Ride quality - shocks

[CFster]

I've seen lots of threads regarding shocks and track performance, but I'm more interested in ride quality on the street.

I have Varishocks, and am looking for a smoother ride. I'm sure these are great on the track, but if I hit a rut, or manhole cover in the road it's jarring. Feel it through the wheel. If I turn the damping down to the point it's halfway acceptable, then it starts wallowing around like a pig.

I've heard people say the Ridetech's ride better - mostly from Ridetech employees though. I have dyno charts for Varishocks, Ridetech HQs and Vikings. It seems like in higher velocity movements the Ridetechs actually offer more resistance than the Varishocks.

For example, at 12 in/sec shaft speed (which I think is appropriate for a quick transition like a rut in the road):

The Varishocks are at 220lbs compression / 575lbs rebound full firm and 95lbs compression / 135lbs rebound on full soft.

The Ridetechs are at 155lbs compression / 640lbs rebound full firm and 125lbs compression / 340lbs rebound at full soft.

The Vikings are at 320lbs compression / 450lbs rebound full firm and 75lbs compression / 100lbs rebound at full soft.

I'm no expert in shock technology. It does seem to me however that (on the street) we would want a softer compression and stiffer rebound to soak up those bumps and prevent packing. In this case, should I in fact be looking at the Ridetechs do to their higher rebound numbers?

I'd appreciate any input.

Thanks,
-CF

[hectore3]

Suscribed

[Bryce]

If you are hitting the bump stops then the shock and spring are no longer included in the system. Do you know if you are bottoming out or not?

I noticed as I have been increasing the spring rates to get the car to corner better I have also increased the ride quality as long as I run a softer setting on the shocks. I am no shock expert so I will save my opinion for later.

[CFster]

It's not hitting the bump stops. As a matter of fact this car is raised way up from the stock SC&C settings.

[Carl @ Chassisworks]

CF,
Each of the three shocks listed will have their own compromises.
The Ridetech shock primarily adjusts rebound with a small affect on compression. You’ll be able to tune out the wallowing more accurately, but have very little compression range to adjust ride harshness.
The Viking shock has less relative rebound damping than the VariShock, so it will be even softer once you set it to a non-harsh ride.

The easiest solution would be a double-adjustable VariShock, so that it matches the travel requirements of the Savitske suspension system. It will also give you the ability to tune for cruising or aggressive driving.

[CFster]

So what you're saying is I should go with the double adjustable Varishock simply because it "matches the travel requirements if the Savitske suspension"? I don't think the travel requirements are any different than a stock a-body. Do the compression numbers go lower on the double adjustable Varishocks?

The Vikings are less money, are double adjustable and as you say have softer rebound. Why the Varishocks?

[marolf101x]

You need to look at the whole graph, not just one point for ride quality. If it starts out soft, then gets stiffer it will slow down the suspension while minimizing the transfer of energy to the driver.
If it starts off stiff, then gets softer (relatively to the others) it will be harsh from the start. Ill expound more when I'm not on my cell phone.

[Marcus SC&C]

Colin, give a call when you have some time and we`ll talk shock talk. The devil`s in the details and I`ll bet it something small that`s keeping the ride from being what you want. We use the Varishocks on comfy cruisers all the time at the shop. If you can`t get good ride quality out of those, it`s only going to be harder with your other choices. If you`re especially sensitive the double adj. QS2 may be the ticket as Carl suggested.

[Nicks67GTO]

Ive also got a 67' GTO with exact same SC&C touring + suspension so i'm very interested in all of this as well. Colin and I have been discussing this for some time now and this issue is what is holding me back from selecting between the HQ Ridetechs and the SA Varishocks.

[Yelcamino]

First off, please try to disregard the fact that I work at Ridetech.

Prior to my current position, I was a typical hot rodder trying to make my cars the best they could be within my means. With that said, I'm not trying to step on toes or bash competitors’ products, just sharing my personal experiences.

As some of you know, I have two ’66 A-bodies. The El Camino has a complete Global West suspension with ATS/C5 spindles/hubs, conventional coil springs and Ridetech single adjustable HQ threaded body shocks. Before I became part of Ridetech, it had QA-1 single adjustable shocks.

