A place for airshox data.

[Goatman]

I'm not.



I'm liking my coilovers just fine, especially when the air bumps go in the front next week. I'm taking some time to get the valving and spring rates dialed in on the rears, but once it's done it will be done for good. The fronts are great, moving the secondary collar down an inch last weekend helped nicely to keep the bottoming to a minimum and the air bumps will take care of the rest.

 

[Paul S]

I've never messed with these, but from a total lack of knowledge perspective it would seem that if you removed oil and kept the pressure the same that the ride height would be lower.

Or do you have to mess with both and tune them over again?

That's exactely what I just did. I took out 10cc's & filled back to 220psi. This lowered it about 1/2"
Tradeoff? We'll see...

P

 

[vetteboy]

You can add or remove pressure for ride height, but it comes with a change in rate.

If it's a small change in pressure, no big deal. The problem is that it's rarely a small change, smaller than 5 psi. 10 psi is alot of change and has a noticable impact.

It's a treadmill. When you gettin on?

--ron

So wherever your ride height is, you have a fixed spring rate to go along with it? There's no way to mix & match to tune it to your rig?

Weird.

 

[Goatman]

So wherever your ride height is, you have a fixed spring rate to go along with it? There's no way to mix & match to tune it to your rig?

Weird.

No, the ride height and spring rate have virtually endless possibilities. I see the guys messing with it all the time. The hard part it seems is that on a C/O you can clearly deal with spring rate, ride height, and shock valving all seperately, and on the air shocks all those are interrelated.

 

[Weasel]

No, the ride height and spring rate have virtually endless possibilities. I see the guys messing with it all the time. The hard part it seems is that on a C/O you can clearly deal with spring rate, ride height, and shock valving all seperately, and on the air shocks all those are interrelated.

Yep pretty much. But really like vetteboy suggested you are pretty much limited to your spring rates. There is only a certain amount you can do with the oil, and that determines where you shock will bottom or hydrolock.

So for instance on our baja shocks we set them up so they bottom with 1/8"- between the body and end of the shaft. And from there we are pretty much stuck with the spring rate at a certain height. It works well fro us so we havn't had any issues.

You can change oil wieghts but that just plays into the damping.

 

[Matt S.]

So wherever your ride height is, you have a fixed spring rate to go along with it? There's no way to mix & match to tune it to your rig?

Weird.

the real kicker is that depending on where you are in the travel of the shock, the spring rate progressively changes... even with everything else the same...

PV=nRT...

F=PA...

 

[Weasel]

the real kicker is that depending on where you are in the travel of the shock, the spring rate progressively changes... even with everything else the same...

PV=nRT...

actually the spring rate is progressive throughout the entire range of travel. And the above equation doesn't apply. It doesn't account for the oil/nitrogen interaction, gasification (not sure if thats the correct term can't think of it right now). I tried a ton of calculations to try and predict the spring rate but no luck. Something funky happens, I suppose it could be figured out but you reach a point that it's not worth the time.

 

[XJ_ranger]

actually the spring rate is progressive throughout the entire range of travel. And the above equation doesn't apply. It doesn't account for the oil/nitrogen interaction, gasification (not sure if thats the correct term can't think of it right now). I tried a ton of calculations to try and predict the spring rate but no luck. Something funky happens, I suppose it could be figured out but you reach a point that it's not worth the time.

the emulsion technology takes the nirogen away from the ideal gas, but the concept is the same... the equation doesnt work, but the concepts are good...

more good airshock data here:
http://pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/PR-Airshox/index.html

AndI accidently posted as SCRAPPY AGAIN above... stupid shared computers... :confused1

 

[Weasel]

the emulsion technology takes the nirogen away from the ideal gas, but the concept is the same... the equation doesnt work, but the concepts are good...

more good airshock data here:
http://pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/PR-Airshox/index.html

AndI accidently posted as SCRAPPY AGAIN above... stupid shared computers... :confused1

Emulsion, that what I was looking for.

