Author Topic: Shock placement?  (Read 11856 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sumner

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4078
  • Blanding, Ut..a small dot in the middle of nowhere
    • http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/sumnerindex.html
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2007, 09:05:03 PM »
There's more reasons to use linkage:
1. it's adjustable without taking the shock off/apart.
2. doesn't have to be linear - you can have soft ride for the first 2" and excellent bottom-out control for the remainder (rising rate).
3. if travel is limited, the shock valving won't do anything - fluid displacement requires some small amount of motion before anything happens, so doubling the distance has considerably more than 2 × the effect.

That is why I've gone to a lot work to get more shock travel and have it easily adjustable:



http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner/bvillecar-2/construction%20page-71.html

I'm having problems though setting the dampening rate on these shocks though.  I think I'll send them back to Kent and ask for a refund,

Sum   

Offline hitz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #16 on: November 08, 2007, 11:49:24 AM »
Sum,

   How much did Kent charge you for those wood shocks??  :-D

  harv

Offline Seldom Seen Slim

  • Nancy and me and the pit bike
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13158
  • Nancy -- 201.913 mph record on a production ZX15!
    • Nancy and Jon's personal website.
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #17 on: November 08, 2007, 12:28:09 PM »
I hear he got them for free from Kent -- but in exchange he's got to put AirTech stickers on his refrigerator door, right next to the kids kindergarten drawings.
Jon E. Wennerberg
 a/k/a Seldom Seen Slim
 Skandia, Michigan
 (that's way up north)
2 Club member x2
Owner of landracing.com

Blue

  • Guest
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #18 on: November 08, 2007, 07:42:28 PM »
There's more reasons to use linkage:
1. it's adjustable without taking the shock off/apart.
2. doesn't have to be linear - you can have soft ride for the first 2" and excellent bottom-out control for the remainder (rising rate).
3. if travel is limited, the shock valving won't do anything - fluid displacement requires some small amount of motion before anything happens, so doubling the distance has considerably more than 2 × the effect.
Add to number 3 that stiction (the force required "unstick" the shock from any static point) is less of a factor with longer travel shocks.

I have no idea about this effect in LSR, but in both superbikes and sports cars on road courses progressiveness had real limits.  As we went faster, the "soft" travel would "load up" and we would end up riding on just the harder half.  It has to do with the rebound damping getting ahead of the preload and the whole system pumping itself down.  We ended up running almost linear ratios.

Offline SPARKY

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6908
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2007, 09:07:57 PM »
Main thing they are concered about ---is if you have them mounted securely---If mine pass you should not have any trouble-- mine are mouned in the center of the frame and angled out board and mounted to the axle---inboard---my lakester is 24" wide
Miss LIBERTY,  changing T.K.I.  to noise, dust, rust, BLUE HATS & hopefully not scrap!!

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."   Helen Keller

We are going to explore the racing N words NITROUS & NITRO!

Offline 1212FBGS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2532
    • http://www.motobody.com
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2007, 07:35:22 AM »
refund..?...what the heck is that..LOL
kent

Offline Jack Gifford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1568
Re: Shock placement?
« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2012, 01:21:52 AM »
Very old thread, so I assume Andy came up with a workable shock absorber scheme.

Reading his original question, I couldn't help but have a mental picture of Houdailles (turn the clock back sixty years or so here!) mounted out of the breeze, but with arms shortened in proportion to their relocation toward the car's center- thus retaining damping forces (at the wheels) in the desired ballpark range. Forgive me for thinking-out-loud about old-school-appearing solutions... :-)
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 01:24:45 AM by Jack Gifford »
M/T Pontiac hemi guru
F/BFL 1-mile Loring record 2020