The Chevelle has a complete SC&C/SPC suspension with ATS/C5 spindles/hubs, conventional coil springs and QA-1 single adjustable shocks. Prior to the QA-1 shocks, it had a set of single adjustable Vari-shocks as recommended by Mark at SC&C.

Unlike most people, I have the luxury of making back-to-back comparisons between shocks on essentially the same car with no delay between tests. My personal opinion is the Ridetech shocks provide a better ride around town and I can quickly adjust the rebound damping when I autocross.

Forget about the different brands of shocks for a minute and re-read my last sentence above and notice where I say: “I can quickly adjust"

This is very important for those of us whose cars have a front suspension that use a conventional coil spring with a shock mounted inside the coil. The typical performance twin-tube shock controls damping through a base valve arrangement. Where does that put the adjustment knob? At the bottom of the shock, inside the coil.

I don’t know about anyone else on this forum, but I DO NOT like lying on dirty, hot asphalt with a floor jack so I can get to the knob to make adjustments. When the shocks were new, it was fun to play around and change the adjustments to see how the car felt, but eventually the floor jack routine became a real PITA. Not to mention, I normally don’t bring a floor jack with me to the autocross. The path of least resistance means finding a middle of the road adjustment and living with the compromise, which is how my Chevelle currently sits.

The following two pictures show the location of the adjustment knob on my Chevelle:

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/hlumpp/media/IMG_20130822_094623_419_zps54c09e45.jpg.html)

There's about a 1" gap between coils when on the ground. Lifting the car with a floor jack increases that gap to maybe 1-1/2" to 1-3/4". Still not much room for my fingers.

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/hlumpp/media/IMG_20130822_094422_492_zpsc41e1861.jpg.html)

Let’s take a look at my El Camino now…

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/noimg.gif (http://s263.photobucket.com/user/hlumpp/media/IMG_20130822_094833_765_zps37c1db78.jpg.html)

The Ridetech shocks have the rebound knob on the top – where it’s super easy to reach in and turn the knob!

No longer do I have to compromise ride quality for performance or performance for ride quality. I have the best of both at my fingertips! Common sense tells me if you can’t easily make adjustments, you probably won’t.

The same goes for coil-over applications. You may or may not need a floor jack to get at the adjustment knobs, but you still have to lie on the ground to reach them. No thanks.

Unfortunately, adjusting the rear shocks still requires you to drop a knee regardless of which brand shock you choose. Once again, all else being equal, I personally prefer the Ridetech shocks.

I apologize for being so long winded, but hopefully this helps in the decision making process! :cheers:

[CFster]

Well I like that a heck of a lot better. It is a PITA to get in between those coils, and as a matter of fact one of my adjuster knobs is very difficult to turn - I have to take it apart to get a good enough grip on it. There's an allen screw in the middle of the knob, and that's great if I want to tighten it, but it's so stiff that if I try to use an allen wrench to loosen it - it just ends up backing the allen screw out!

Are those the HQs?

How do you define better ride? As far as handling, or do they absorb the bumps better? What settings do you have them on?

Thanks.

[CFster]

Also wondering if I can get some input on compression vs. rebound.

What am I feeling when I hit a bump in the road? Is it too much compression, or not enough rebound? I would think you would want less stiff compression to absorb the bump. As the compression doesn't really change with the Varishock QA1's adjustment, I don't see how adjusting that shock affects ride quality at all, with the exception of preventing "packing" over a series of bumps.

