Does this make any sense

[wanderer]

go this message from a well known shock tuner. But I don't really understand it. Re fox:

My goals:"I wanted to get a more complaint ride over smaller washboard and cross rivlet drainage swales.Bu the metal black shocks and springs were too stiff. I then switched out the springs to the synergy ( very close to stock spring rates) still. Seemed bit stiff. ( the metal cloak black shocks)"

Their responses:

"Going up to a 2.5 diameter shock will take the damping in the complete opposite direction of your goals. This is true despite us making the Kings Linear, or putting the softest valve shims in the Foxes."
and
"The 2.0s on this application lack the adjuster option because the hose diameter is too large to flow through the small adjuster."

So I ask why would bigger larger diameter shock be stiffer than a smaller shock?, assuming you can adjust the internal Valves? and it has adjustable compression?
Given their response It makes me think that a smaller shock is better than a larger diameter shock >. but this can't be correct?

Sponsored

 

[CloakedWillys]

It takes more energy to move bigger valves and the displacement of fluid from the shaft. This is why our smoothest riding options are the reds and slates. The bigger shocks generally are more performance driven and want the speed to go with them. This is why your blacks will smooth out on the washboard with some speed.

 

[wanderer]

OK, that makes plenty of sense. The next question is why couldn’t you just use bigger ports in the shock valve? for part of the initial stroke? and have the shims. Be more progressive the deeper end of the stroke you are.? seems like that would accomplish that and give you a bigger oil volume

 

[The Last Cowboy]

Fluid volume is all about cooling. More fluid, less heat soak to the fluid, and the more cycles it can endure before overheating. Valving stays relatively the same based on the dampening needs.

It sounds like you want a softer ride. Everything is a compromise. Stiff springs, and less dampening from the shocks, or soft. tall springs, but greater dampening from the shocks. Tire come into play too. Many hardcore offroaders, rockcrawlers, or racers will use tall, 37"+ tires with load range E tires. The thick sidewalls allow less damage will sidewalls flex at very low PSI. But they tend to ride more firm with road use pressures in them.

There is a common misconception about performance and racing parts being superior to OEM or premium aftermarket OEM replacements. Yes, often times performance/race parts are overbuilt. But they are also built for frequent servicing.

Indeed the 2.0 shocks may be best for you. And that was the builders professional opinion. Have a talk with him about your wants vs needs, the weight of your Jeep, lift, spring rates, tire size and specs, and intended use. Let him know what you expect for ride day to day vs trail performance for how you use it. A good builder will know exactly what compromises to make to get you where you want to be. Often times the parts they recommend will not always be the most extreme, or highest performing on a spec sheet. They will be a collection of parts tailored to meet your expectations.

 

[VKSheridan]

Ralph, none of the previous responses is what drives Fox’s reply.

The reasoning is simply Pascal’s Principle whereas F = P * A. The greater the face on the piston, the more force it can produce with the same amount of pressure. Bigger piston, lots of stiff dampening.

Pascal’s Principle is what makes your hydraulic floor jack work.

 

[LSJKU]

I'm gonna have to consult this Pascal. My hydraulic floor jack is creeping. The principal is not "holding" for me....

 

[LSJKU]

Since CloakedWillys is monitoring this thread, I have a question (not trying to highjack): I had a 3'5" Game Changer w/6-pack shocks on my 2012 LSJKU. The ride was very stiff, what i call "sharp," across any washboards and especially bridge abutments. I changed back to Fox 2.5 DSC's and was able to dial it out, so I know it was not the spring stiffness.

I am in the process of swapping out my pieced-together 3"/2.5" Terra-Krawler suspension on my 2025 JL and really wanted to go full-on with the 3.5" GC + 6-packs again, but I'm leery of the same ride as my 2012. Has anything been done over the years to smooth out the damping of the 6-packs? As of now, I'm going GC mid-arms with my linear rate springs, and 3rd party shocks such as the SDI e-clik RR shocks. But I lose a little articulation with that shock setup.

The SDI e-clik setup on my Raptor was a game-changer for sure. That's what got me looking at it for my JL.

Please help!

 

[CloakedWillys]

Since CloakedWillys is monitoring this thread, I have a question (not trying to highjack): I had a 3'5" Game Changer w/6-pack shocks on my 2012 LSJKU. The ride was very stiff, what i call "sharp," across any washboards and especially bridge abutments. I changed back to Fox 2.5 DSC's and was able to dial it out, so I know it was not the spring stiffness.

I am in the process of swapping out my pieced-together 3"/2.5" Terra-Krawler suspension on my 2025 JL and really wanted to go full-on with the 3.5" GC + 6-packs again, but I'm leery of the same ride as my 2012. Has anything been done over the years to smooth out the damping of the 6-packs? As of now, I'm going GC mid-arms with my linear rate springs, and 3rd party shocks such as the SDI e-clik RR shocks. But I lose a little articulation with that shock setup.

The SDI e-clik setup on my Raptor was a game-changer for sure. That's what got me looking at it for my JL.

Please help!

They are totally different vehicles. Give me a call and we can discuss this as not to hijack the thread.

 

[flick2614]

It takes more energy to move bigger valves and the displacement of fluid from the shaft. This is why our smoothest riding options are the reds and slates. The bigger shocks generally are more performance driven and want the speed to go with them. This is why your blacks will smooth out on the washboard with some speed.

I've argued this point a million times on here because the assumption is always the bigger, more expensive shock will be a more plush ride. If you ain't driving it like Dale stick to the 2.0's.

 

[etoften]

It sounds like what you are looking for is the multimatic dssv shock chevy puts on the zr2. Someone way more into shocks would have to explain the difference, how they work, and why noone else seems to use them. I test drove both the Colorado RST and ZR2 before buying the ZR2. I didn't want our need the offroad chops of the ZR2 since I am 90% onroad and 10% unmaintained road or light trail. But the reduced body roll and ability to soak up the bumpy stuff at normal speed sold me. I also test drove a Wrangler sport before buying my Willy's as a third vehicle. The difference from sport to ZR2 vs sport to Willy's suspension is 10 times different in my opinion.

 

[CloakedWillys]

It sounds like what you are looking for is the multimatic dssv shock chevy puts on the zr2. Someone way more into shocks would have to explain the difference, how they work, and why noone else seems to use them. I test drove both the Colorado RST and ZR2 before buying the ZR2. I didn't want our need the offroad chops of the ZR2 since I am 90% onroad and 10% unmaintained road or light trail. But the reduced body roll and ability to soak up the bumpy stuff at normal speed sold me. I also test drove a Wrangler sport before buying my Willy's as a third vehicle. The difference from sport to ZR2 vs sport to Willy's suspension is 10 times different in my opinion.

Yeah, the spool valves in those are cool. Closest thing in the jeep world would be the E clik or Fox live vavles.

Sponsored