Thread: Dislocation or Retention?

Originally Posted by uninformed

Bill, on an original RRC, were the rear or front shocks long enough travel to allow the coil to unseat (more than 1/2 and inch)?

I can't give you a definitive answer Serg.Can't find my notes and memory isn't too good nowdays, and the RRC I am agisting has incorrect dampers fitted.I'm fairly sure the fronts don't dislocate though. Certainly not with cross articulation.
Based on some tests i did a while back, I'd expect that a 3'' lift may cause the tyre wall to foul the rear spring perch on the compressed side at about the same time as the drooped spring dislocates.So maybe retaining the springs might be a safer course of action in this case. I destroyed a tyre on the Hybrid recently due to tyre fouling on spring perch.
What is the static bumpstop clearance of a 90 with 3'' lift? I'd be surprised if full potential articulation could be realised unless the upper shock mounts were modified similar to what you have done Serg. Too much strain on shock shafts and bushings etc.
Bill.

definitly go custom all the way, ie on every component you can if thats the road headed down....but as with evrything its a comprimise. Those full bodied rigs suffer from clearence of the body to allow the dampner to be extender much higher, they have to keep leaning them forward...not desirable.

BS clearence I would guess (from my memory of my stock 110 front) that the front of a 90 be about the same, say 75-100mm so a 3inch lift would be 150-175???? others may be able to measure.

whats your thoughts on shock angle? I know KC (puffdragon) was pretty happy with mounting the tops of the shocks inboard of the chassis rails in the rear, so they lean inward, not forward backward. I was under the impression that a shock most efficent at 90 degrees (say like in the front end) How would handleing be effected if the rears were mounted the same?

Originally Posted by uninformed

[snip]


whats your thoughts on shock angle? I know KC (puffdragon) was pretty happy with mounting the tops of the shocks inboard of the chassis rails in the rear, so they lean inward, not forward backward. I was under the impression that a shock most efficent at 90 degrees (say like in the front end) How would handleing be effected if the rears were mounted the same?

Yep, as you lean a damper over wheel travel exceeds damper piston travel and continues to do so the more you lean the damper, so theory is that it becomes less efficient as you do so, but the larger piston diameters now in vogue make up for this somewhat. (or maybe a lot)

Put it this way, one of the first mods Ford Motorsport did to the old Mk I Escort rally car was to mount the rear Bilsteins vertically above the back axle and as far outboard as they could.
The road car's dampers were mounted at almost 45* leaning towards the car centreline and inboard of the spring pack.

There has been lots of threads on this...

But I think the best solution for your problem is to tie them in.

I ran (new 90 will run the same when i pull my finger out) my coils with cones on my ute only because I was running 14' travel shocks on custom mounts that where 7 inches taller then standard. But I choose the leave it on standard lenght springs in the rear so there was no way a spring could strech enough. ( the coil would unseat a good 8 inches or so.)

If you choose to run cones mount them on the diff and tie the coils to the chassis. running it this way will stop the horrible bang that is normally caused by springs relocating in the chassis end.

Any cones can be mounted on the diff by cutting off the locating tabs and drilling 2 holes in the flat face and bolting it the the coil hat mounts on the diff.

Originally Posted by uninformed

definitly go custom all the way, ie on every component you can if thats the road headed down....but as with evrything its a comprimise. Those full bodied rigs suffer from clearence of the body to allow the dampner to be extender much higher, they have to keep leaning them forward...not desirable.

BS clearence I would guess (from my memory of my stock 110 front) that the front of a 90 be about the same, say 75-100mm so a 3inch lift would be 150-175???? others may be able to measure.

whats your thoughts on shock angle? I know KC (puffdragon) was pretty happy with mounting the tops of the shocks inboard of the chassis rails in the rear, so they lean inward, not forward backward. I was under the impression that a shock most efficent at 90 degrees (say like in the front end) How would handleing be effected if the rears were mounted the same?

From a handling perspective, as close to the wheel and as vertical as possible is as Rick mentioned probably the way to go, but as you point out,with the vertical space restrictions of Landrover rear bodies you won't get much articulation. The LandRover rear shock mounting angle is probably a fair compromise between ride/ handling and articulation, but anyone who has removed the upper stone sheilds from their shocks and seen how much the shafts have to flex during articulation will realise that Rover didn't get the upper bushing orientation quite right.
My Series 2 hybrid is biased towards relatively low speed, severe articulation terrain with the tops of the rear shocks leaning towards the centre at about 45 degrees, and although they are Koni truck and bus adjustables, screwed down to their stiffest setting, it is a bit underdamped in rough terrain at higher speeds.
It's a shame someone doesn't re invent the old Armstrong type lever and piston dampers with bigger hydraulics and oil capacity.That type of damper doesn't require a lot of vertical space to control large wheel movements.
Bill.

Originally Posted by wagoo

[snip]
It's a shame someone doesn't re invent the old Armstrong type lever and piston dampers with bigger hydraulics and oil capacity.That type of damper doesn't require a lot of vertical space to control large wheel movements.
Bill.

You can do the same thing with a telescopic mono-tube damper with a small pushrod and bellcrank and lie the buggers horizontally or wherever they can fit and be like every open wheeler since the early eighties

Originally Posted by rick130

You can do the same thing with a telescopic mono-tube damper with a small pushrod and bellcrank and lie the buggers horizontally or wherever they can fit and be like every open wheeler since the early eighties

Yes but unless the bell crank has equal length levers, doesn't that give the same effect as leaning the shocks over? So to control the large wheel movements (say 10'' stroke at the shock) that we want on offroaders the bell crank would be quite large and difficult to find a position to mount them.
The Armstrong accomplishes all that in a compact unit,and are adjustable for both compression and rebound damping, but they tend to overheat due to the small hydraulic cylinders and low oil capacity. That's why they need to be reinvented.
Bill.

Yep, all true.

I'd just lean the buggers over, everything's a compromise