[Henesian]

Shocks obviously make a huge difference in ride quality, but I think that on our cars and setups, tire height and compression valving make a huge difference than adjusting the rebound. I don't have shocks that adjust like the Ridetechs or Varishocks do, but I know from experience that my AFCO shocks with 255/60/15 Radial T/As felt like a boat, even though the AFCO Shocks are insanely stiff 50/50 shocks that are 7/7 valving. The difference between 40/60 Koni shocks and 50/50 AFCO race shocks on 255/60/15 Radial T/As was barely anything. But, on 275/40/17 Kumhos, being a 26" tire and having barely any sidewall, the difference in compression valving made a huge difference in ride quality even with a minimal difference in rebound. You also have to take into account that adjusting compression and rebound affect handling in different ways, and that if you try to adjust the car with adjustable shocks to get better ride quality, the first fast turn you try to take, the car is going to feel completely different, because of how huge a different shocks can make in suspension balance. Also, tire pressure balance makes a huge difference too. In these modern 51psi Z-rated tires that we run, you don't have to keep it up at 40-45psi cold, when you can run it down at 30-35 psi cold and get way better ride quality and have a marginal affect on handling.

[Yelcamino]

Are those the HQs?

How do you define better ride? As far as handling, or do they absorb the bumps better? What settings do you have them on?

Thanks.

The ones I have are the single adjustable threaded 2.0" body. Just in case I ever want to convert to coil-overs, all I need to do is add the coil kit and coils.

I define a better ride as being able to go down a bumpy road without my teeth rattling, yet the car doesn't feel like it’s on marshmallows. With the turn of the knob, I can get a more performance ride.

The Ridetech shocks on my El Camino are 10 clicks out from full firm for normal driving. For autocross, I have them on full firm. The QA-1s on my Chevelle, it's been so long since I messed with the adjustments, I can't honestly tell you where they are.


Also wondering if I can get some input on compression vs. rebound.

What am I feeling when I hit a bump in the road? Is it too much compression, or not enough rebound? I would think you would want less stiff compression to absorb the bump. As the compression doesn't really change with the Varishock QA1's adjustment, I don't see how adjusting that shock affects ride quality at all, with the exception of preventing "packing" over a series of bumps.

Typically if there’s too much compression, you’ve added rate to your spring, which will give you a harsher ride. If you have too much rebound, following a bump, the car won’t come back up fast enough before you hit the next bump, known as packing. However, the rebound levels of the shocks in discussion aren’t high enough to pack. I’ve put together some valve stacks in our shocks and reached 2500 lbs of force at 15 in/sec on the dyno. That level of rebound will pack!

[CFster]

What effect does rebound have on ride quality? Given these aren't prone to packing.

Am I looking for a lower number?

[CFster]

Shocks obviously make a huge difference in ride quality, but I think that on our cars and setups, tire height and compression valving make a huge difference than adjusting the rebound. I don't have shocks that adjust like the Ridetechs or Varishocks do, but I know from experience that my AFCO shocks with 255/60/15 Radial T/As felt like a boat, even though the AFCO Shocks are insanely stiff 50/50 shocks that are 7/7 valving. The difference between 40/60 Koni shocks and 50/50 AFCO race shocks on 255/60/15 Radial T/As was barely anything. But, on 275/40/17 Kumhos, being a 26" tire and having barely any sidewall, the difference in compression valving made a huge difference in ride quality even with a minimal difference in rebound. You also have to take into account that adjusting compression and rebound affect handling in different ways, and that if you try to adjust the car with adjustable shocks to get better ride quality, the first fast turn you try to take, the car is going to feel completely different, because of how huge a different shocks can make in suspension balance. Also, tire pressure balance makes a huge difference too. In these modern 51psi Z-rated tires that we run, you don't have to keep it up at 40-45psi cold, when you can run it down at 30-35 psi cold and get way better ride quality and have a marginal affect on handling.

Yes, there's no question in my mind ride quality was compromised when I went from 15" to 18" rims, and 45 series rubber.

I'm just trying to make the best out of my situation, because there's no going back. Plus, there's a lot of cars out there with 18"-20" rubber and they ride a heck of a lot better than my car.

[Henesian]

Yes, there's no question in my mind ride quality was compromised when I went from 15" to 18" rims, and 45 series rubber.

