Conversation on Shocks

[grt74]

Off topic but I guess not really too far off, I've been wondering about his new Afco Technologies shocks.
Has anyone used them or heard anything on them? I can't imagine them not being pretty darn good.

we run them, there as good as anything out there,we've kept up with them on a dyno and they haven't fell off any about 15 races on them

[grt74]

The shock dyno only tells you so much about the shock performance. So, that is certainly very possible.

The shaft changes direction very frequently on the race car. Your dyno sheet don't show what happens then.

you can get shock data from the car,then put it in a program on the dyno,then work off of those graphs
end result same shock no matter who's name is on it,now shock fade is another story,but if your running weekly shows,20-30 laps you won't see much of it either,75-100 laps and fade is a huge factor(heat)

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

What tells me whether a shock is RIGHT or not?

Maintaining the attitude of the race car?
Tire temp management?
Checkered flags?

What tells me it's the RIGHT shock?

Attitude would be a big hell no.

For most people, the stopwatch. Testing with DAQ would work too.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

you can get shock data from the car,then put it in a program on the dyno,then work off of those graphs
end result same shock no matter who's name is on it,now shock fade is another story,but if your running weekly shows,20-30 laps you won't see much of it either,75-100 laps and fade is a huge factor(heat)

If you have a dyno with type of capabilities. There are reputable shock guys that don't have access to such dyno technology.

[let-r-eat]

A traction shock has nothing to do with attitude?

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

A traction shock has nothing to do with attitude?

If you take it off and your car looks the same, what is it doing for attitude? Shocks work by moving. They are intended to damp motion. You can build something crazy to act like a prop stick, but that isn't going to be the fastest way.

[let-r-eat]

Originally Posted by let-r-eat View Post
A traction shock has nothing to do with attitude?

MBR"If you take it off and your car looks the same, what is it doing for attitude? Shocks work by moving. They are intended to damp motion. You can build something crazy to act like a prop stick, but that isn't going to be the fastest way."


If the propstick improves aero/increases bar angles etc etc that outweigh the disadvantage of the propstick? I believe you know I'm talking about dynamically balancing the race car.

I think it's important to define what the "right shock" *goal* may be.

It's a plethora of variables. That right front hold down deal.........the traction shock........the ratcheting stuff............They all deal with attitude.

The right shock controls motion to improve traction. A prop stick isn't a shock. You can build a shock to be one but IMO that's not a shock and you must compensate for the motion somewhere else on the car.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Originally Posted by let-r-eat View Post
A traction shock has nothing to do with attitude?

MBR"If you take it off and your car looks the same, what is it doing for attitude? Shocks work by moving. They are intended to damp motion. You can build something crazy to act like a prop stick, but that isn't going to be the fastest way."


If the propstick improves aero/increases bar angles etc etc that outweigh the disadvantage of the propstick? I believe you know I'm talking about dynamically balancing the race car.

I think it's important to define what the "right shock" *goal* may be.

It's a plethora of variables. That right front hold down deal.........the traction shock........the ratcheting stuff............They all deal with attitude.

The right shock controls motion to improve traction. A prop stick isn't a shock. You can build a shock to be one but IMO that's not a shock and you must compensate for the motion somewhere else on the car.

I guess my point is that you can make the car be nose down lr up without any crazy shocks. And you should. No way the benefits outweigh a rigid suspension.

[Kromulous]

Stede, its sounds like you have real shock experience, so i have a question for you? Why do all the shock companies promote a digressive valved over a linear valve? I know the party line, they have more traction, and i think thats a complete load.

[MasterSbilt_Racer]

Stede, its sounds like you have real shock experience, so i have a question for you? Why do all the shock companies promote a digressive valved over a linear valve? I know the party line, they have more traction, and i think thats a complete load.

I am not Sted, but if you have ridiculous rebound at 1"/sec if will really be crazy at 10" if it isn't digressive.

[zeroracing]

Also to answer Kromulous some in the sports car or F1 type realm will tell you the opposite. That often a linear valve will produce more traction overall, but drivers will not like the feel as much and it will not control body movements as much. But for pure mechanical traction very little dampening and very light springs would be best.

Other side note, it is my understanding that the high frequency pistons that people like on dirt were originally designed for novice drivers that hit curbs on road courses to keep from upsetting the car with dampening too much on those hits.

[Kromulous]

Its already crazy rebound digressive or linear. If u were to do a linear valve you would have to scale it i would think. Also what purpose does the bleed adjustment serve on a linear valved shock? Most DA shocks only manipulate the bleed orifice is my understanding.

What is meant by "High freq" anyway, especially for a shock piston?

Why do say Drivers will not like the feel of a linear valved shock?

Thanks, Krom.

[Stede Bonnet]

Stede, its sounds like you have real shock experience, so i have a question for you? Why do all the shock companies promote a digressive valved over a linear valve? I know the party line, they have more traction, and i think thats a complete load.

Digressive is typically better for slick situations where maintaining traction is a must.
Linear or progressive would be better suited for hooked up, heavy and rough tracks.
These are general rules of thumb, driving style can't be overlooked either. If the driver doesn't like it or feel confident in whats under him it won't be an optimum situation.

[MachineMasters]

One thing to understand is that bleed has a huge effect on rebound in a digressive shock.

For example, Carrera was real big on large bleed digressive shocks. Meaning - there was little damping control at lower shock velocities (1ips - 3ips). Modern/current shocks used in DLM racing have little to no bleed which is what helps keep the car on the RF. This low/no-bleed digressive curve looks and performs entirely different at lower shock velocities. A big bleed digressive shock lets the car 'move around' and can promote weight transfer due little resistance in the shock at low velocities, but also can let the nose pop up in dirty air and give the car a sloppy feeling.

My preferred damping characteristics for each corner are:
LF - linear compression/digressive rebound (the type of curve is least important on this corner)
RF - linear compression/digressive rebound
RR - linear compression and rebound (large bleed w/stiff stack)
LRF - digressive with large bleed
LRR - digressive compression/linear rebound

[Kromulous]

Why do you like the RR set up that way, better feel st speed?