 

[vetteboy]

So aside from weight. (edit: and price)

What advantages are there to running airshox vs. coilovers? Doesn't seem like simplicity is one of them, but I don't know much about them.

I've driven maybe 4-5 airshox rigs, and I've not driven one that I liked better than comparable coilovered rigs. But I can't say for sure that the airshox ones were set up 'properly' either.

 

[Captain Ron]

...
PV=nRT...

As you already know, this does not account for emulsification, at a major simplification.

Of course, maybe you have not changed my ratios yet this season.

Wait, that'll be Scrappys job...



--ron

 

[Paul S]

So aside from weight. (edit: and price)

What advantages are there to running airshox vs. coilovers? Doesn't seem like simplicity is one of them, but I don't know much about them.

I've driven maybe 4-5 airshox rigs, and I've not driven one that I liked better than comparable coilovered rigs. But I can't say for sure that the airshox ones were set up 'properly' either.

I don't think there are any advantages, even the cost is within $100 when you go to 2.5's. But, there's just something about 'um.
I was100% set on F/R coilovers for my Summer remodel, but after driving Matt's car half way up Jack & driving Ron's car through the desert & up/down part of Resolution I couldn't get it out of my head how much I liked the feel.
I don't have the experience with coilovers to know whether or not you can get the same kind of feel, I just really like the smooth, progressive feel of airs.
I think it's definitely a little more tricky setting them up though, as with the wrong pistons, oil level, etc., they're terrible, while coilovers work alright with things not perfect.

Paul

 

[Weasel]

So aside from weight. (edit: and price)

What advantages are there to running airshox vs. coilovers? Doesn't seem like simplicity is one of them, but I don't know much about them.

I've driven maybe 4-5 airshox rigs, and I've not driven one that I liked better than comparable coilovered rigs. But I can't say for sure that the airshox ones were set up 'properly' either.

Depends on the brand, which have you ridden with? I know from talking with Jason Paule that the Walker Air shocks seem to ride/work better then the Fox air shocks. I would say it's due to the bleed holes that are in the Walker pistons.

Piston design is going to be what makes the largest difference. The walkers are a linear with bleed holes. Fox's tend to be a progressive, bleed holes are not standard but you can get them. They also have digressive pistons which i don't think you would want. For the difference between the two, airshocks are pretty simple. You put oil in them till they bottom where you want and the air them up to the ride height you want. Coilovers are the best as far a tune-ability. You can change ride height, spring rate and progressive pretty independently of each other.

The biggest pro for airshocks is weight. The biggest con would probably be keeping them cool and tune-ability. For fast stuff and large bumps they will probably start fading depending on the weight of the rig. Jason's comp buggy doesn't take the huge jumps and hits as well as the rock race buggy with C/O.

And valving is just valving. It's tricky no matter what kind of shock it's in.

 

[vetteboy]

Mostly Fox. I don't think I've driven any Walkers.

Coilover experience is both Fox and Racerunner for the most part.

Not so much interested in the differences as the advantages. What will an airshock do for me that a coilover with equivalent spring rate won't? Assuming at least a dual-rate coilover, more than likely a dual rate with a tender as that's what I'd run.

I've crawled a few airshock rigs that really had issues with going back to neutral after being flexed out, or off-camber. Like I'd come off a large boulder on one side and the rig really didn't want to balance like it would with a regular coil spring setup. Is this a problem with airshocks in general, or just one that didn't dial in the spring rate properly?

 

[Weasel]

Thats probably a problem with the piston. One of the reasons most guys run a sway bar with them to provide some force to get the fluid flowing back through the piston.

The way to fix this without using a sway bar is to get a piston with bleed holes or drill them in the piston it's self. That why the walkers do better with the off camber as they have the bleed hole.