I'm just trying to make the best out of my situation, because there's no going back. Plus, there's a lot of cars out there with 18"-20" rubber and they ride a heck of a lot better than my car.For sure man, I'm totally in the same boat too. 275/40/17s have an insanely small amount of sidewall, and it's such a tough ride, that it's not a girl-friendly car, but handles insanely well. I think one thing that helps me is only running 32 PSI cold, because I know that Kumhos like to be in the mid to high 30s psi range when hot. That also helps with ride quality. I think on the front, lowering compression valving helps alot, but, if you're running 50/50 shocks in the rear, it's going to lean the car toward the oversteer side of the handling balance spectrum, even with reduced rebound valving. Which might make the car less safe, unless you like to drift of course. But if you're running digressive shocks front and back, it won't do much. Ricers have this problem even more than we do, because of how stiff their coilovers are on cars that natively have struts and not a dual a-arm suspension. My friend's stock 2005 Subaru STi has worse ride quality than my T/A with the same amount of sidewall tire and soft, stock struts and not even coilovers.

[marolf101x]

You must remember, after the coil over compresses it must then extend. You want very little compression damping. . . That's the job of the spring in ride quality. Once the spring is compressed it will force the shock apart. Rebound damping MUST slow this down. If it does not the suspension will continue to bounce.

Ride quality is odd. Sometimes the more force you have, the more control it provides, the better the car feels. Like a stock chevelle we test with. . . Floated all over the road with worn out Monroe's. added RQ smooth bodies (and that was it) and it was controlled and predictable. Everyone voted the ride quality got better, even though the shocks were stiffer.

Since ride quality is such a subjective beast I think we need to explain your current ride quality in terms of a new car. You say it's harsh or stiff. Is it "BMW M3" stiff, or is it F550 stiff? There's a huge difference between the two!

[Nicks67GTO]

Herb..

Is there a price difference in the smooth body HQ's and the threaded body HQ's?

[Nicks67GTO]

The easy front adjustment of the RQ Ridetech is also a VERY nice selling point.

[Yelcamino]

Herb..

Is there a price difference in the smooth body HQ's and the threaded body HQ's?

Smooth body HQ - $175 each
2.0 threaded body HQ - $250 each (coil mounting kit included with shock)

[Yelcamino]

What effect does rebound have on ride quality? Given these aren't prone to packing.

Am I looking for a lower number?

As Britt stated, the rebound slows down the coil following compression. Keep in mind, a 300 lb/in coil won't need as much rebound force as a 1000 lb/in coil. That's where the HQ shines - you can adjust the rebound force to suit your coil rate and your personal preference.

At low velocities (1-3 in/sec) you want the rebound force to make a nice ramp up to 200-300 lbs or so. Of course the force should continue to increase as the velocity increases.


Like a stock chevelle we test with. . . Floated all over the road with worn out Monroe's. added RQ smooth bodies (and that was it) and it was controlled and predictable. Everyone voted the ride quality got better, even though the shocks were stiffer.


This Chevelle is bone stock with original rubber bushings, springs, etc. It was incredible how just installing a set of the RQ smooth bodies improved all aspects of the ride!

[CFster]

You must remember, after the coil over compresses it must then extend. You want very little compression damping. . . That's the job of the spring in ride quality. Once the spring is compressed it will force the shock apart. Rebound damping MUST slow this down. If it does not the suspension will continue to bounce.

Ride quality is odd. Sometimes the more force you have, the more control it provides, the better the car feels. Like a stock chevelle we test with. . . Floated all over the road with worn out Monroe's. added RQ smooth bodies (and that was it) and it was controlled and predictable. Everyone voted the ride quality got better, even though the shocks were stiffer.

Since ride quality is such a subjective beast I think we need to explain your current ride quality in terms of a new car. You say it's harsh or stiff. Is it "BMW M3" stiff, or is it F550 stiff? There's a huge difference between the two!

Not F550 stiff - we have those and nothing as stiff as one of them. Maybe M3 stiff.

Again, one it's past the initial movement it's fine - as in, the small bumps are the worst - just kind of hammers. Anything more than that is fine - I can go over rises and dips in the road and it's fine. The suspension moves, the car goes up and down it's fine.

[andrewb70]

Not F550 stiff - we have those and nothing as stiff as one of them. Maybe M3 stiff.

