Fox CD Adjuster's, questions

Time to chime in shock guru's. I normally don't ask too many question's when it comes to suspension, but if you've seen my previous thread, I am currently going through a situation with my old Fox shocks, needless to say due to the circumstances I am getting some new revised Fox shock's shipped out to me on the house. Since I will be replacing the old ones with the new updated ones, I have the opportunity to throw in some new CD adjusters for the reservoir's. They are currently out of stock of them at the moment which gives me some time to evaluate whether or not these are a good idea or just somewhat of a gimmick.

Anybody have these? What is the consensus on running them? Good, or bad? My wheeling style is mostly desert and sand running at high speeds. I know there is no replacement for proper valving, but any devices that offer finer tuning for adjustability can be and are appreciated. Whether these are legit or not, I'm not sure. There seem's to be a lack of info and reviews out there on them. Based on what they look like, it appears that they restrict oil flow into the reservoir's via the adjustment knob. I'm not sure if this would be a good or bad thing though. Any input? Thanks guys.

 

I was looking at the DSC adjusters though it appeared for some reason that they were only available for 2.5" shocks and not 2.0's. Though another website stated that the only difference in making them fit and not fit was the increase in hose size.

The money is not a huge deal, as Fox is going to take care of me regardless of what I decide. I just want to make sure they are good for what they are, and if the CD adjusters are not good, I see no sense in wasting the money. If the DSC adjuster are good though I do want to make sure they will work.

http://www.pacificcustoms.com/fox81003001kit.html

2nd option down, PN: fox81003001fitting

This is what has me curious about it ^^

 

I just shot over the tech support/ warranty claims rep an email about retrofitting those on along with upgrading to 7/8 shafts. Theoretically, it should work if you change out the shafts and the fitting for the hose as well. Who knows. I guess I'll find out more information about it tomorrow. This would be good to know for the rest of the guys who might be interested in 2.0's as well.

 

The truck is currently parked. If I need to go to work, which I am tonight I'll have to drive it, no other real way around it. I have my old TRD shocks but if I use them I'll probably snap them because of the lift pack.

I think Jason is probably right about DC adjusters as well. Based on your feedback about them it tells me they are somewhat snake oil and all in the mind. About the DSC's though, those are probably much better and I wouldn't mind fitting those on but I'm wondering if the actual end cap for those fit 2.0 Resi's not just the 2.5's. The plumbing for the hosing and stuff should be an easy work around, but I'm wondering why they wouldn't work with 5/8 shocks.

 

This is our conversation as of this morning. It appears for Factory style shocks its the top stem cap that is the problem.

ME:

WILL:

ME:

WILL:

 

Theoretically, this should be an easy fix entirely. A quick google search for an adapter allows me to find a 7/16 to 9/16 adapter for the hose immediately. So I don't see why running DSC would be unfeasible? It's a super easy retrofit.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=7/16+to+9/16+adapter&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

 

I see what you mean by the straw analogy. That makes good sense and so does a lot else about what you are saying.

It appears that Fox DOES make a DSC reservoir with a 7/16 hose for 2.0 shocks. They have released it, apparently they have not and will not ship them out to their distributors for one weird reason or another. A quick look at these pictures proves that. These were taken at the Offroad expo in Ontario.





Persistance is an amazing thing.

 

I'm working on it right now.

He sent me an email about 5 minutes ago before he received my pictures regarding retrofitting adapters and whatnot to it. He said he spoke with his engineers and that method should be doable as well. It would be 350 per shock, before my discount they were offering me. I'll have to see what he says about these newly discovered photos of the 2.0 DSC's w/ 7/16 hose.

Either way, it looks like they'll be able to get 'er done for me. Good news for me and anyone else who may be in the market or looking to upgrade.

 

I really would like to go custom shock hoop as it would make shock options much more expanded to me and readily available, but because it's my DD I can't really take that time away from being down the truck and work without a backup vehicle. Being that I'm sort of screwed with what junk stock gave us I am somewhat at the moment forced to work with what I got. I know Fox uses an internal bypass feature integrated into their new shock bodies as of last year I want to say. Using a different method to approach similar results without all the extra bulk. Aside from going DSC adjusters, the IB's plus the remote reservoir already offers a pretty nice package as it sits. This video explains it, I know it says UTV, but they feature it on the off road shocks as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBjZu3TfjF8

Unless you go DSC, which I am trying to look into retrofitting onto the 2.0's right now

They will work with standard eyelet shocks but not with stem tops as stated by the Fox rep, BUT given some suggestions I made to him, he is talking things over with some of the engineers there and is going to get back to me within today.

As a small update the pictures of the DSC 2.0's with the 7/16 hose is still in it's developmental stages apparently according to him. It's not ready for full production. I guess those must had just been an announcement that those were coming out at the Offroad Expo in Ontario.

 

Lol yeah I have heard you can run the rear with no shocks temporarily. I wonder how sketchy it is on the highway which is what I primarily drive to get where I need to go (got to love suburban city's). Either way, I do like the IB feature, and while I'm sure it's not necessary on trucks like ours unless you are running them very hard it's still a nice feature to have so in case you ever want to braap time you can braap time, which I do like to do if and when I go wheeling.

