Printable View
Whats the missing link in dlm shock technology, pertaining to rough tracks, when comparing them to a monster truck. Those trucks jump 10-20 feet in the air and land really smooth with no jounce. There's plenty of room in a dlm to lengthen shocks another 6-8 inches if added stroke and oil is needed!
Trucks have more travel.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZERO25
Trucks don't have massive anti squat fighting shock operation.
Trucks don't use shocks for things that a shock shouldn't do. (Hold the rf down, hold the lr up, defeat droop rule, etc )
Those are pretty general statements.
Dlms arent trying to control no where near the amount of weight transfer either.
I don't know what else you want me to say. I made factual statements about the use of shocks in each discipline and the reasons shocks may or may not be able to defeat bumps in the surface. In DLM, we use shocks to do other things besides control spring oscillations. Those other tasks make them bad at their intended purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZERO25
Shocks aren't supposed to control weight transfer either. The job is controlling spring oscillations. Now you may use more or less damping depending if your goal is ride comfort or performance, but limiting the amount of time a spring continues to oscillate, from hitting a bump, is the real goal.
Take the dlm rf for instance. We put a crap ton of rebound in the shock to hold that corner down. Guys get so stiff, when you hit a bump, the shock actually lifts the tire off the racing surface. This is extreme over damping that doesn't allow the spring to unload enough to handle the bump efficiently.
Im not saying your statements werent true.
What Im saying is at extremely rough tracks, like the Dome, there seems to be no sacrifice for ride control. Is it lack of technology or racers unwilling to change their thinking?
There is no lack of technology. Getting a shock right for a rough surface is the most simple use of a shock.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZERO25
People are showing up with a car very close to what they have been running. A purpose built car could probably be much faster, but so far, no one has done it. You can see some guys have obviously made small changes, but nothing like could be done.
I've been saying for a long time, our dirt late models are getting more like low riders in East LA the way we use shocks mainly to control body attitude.
Once we stop that and start creating cars that will do the same attitude with suspension and weight transfer, we can start using shocks to do what they were intended to do, make traction.
That was my point to begin with!Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterSbilt_Racer
there making traction , back 15 or so years ago with that era of shocks , when the track went slick in mid summer , a 600 hp engine could have a chance and win races , today , with modern shock tech , you can hook 900 plus hp in the slick , so shocks have increased speed by other than just controlling spring oscillation alone ....Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltemodel
A lot of what you are seeing is the downforce. You also see guys on their lid or loading up on tracks that guys would have raced 100 laps on 20 years ago. We give up any ability to handle rough to load the hell out of the body. I think you flip that script at the Dome, you could run well.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastford
People credit the shock tech. It isn't. It's the cg height and body loading we gained from screwing the shocks up. The gains overcame what was lost, if the surface is perfect enough to race on...
Power is needed for qualifying at the big tracks or shows, not helped by the fact at a big show they usually water more then normal too. But after you get past that and maybe a early heat race, power is being reduced a ton. I rarely see anything over 40 to 50% throttle in the slick even after a restrictor, timing, or carb has been changed to reduce power. I obviously haven't seen data on every car out there but a decent sample tells me this is mostly correct on average.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastford
so you guys think you could unbolt these modern shocks , dont change anything else , and bolt on a set of 15 year old oil shocks and be just as fast in the slick as todays shocks ? I am not arguing , just curious to your thoughts .....
Of course not. The rest of the setup is changed to run with the rf pinned down. You would push like a dump truck.Quote:
Originally Posted by fastford
Now ole Billet can tell you about the time his car was fast with 4 solid rods. No shocks there!
I did witness a guy years ago when the 4 bar was getting going , have the left side bird cage cam over while running 5th with 10 laps to go , he flew to the front and won the race , it was at Cleveland TnQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterSbilt_Racer
If I remember right, Randle Chup won Golden Isle years ago with the car locked solid with bump stops on the RF.
That was the rumor floating around. It doesn’t seem to jive for me because without a shock, what would rebound be like?
I would think with the areo and a little bit of what is going on now, you could easily take a set of mono tubes which are 6 or seven years old, bolt them on and be pretty good.
Just watch how a lot of these cars hobble and bounce through the corners. A ton of these cars now actually look quite miserable to drive. The largest gain is aero and muddy tracks. It seems they just don’t get slick anymore.
Even Florence seems to have way more traction than it used to.