Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt49 View Post
    We just keep coming up with more and more reasons to buy a spring smasher, don't we? I've been putting it off too long. Can't get good info from anybody (even those willing to help) on RF bump stops without giving them all these load numbers first and not just on RF.
    Like MB said you can do the math and get most of the info you need, it's just slower. Now setting or adjusting to pin to pin measurements without one takes a lot more steps and is way way slower then just using a cruncher. Before we had them, even with bump stops if you have the graphs on them I could take someones 375 spring off that was traveling max of 4.125" and change it to say a 250 with a bump stop and calculate it with math and throw it on the car and usually get within a 1/8" of travel most times.

    The cruncher makes life a lot faster and easier but can be done without one. It saves a lot of trips back and forth to the car (depending on what your doing) and a lot more accurate.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    The land of Irma
    Posts
    3,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by billetbirdcage View Post
    Like MB said you can do the math and get most of the info you need, it's just slower. Now setting or adjusting to pin to pin measurements without one takes a lot more steps and is way way slower then just using a cruncher. Before we had them, even with bump stops if you have the graphs on them I could take someones 375 spring off that was traveling max of 4.125" and change it to say a 250 with a bump stop and calculate it with math and throw it on the car and usually get within a 1/8" of travel most times.

    The cruncher makes life a lot faster and easier but can be done without one. It saves a lot of trips back and forth to the car (depending on what your doing) and a lot more accurate.
    So my socket on the jack under the rearend is antiquated now!
    Turn LEFT, Vote RIGHT!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    3,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fastford View Post
    saw a track record set with less than 1 inch of stagger this year , with the rear steer thats achieved now days , less is needed to turn , plus strait away speed is usually gained.....by the way , there was a thread on here a while back about running two 29s on rear , if im not mistaken , thats what he was on....
    Agree on the less stagger for sure with the amount of rear steer we have. You really only need enough stagger to keep the tires from "scrubbing" too much in the turns. But any amount of scrubbing you eliminate in the corners gets picked back up on the straights.
    I think less that traditionally accepted stagger also puts optimal camber in the rear tires. Just look at the tire wear pattern that you get when running 4 inches or more of stagger. That can't be good or at least I see room for improvement.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    thedirtysouth
    Posts
    4,014

    Default

    the only thing is some times that stagger does create camber in the rt rear that is beneficial , maybe its time to look at cambered axle tubes again .

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.