 

As an update, I did receive a reply from the Fox rep about it stating that they did not have the proper convertor fittings to make it work, but assuming they did, a conversion like this would work and would go together fine, BUT for the money invested as well as the performance benefit out of it being that it is not made for 2.0's it is not worth it according to his engineers.

The big HOWEVER to that though that I have somewhat of an objection with, (after doing some calculations with the information I have) why are the King Compression Adjuster's compatible for both 2.0 and 2.5 body shafts no problem, both 3/4 (.750 shafts) and 7/8 (.875) shafts, and can work with their old model shocks equipped with 3/4 shafts as long as a converter hose of 3/8 to 9/16 is used, and the Fox DSC Adjusters are only compatible for 2.5's and 2.0's with a 7/8's shaft, NOT compatible with a 5/8's shaft when the sizing difference would equal the same values after they are broken down and cross referenced? Their construction is identical which utilizes springs and shim stacks in a remote reservoir. The bump in size from a 2.0 to a 2.5 reservoir should also offer additional cooling capacity as well on the Fox 2.5 DSC Adjuster's.

(See Bilstein 9300 Blackhawk series shocks specs. to see what I am referring to here.) Just so you don't have to spend the time searching, the Bilstein Blackhawk 9300's are 3.0 body shocks equipped with a MASSIVE 4.5 remote reservoir. Running something like this would be essentially the same theory. 2.0 body shocks equipped with a 2.5 remote reservoir.

I did some quick math and cross referencing based on the information I had on both the King Adjusters and the Fox DSC's and I came up with these specs. I hope I do not confuse anyone.

King Compression Adj.
(.3750) to (.5625)
3/8 bore hole to 9/16 hole
.5625-.3750=
.1875 difference in bore size
.750 (3/4) smallest shaft avail
.1875+.750
= .9375 total

Fox DSC Adj.
(.4375) to (.5625)
7/16 bore hole to 9/16 hole
.5625-.4375=
.1250 difference in bore size
.625 (5/8) factory shaft (7/8 available, but not advised)
.1250+.625
= .7500 total

Difference in overall sizing= .1875

A quick check of this math is easy. If you notice, when you add the Fox's overall larger bore size and it's shaft size together, you will see it equals .75, which just so happens to be the thickness of a a 3/4" King shaft. Gee, funny how that worked out huh?

The difference between the King Compression Adjusters and the Fox DSC Adjuster's cancel each other out after you factor in the larger size of oil flow from Fox's 7/16 bore hole compared to the old King's 3/8 bore hole. They both HAVE to be 9/16's (at the shock body via an adapter) regardless to run the adjuster's and if you have to run a converter to the hosing to make them both work with the appropriate shocks, then so be it, but the amount difference between the two in their allowable oil output from their bores cancel each other out after you factor in the loss of shaft size for the Fox shocks. It appears based on the information I have, that the same amount of fluid will be worked into both reservoirs due to the lack of sizing of ones bore vs the others larger bore in relation from ones larger shaft sizing to the others smaller shaft sizing. In conclusion to this crapshoot (lmao), I honestly see no problems here.

I am going to let the rep know I want them anyways and will be testing them out myself, then provide feedback. Gerbil style



References:

$2,819 Bilstein 9300 Series Black Hawk Shock Absorber - AK9318BY

http://www.4wheelparts.com/Lift-Kit....aspx?t_c=1&t_s=90&t_pt=3306&t_pn=BILAK9318BY

http://www.truckspring.com/suspension-parts/shock-absorbers/bilstein-9300.aspx

http://www.pacificcustoms.com/ks21072-100hose.html

http://www.FilthyMotorsports.com/2_0_King_Smoothie_Shocks_p/king-pr20ss.htm

 

Whoo.. Some of that went over my head. Partially because I worked nightshift and it sort of dumbs me down when it comes to comprehension of things.

That was a pretty good explanation. From my understanding, the different size holes are capable of moving a different amount of fluid, though is very minimal anyways, think 1-2 ounces of oil that actually makes it through on a maximum. The rest is for the nitro to move through. I was definitely taking on a simplistic approach when looking at this and basically seeing it as, "well since the King's have a smaller sized bore hole on their shock bodies and convert upwards to a larger bore to run their compression adjuster without zero issues, why should it be any different whatsoever to do the same with the Fox's and not expect the same outcome?"

I agree with you, bypasses would always be the better route to go here, but given their price and lack of adaptability to stock (you would be forced to go custom), I can't justify all that time.and money spent in both fabbing it up to make it fit and purchasing the actual hardware based on the kind of wheeler I am. If I was out there more often and had this as a backup driver then oh hell yeah, why not splurge.

 

You are right. I didn't really think of how minor that was. I'm going to attempt to run them. Worst case scenario, they don't work and I have to dump the setup and go back to the standard Resi's. I know someone would jump on these quick if I were to put them up seeing as they are whole new can assemblies.