Again, one it's past the initial movement it's fine - as in, the small bumps are the worst - just kind of hammers. Anything more than that is fine - I can go over rises and dips in the road and it's fine. The suspension moves, the car goes up and down it's fine.

Just out of curiosity, do you know how much your wheels weigh?

Andrew

[CFster]

No. They're 18x8 and 18x9 Boyds PT-09s. I've just sent an email off to them.

I do have C6 ZO6 brakes though, which are not light...

[andrewb70]

No. They're 18x8 and 18x9 Boyds PT-09s. I've just sent an email off to them.

I do have C6 ZO6 brakes though, which are not light...

The reason I ask is because your car and mine are very similar (suspension and brake components). I have QA1 coilovers on the front with 550lb/in springs and my ride is definitely not jarring or "hammer" like. It is definitely firm, but my GF never complains, so that tells me the ride is not punishing. My shocks are set fairly firm.

The reason I ask about the wheel weight is that the unsprung wheel and tire weight make a big difference not only in handling, but also in the ride quality. I used to have a 1995 Miata and those cars are especially sensitive to unsprung weight. It had a set of heavy cast 16x7 wheels on it and Kony coilovers. The ride was very harsh. I always thought that it was because of the Konis. Then I installed the stock wheels and new stock size tires on it, and the handling AND the ride quality improved tremendously.

The wheels on my GTO are about 20-21 pounds in the front.

Andrew

[Nicks67GTO]

I'm going to be really forward and cut to the chase here so forgive me....

Is it really possible to have a shock that rides super smooth on the street and can get turned up to outperform the competition on the track? It seems like too much win. Like its too good to be true. Is Ridetech suggesting that the HQ's will ride better on the street and do just as well on the track as the SA Varishocks?

[Carl @ Chassisworks]

Colin,
Experience tells us that the simplest solution is usually the best solution. With a low profile tire, the air pressure can make a HUGE difference so I would play around with that a bit. Does your car have a full, sound deadened interior or is it a stripped down streetfigher? Noise plays a huge part in our perception of ‘ride quality’ as well.

Do you have cut stock style coil-springs on the car to get it lower? If not, what springs do you have? I ask because you mentioned ‘wallowing’ which can mean many things to different people. To me it means your spring is too soft but other indicators, such as not hitting the bump stops and having a harsh ride, lead me toward the spring being too stiff.

Here’s an editorial that Chris Alston wrote a while back. CLICK HERE. (http://www.cachassisworks.com/Stories/TechVAS-002_WEB.pdf) It references both handling and straight line applications. Some good info, for instance “If your car rides like crap, it’s got the wrong spring in it! That’s why so many street machines ride like skateboards.” Also, THIS ARTICLE (http://www.cachassisworks.com/whitepapers/002-CoiloverConversion_WP_WEB.pdf)about coilover conversions has a lot of good tech info.


It’s not hitting the bump stops. As a matter of fact this car is raised way up from the stock SC&C settings.
If you’re not at the settings SC&C designated, it’s possible you’re topping out the shock. This can contribute to poor ride quality. Call Mark and go over your setup. He knows how to tune your configuration better than anyone else. If you’re running it different that he designed for you, then that’s issue #1.


What am I feeling when I hit a bump in the road? Is it too much compression, or not enough rebound? I would think you would want less stiff compression to absorb the bump.
Rebound typically has the largest effect on what we experience as 'ride quality.' The springs are pushing the wheel down into the ground and the car up into the air. They do most of the work when it comes to compression damping, providing they are the proper rate for your application. From there, the rebound keeps it from feeling ‘springy.’


As the compression doesn't really change with the Varishock QA1's adjustment, I don't see how adjusting that shock affects ride quality at all, with the exception of preventing "packing" over a series of bumps.
Actually, our compression resistance force changes significantly throughout the dampening range so I’m not sure if you’re referring to a QA1 or a VariShock. You don’t have to worry about ‘packing’ on these shocks. These are street cars and are not valved stiff enough for that to be an issue.