Bleed holes will allow fluid flow through the piston. You could also include a bleed disc which would be installing a disc slightly smaller then the largest disc on the bottom of the stack. This will also allow fluid to flow accrossed the piston in low velocity situations but will effect high speed vavling charcteristics. The bleed holes will "choke off" at a certain velocity allowing the valve stack to due the work.

I don't know really what a air shock will give you over a coilover except for weight savings. I guess if you don't want to mess with spring rates, but you do need to make sure the air shock is rated for the weight of the vehicle.

 

[Paul S]

Depends on the brand, which have you ridden with? I know from talking with Jason Paule that the Walker Air shocks seem to ride/work better then the Fox air shocks. I would say it's due to the bleed holes that are in the Walker pistons.

Piston design is going to be what makes the largest difference. The walkers are a linear with bleed holes. Fox's tend to be a progressive, bleed holes are not standard but you can get them. They also have digressive pistons which i don't think you would want. For the difference between the two, airshocks are pretty simple. You put oil in them till they bottom where you want and the air them up to the ride height you want. Coilovers are the best as far a tune-ability. You can change ride height, spring rate and progressive pretty independently of each other.

The biggest pro for airshocks is weight. The biggest con would probably be keeping them cool and tune-ability. For fast stuff and large bumps they will probably start fading depending on the weight of the rig. Jason's comp buggy doesn't take the huge jumps and hits as well as the rock race buggy with C/O.

And valving is just valving. It's tricky no matter what kind of shock it's in.

Go back & read page 1. Fox's do come with bleed holes, 2 of 'um. The key to making Fox's work is throwing the standard 2 bleed hole pistons in the trash & replacing them with the single bleed hole 'bumpstop' pistons. I can't even describe how much difference this makes.

Paul

 

[Paul S]

Mostly Fox. I don't think I've driven any Walkers.

Coilover experience is both Fox and Racerunner for the most part.

Not so much interested in the differences as the advantages. What will an airshock do for me that a coilover with equivalent spring rate won't? Assuming at least a dual-rate coilover, more than likely a dual rate with a tender as that's what I'd run.

I've crawled a few airshock rigs that really had issues with going back to neutral after being flexed out, or off-camber. Like I'd come off a large boulder on one side and the rig really didn't want to balance like it would with a regular coil spring setup. Is this a problem with airshocks in general, or just one that didn't dial in the spring rate properly?

Sounds like a valving issue, as I've never noticed that with Mine, Matt's, Ron's, Rick's or Dave's car.
There is however enough stiction that if you push down / pull up on a corner it will stay there.

BTW, non of us run sway bars. Matt & Ron both ran sway bars for awhile, but took them off & prefer it without.
I fully planned on putting one, as I'm more of the pro swaybar, anti big travel type, but it's so stable there's absolutly no need. Interestingly, it's much more stable than it was with rear leaves/front coils.

Paul

 

[Weasel]

Go back & read page 1. Fox's do come with bleed holes, 2 of 'um. The key to making Fox's work is throwing the standard 2 bleed hole pistons in the trash & replacing them with the single bleed hole 'bumpstop' pistons. I can't even describe how much difference this makes.

Paul

But they are not standard with air shocks. You have to buy the piston. Walkers come with the shocks.

 

[Weasel]

There is however enough stiction that if you push down / pull up on a corner it will stay there.

BTW, non of us run sway bars. Matt & Ron both ran sway bars for awhile, but took them off & prefer it without.
I fully planned on putting one, as I'm more of the pro swaybar, anti big travel type, but it's so stable there's absolutly no need. Interestingly, it's much more stable than it was with rear leaves/front coils.

Paul

Sounds like you have your pretty well tuned then.

 

[Paul S]

But they are not standard with air shocks. You have to buy the piston. Walkers come with the shocks.

The 2 hole piston is standard with Fox.
I ordered the single bleeds seperatly.
Dave ordered his shocks with the single bleeds & they screwed-up & sent him the dual bleeds. He called Fox directly to straighten it out & was told that they had never built them with singles, but it was not a problem for them to do it for him.

Paul