Coil over question

It seems like it would be a "Bottom" spacer for cars. If the Body of the shock sits all the way inside that tube you acheive "Stock" ride height. But say you twist the shock body out by 1", which basically means you would have a 1" gap inside the tube housing. So that 1" gap in the tube housing acts as a 1" spacer.

kinda thinking and typing aloud here. This is essentially what it is, isnt it?

 

My thoughts are similar. Adjustable spacer puck lift. But better

 

So you are saying, and this is only a guess, is that with brands such as Icon, King and Fox that the more you raise your truck ie: preloading the spring for more lift, it does not increase in harshness? That it will be the same firmness of ride at 0" lift vs. 3" lift? From every one I have heard The more you raise the truck the more firm the suspension gets and what you are suggesting says the opposite. I am confused on what you are saying

 

Here is what I am talking about only this is for a trailblazer

http://tbssowners.com/store/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=16

 

Notice the way it drops 2" but only lifts 1"? I'd bet good money it's not intended to take a beating. Perfectly good for appearances and daily use.

 

I wasn't saying that coilover specifically it was just an example of what I was talking about. Anything that can be built can be built stronger. Rally cars use this design and have no problems when beaten on way harder than most of us would dare, so I don't think strength is the issue here.

 

This thread needs boobs... ( . ) ( . ) there ya go

 

OP, your understanding of the adjustable strut is correct. The length change is independent of preload.

Preload is a weird setting to change. Many people use preload to compensate for the wrong springs. Regardless, a spring with less preload will most times feel more lively and work better, provided the spring rate is correct for the application.

The shocks you posted will accomplish this. Not running excess preload but allow the chassis ride height to be dialed in. This lets the spring be optimized for best tire grip, and the chassis to have the optimum geometry of the suspension arms and ride height.

Overall, the advise from Jerry Lee, and others is your best bet. If you prefer to retain the spring setting for the best ride and tire grip, install a spacer on the shocks upper end and adjust the bump stop cushion to prevent metal to metal contact of the shock.

PK

 

I'm not shitting on you brother, I think it's a hellova strut. Just trying to figure out why this design isn't on the market for trucks if it truly is "all that". Just talking through it.

Tits or GTFO!

 

I wish some reputable dealers and or manufactures would chime in that have done tests and know why.

 

So reading this and thinking about this for a bit.
Why is a shock design like the below not in production?

 

^ because you can't rotate that top plate. It's bolted to the truck. As well as the shock body.

 

Yes and no. Raising the truck does change the ride qualities, but it has nothing to do with spring rate or spring pre-load. Raising the truck changes the geometry of the suspension. From the factory, the lower control arm sits roughly perpendicular to the ground at resting ride height. That means that when you hit a bump, the forces are translated efficiently from the wheel to the strut assembly. As you raise the truck the angle between the lower control arm and the ground changes, and some of the force of the impact will be directly translated up the length of the control arm and into the frame of the truck. Additionally, the changing angle between the strut and the lower control arm means that it takes more force to compress the strut the same distance. So a small bump will not result in an equal amount of travel in the strut and instead translate additional force into the truck.

Neither the spring rate nor the spring length has changed. Therefore it still takes the same amount of force to compress the spring with respect to the bottom of the strut. It would not matter if the lift was achieved by adding a spacer to the top, somehow lengthening the shock body, or turning the ring at the top of an adjustable coil-over, the result is still the same... changed geometry. There certainly are many considerations for the differences created by these lift methods, but harshness is not one of them.

 

:scratchhead:
I guess this design is just a shock with a built in adjustable spacer!

 

I'm pretty sure that's exactly wrong.

 

Believe what you'd like, but physics doesn't lie. I'd go get some measurements and show you some calculations, but I'm lazy and don't feel like diving under the truck. It is all about translation of force. See two posts up for further explanation.

 

Now I think you are onto something, that seems like a design that would work, you wouldn't need to rotate the top hat, just the shock body inside it

 

I read it and respectfully disagree.

 

You could change the design a bit. Add a swivel top if needed.

Not sure it is strong enough thou
This overall design is essentially just an adjustable spacer... I would take this design over the 3 setting billies. Like you said just twist the shock body to adjust lift. No spring compressor needed. And you mostly maintain spring rate.

 

That's what I was thinking (great idea) but to rotate the shock body would require the lower mount to be able to rotate, where the shock attaches to the LCA.