Incidentally, the shock dyno numbers you posted are not really comparable. The VariShock numbers in your original post are from a coil over body. The valving is slightly different for the 'bolt-in' shocks. Also, the valving is different between set valve, 1, 2, & 4 way adjustable as well. I don’t have a smooth body graph to share so we’ll just run with what you posted as it’s not drastically different. I’m pretty sure the Ridetech info is also for a coilover as they don’t currently offer an HQ smooth body/adjustable ‘bolt-in’ style shock for your car. Herb is running a coilover body in his car. You could put those in, or you could spend an extra $48 to get a double adjustable VariShock. The Viking is a DA shock of unknown configuration.


For example, at 12 in/sec shaft speed (which I think is appropriate for a quick transition like a rut in the road):
The Varishocks are at 220lbs compression / 575lbs rebound full firm and 95lbs compression / 135lbs rebound on full soft.
The Ridetechs are at 155lbs compression / 640lbs rebound full firm and 125lbs compression / 340lbs rebound at full soft.
The Vikings are at 320lbs compression / 450lbs rebound full firm and 75lbs compression / 100lbs rebound at full soft.

That said, here's what I see when I look at the numbers you provided. The curve is important too, but this will do for now.
- VariShock - Primarily rebound dampening is controlled by the knob. Compression dampening follows slightly behind rebound damping.
- Ridetech - Rebound dampening has narrowest range listed, has the most rebound damping at full soft and full stiff. Compression damping stays relatively static.
- Viking - DA Shock, can be tuned for softest rebound and stiffest compression of those listed. Has middle of the road rebound range. (Unless you compare it to the VariShock DA which can )

For reference, I have attached a copy of the VariShock coilover single and double adjustable coilover dyno graphs.

81268 81269

[Yelcamino]

I’m pretty sure the Ridetech info is also for a coilover as they don’t currently offer an HQ smooth body/adjustable ‘bolt-in’ style shock for your car. Herb is running a coilover body in his car.

Carl, you are correct, I have the coil-over body in my car. However, we do offer a bolt in smooth body rebound adjustable shock, known as the HQ (http://www.ridetech.com/store/shocks/). Stock should start arriving in September. As soon as we get them in, I'll do some dyno runs and post up graphs.

[Yelcamino]

I'm going to be really forward and cut to the chase here so forgive me....

Is it really possible to have a shock that rides super smooth on the street and can get turned up to outperform the competition on the track? It seems like too much win. Like its too good to be true. Is Ridetech suggesting that the HQ's will ride better on the street and do just as well on the track as the SA Varishocks?

Yes it is possible to get the best of both worlds. However, none of the shocks in this discussion will fall out of the box optimized. That will require you to invest your time trying different settings under various conditions until you're satisfied with the result.

[CFster]

Colin,
Experience tells us that the simplest solution is usually the best solution. With a low profile tire, the air pressure can make a HUGE difference so I would play around with that a bit. Does your car have a full, sound deadened interior or is it a stripped down streetfigher? Noise plays a huge part in our perception of ‘ride quality’ as well.

Do you have cut stock style coil-springs on the car to get it lower? If not, what springs do you have? I ask because you mentioned ‘wallowing’ which can mean many things to different people. To me it means your spring is too soft but other indicators, such as not hitting the bump stops and having a harsh ride, lead me toward the spring being too stiff.

Here’s an editorial that Chris Alston wrote a while back. CLICK HERE. (http://www.cachassisworks.com/Stories/TechVAS-002_WEB.pdf) It references both handling and straight line applications. Some good info, for instance “If your car rides like crap, it’s got the wrong spring in it! That’s why so many street machines ride like skateboards.” Also, THIS ARTICLE (http://www.cachassisworks.com/whitepapers/002-CoiloverConversion_WP_WEB.pdf)about coilover conversions has a lot of good tech info.


If you’re not at the settings SC&C designated, it’s possible you’re topping out the shock. This can contribute to poor ride quality. Call Mark and go over your setup. He knows how to tune your configuration better than anyone else. If you’re running it different that he designed for you, then that’s issue #1.


Rebound typically has the largest effect on what we experience as 'ride quality.' The springs are pushing the wheel down into the ground and the car up into the air. They do most of the work when it comes to compression damping, providing they are the proper rate for your application. From there, the rebound keeps it from feeling ‘springy.’


