Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 92

Thread: is someon using dual rear shocks in his 110?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,178
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ranga View Post
    I



    I guess the only other possible advantage I've considered with dual shocks is redundancy. In the event one fails, you have another already in place. On the other hand, it might make diagnosing a failed shock difficult.



    I'm still yet to be convinced dual shocks are required items, particularly if running quality shocks in good condition.



    Hope this helps.

    as I understand it if you have dual shocks they would be differently valves so would not really be a proper replacement in place

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NSW far north coast
    Posts
    17,285
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by uninformed View Post
    4x Ranchos each corner....


    your welcom
    Good call !





  3. #43
    n plus one Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve223 View Post
    as I understand it if you have dual shocks they would be differently valves so would not really be a proper replacement in place
    Still likely to be substantially better than nothing though?

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,178
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by n plus one View Post
    Still likely to be substantially better than nothing though?

    my nothing would be a spare front and rear shock for long trips though

  5. #45
    n plus one Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve223 View Post
    my nothing would be a spare front and rear shock for long trips though
    Fair call.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Coast NSW
    Posts
    1,576
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Well I had a good chat today with the Guy's from KONI.

    By the end of the chat, the conclusion is as follows...

    Apparently Raid's should never be set to the maximum hard setting. The full hard setting is to be used as the shocks deteriorate to maintain their ability to damp. The best advice is to return them to the softest setting.

    With the Raid's set too high they impair the ability of the spring to return to its full height in a timely manner. The effect that I am experiencing is that simpley by the time I arrive at the next "whoop-d-doo" the spring has yet to reach full extension, causing a heavy entry into the hole and a rigid exit.

    By returning the Raids to the full soft setting it will/should eliminate this effect.

    So I have returned them to full soft but yet to test drive, but the theory sounds solid.

    Thoughts and opinions welcome.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NSW far north coast
    Posts
    17,285
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Drover View Post
    Well I had a good chat today with the Guy's from KONI.

    By the end of the chat, the conclusion is as follows...

    Apparently Raid's should never be set to the maximum hard setting. The full hard setting is to be used as the shocks deteriorate to maintain their ability to damp. The best advice is to return them to the softest setting.

    With the Raid's set too high they impair the ability of the spring to return to its full height in a timely manner. The effect that I am experiencing is that simpley by the time I arrive at the next "whoop-d-doo" the spring has yet to reach full extension, causing a heavy entry into the hole and a rigid exit.

    By returning the Raids to the full soft setting it will/should eliminate this effect.

    So I have returned them to full soft but yet to test drive, but the theory sounds solid.

    Thoughts and opinions welcome.
    Depends entirely on the spring rate.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    NSW far north coast
    Posts
    17,285
    Total Downloaded
    0
    And doing what your describing is called 'jacking down' and the only time I've ever approached that was in a race car once with so much low speed rebound on the rear dampers I would lift the back wheels off the track under braking.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Coast NSW
    Posts
    1,576
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Thanks Rick,

    How would the spring rate change this effect ?

    Would it not be the stronger the spring the quicker it would/could reach full extension and weaker the spring the slower it could return.

    My rear springs are TF heavy duty, rated at 420lb's if that makes sense....

    The Koni guy spoke about shock mounts being torn off as the Raids were wound up to far.

  10. #50
    n plus one Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Drover View Post
    Thanks Rick,

    How would the spring rate change this effect ?

    Would it not be the stronger the spring the quicker it would/could reach full extension and weaker the spring the slower it could return.

    My rear springs are TF heavy duty, rated at 420lb's if that makes sense....

    The Koni guy spoke about shock mounts being torn off as the Raids were wound up to far.
    Rebound damping damps a spring's return to its full length (I.e. it's rebound) - a firmer spring needs more rebound damping to control it's return rate. Excess rebound can cause spring pack by preventing the spring from fully re extending before it hits the next bump - kind of a ratcheting effect - but, as already noted, it's rare and tends to be a high speed stutters (think moto x) style issue.

    FWIW, I've found that my 110 starts to feel low on rebound damping if/when I get too aggressive with lowering my tyre pressures - basically because the tyre starts to act a lot like an under-damped spring - could this be your issue?

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!