extended shock question.

I have a rustys 6.5" long arm lift, I want to put new heavier duty shocks on it, I get great flex out of both the front and the back :clap: and with the sway bar disconected the shocks are really the only limiting thing on the front end, Can I get even more flex by putting shocks for an 8" or 10" lift and if so are there any trade offs?
I am running 34" swampers:nosmile: (hate them) now and now that I have trimed a good 3" I will be going to 36"'s soon. I was thinking about either fox or bielstien shocks any input on shocks would be great.

The longer the shock, the more likely you are to bottom out (kill) them. The more extension you get makes it droop more, which is cool on the RTI ramp in the parking lot, but will get you less traction off the pavement. Less traction comes from less sprung weight on the drooped tire. The compressed tire has more weight on it, thus adding to available traction.

A wise man once told me: Never sacrifice compression for extension.

Measure for your shocks, then make sure you've got a little more compression than extension. Add bumpstops that bottom out before the shock does so you don't kill the valving in it.

Make sure you're not using your brake line as a limiting strap.

ECKSJAY said:

The longer the shock, the more likely you are to bottom out (kill) them. The more extension you get makes it droop more, which is cool on the RTI ramp in the parking lot, but will get you less traction off the pavement. Less traction comes from less sprung weight on the drooped tire. The compressed tire has more weight on it, thus adding to available traction.

A wise man once told me: Never sacrifice compression for extension.

Measure for your shocks, then make sure you've got a little more compression than extension. Add bumpstops that bottom out before the shock does so you don't kill the valving in it.

Click to expand...

In the case of open diffs, sounds like the tire with the most droop will get the power since it has less traction. So if indeed more droop equates to less traction due to less weight as you say, limiting droop may be appropriate. Keep in mind I'm just reacting to your post outloud.

With open diffs, would it be correct to say there is an optimum droop (extension) less than which performance suffers from lack of flex and greater than which performance suffers from lack of traction? You're saying that this point is where you have a little more shock compression than flex (yes/no?).

Rod Knee said:

In the case of open diffs, sounds like the tire with the most droop will get the power since it has less traction. So if indeed more droop equates to less traction due to less weight as you say, limiting droop may be appropriate. Keep in mind I'm just reacting to your post outloud.

Click to expand...

Understood, and correct. However, with an open diff or locked diff, you're still not going to get optimum traction without the weight.

With open diffs, would it be correct to say there is an optimum droop (extension) less than which performance suffers from lack of flex and greater than which performance suffers from lack of traction? You're saying that this point is where you have a little more shock compression than flex (yes/no?).

Click to expand...

Lack of flex vs. lack of traction?

Let me put it to you this way: You can have all the clearance in the world with bald street tires of any size and open diffs. Clearance doesn't matter if you can get there in the first place. Of course there's a threshold where super grippy tires and locked diffs aren't going to matter if you're dragging framerails, but then a suspension that doesn't allow for much ground clearance isn't going to flex enough to make it matter anyway. This all is accounted for in the term 'low center of gravity.' With a low COG, body roll is much less of a concern because you don't have a suspension to 'unload' onto. If a wheel is drooped way out, it has a possibility of flopping back 'up' when tipped back. You've got a decent amount of weight out at the end of that axle, so if it decides to spring back up you'll have a weight shift that can flop you over. I can think of a recent video here where an XJ did just that. Now, had the suspension been controlled by something like an Antirock device, the travel would have been limited and FORCED the body into the UPHILL wheel that was coming off the ground. Theory here being that the body would have helped the uphill side compress and shift the COG. This is one reason you see TJs and other SWB rigs flopping over a lot. With a shorter wheelbase, the COG and geometry are different. Antirock bars allow for flex to a certain point but help prevent the suspension from loading and unloading too fast. I've got one on my XJ and I've been amazed at the sidehill runs I've been able to do. Granted, the large axles and 37s help keep it planted, but the theory is the same.

Hope that's as clear as mud. Was a slow day so I had coffee late.

pataterchip said:

I have a rustys 6.5" long arm lift, I want to put new heavier duty shocks on it, I get great flex out of both the front and the back :clap: and with the sway bar disconected the shocks are really the only limiting thing on the front end, Can I get even more flex by putting shocks for an 8" or 10" lift and if so are there any trade offs?
I am running 34" swampers:nosmile: (hate them) now and now that I have trimed a good 3" I will be going to 36"'s soon. I was thinking about either fox or bielstien shocks any input on shocks would be great.

Click to expand...

You have to measure the shock, then get one a little longer. You can't go by what shock might come with a particular lift kit, you have to go by the shock length itself.

Like was already said, you have to be careful when getting longer shocks because the compressed length will be longer as well as the extended length. If the compressed length is too long, you'll bottom out against the shocks which will be uncomfortable, will clunk, and will prematurely wear out or damage the shock. So, you need to know what the maximum compressed length you need for the shock, and find a shock with that compressed length, and then see what the extended length is. When checking compressed length, you have to allow for the bumpstop to compress all the way, because it will on a hard hit.

ECKSJAY said:

The longer the shock, the more likely you are to bottom out (kill) them. The more extension you get makes it droop more, which is cool on the RTI ramp in the parking lot, but will get you less traction off the pavement. Less traction comes from less sprung weight on the drooped tire. The compressed tire has more weight on it, thus adding to available traction.

A wise man once told me: Never sacrifice compression for extension.

Measure for your shocks, then make sure you've got a little more compression than extension. Add bumpstops that bottom out before the shock does so you don't kill the valving in it.

Click to expand...

Remember you can lower the lower shock mounting point so you can run a longer shock and gain droop without sacrificing any compression travel.

I like a 60/40 to 40/60 droop to compression ratio at the most. My front and rear on my MJ should be about 50/50. I like to go fast at times and need compression travel to do it. Some air bumps will probably be in my future.

Interesting discussion, and noteably clearER than mud, even to my muddled brain. Its relevant to me in that I'm mulling over what to do about shocks post-2 inch "budget" lift. I'm now leaning toward just using my stock shocks (they're still in OK shape) with 1.25 inch lengthening BPE's in the rear and maybe JKS BPE's (which provide .5 inch lengthening) in front to recover some extension within the comp/ext parameter as outlined by ecksjay. I'll mod bumpstops accordingly but according to a couple sources I've read, I really should not need to bumpstop the front. Does that sound like a reasonable approach?