Actually, our compression resistance force changes significantly throughout the dampening range so I’m not sure if you’re referring to a QA1 or a VariShock. You don’t have to worry about ‘packing’ on these shocks. These are street cars and are not valved stiff enough for that to be an issue.

Incidentally, the shock dyno numbers you posted are not really comparable. The VariShock numbers in your original post are from a coil over body. The valving is slightly different for the 'bolt-in' shocks. Also, the valving is different between set valve, 1, 2, & 4 way adjustable as well. I don’t have a smooth body graph to share so we’ll just run with what you posted as it’s not drastically different. I’m pretty sure the Ridetech info is also for a coilover as they don’t currently offer an HQ smooth body/adjustable ‘bolt-in’ style shock for your car. Herb is running a coilover body in his car. You could put those in, or you could spend an extra $48 to get a double adjustable VariShock. The Viking is a DA shock of unknown configuration.



That said, here's what I see when I look at the numbers you provided. The curve is important too, but this will do for now.
- VariShock - Primarily rebound dampening is controlled by the knob. Compression dampening follows slightly behind rebound damping.
- Ridetech - Rebound dampening has narrowest range listed, has the most rebound damping at full soft and full stiff. Compression damping stays relatively static.
- Viking - DA Shock, can be tuned for softest rebound and stiffest compression of those listed. Has middle of the road rebound range. (Unless you compare it to the VariShock DA which can )

For reference, I have attached a copy of the VariShock coilover single and double adjustable coilover dyno graphs.

81268 81269

Carl,

I'm running the SPC springs that Mark sold me with my AFX kit. They haven't been altered in any way. I'm also running spacers that he gave me, so I'm sure if there were any travel issues he would have made me aware of it.

The car is dynomatted on the floor and trunk. Full interior.

What I mean by wallowing is if I turn my shocks down to zero then yes it will bottom out and is generally scary during weight transfer and going around corners.

What I find interesting about the dyno charts you posted is the rebound range is virtually the same but the compression force is significantly higher on the Q2s. I'm not sure how the Q2s would help in my situation as I'm experiencing more of a harsh compression event.

[CFster]

Also, while looking at the charts (that I have), it appears the Varishocks ramp up quicker. Meaning, while I was referring to a fast piston velocity, obviously an acceleration took place, so is accurate to say your shocks have a firmer initial movement or (head) to them?

[rustomatic]

To the original poster: Have you checked your front suspension for bind? Having obsessed over this myself recently (1963 Falcon), my most recent changes have finally gotten rid of the the jarring/shudder that once seemed ever-present in every early Mustang I ever had (about six). Two main elements seemed to make the greatest difference: control arms/spring saddles with bearings in them, plus Koni shocks. The Konis (classics--compress and twist to adjust) are a huge pain to adjust, but it only seems to take one or two adjustments past the baseline to get the sweet spot. Konis do about the opposite of what KYBs seem to do; the adjustments stress rebound damping long before compression stiffens up. This makes all the difference in the world when trying to combine ride quality with performance.

My car sits pretty low, to the point where I've had to raise bump stops (and shock travel, to a lesser extent) on the front end 2-3 inches; in the rear, I actually had to recently raise the rear of my driveshaft/transmission tunnel nearly three inches. I still have good travel, however. With the right combo, you can still get a very good ride at a low height, and slam through turns confidently. I recently laughed myself silly with an M3 in my rear view...

At any rate, my normal drive, from my driveway, consists of ten miles of twisties and two bridges (not the smoothest joints). The comfort of my suspension has been largely accidental, but at the peak of my Falcon's development, it has oddly reached its most comfortable ride quality with peak handling (to date)...

[Carl @ Chassisworks]

Carl,
What I find interesting about the dyno charts you posted is the rebound range is virtually the same but the compression force is significantly higher on the Q2s. I'm not sure how the Q2s would help in my situation as I'm experiencing more of a harsh compression event.

Yes, the QS2 has a lot more available compression dampening. That doesn't mean you have to use all of it. The benefit of the double adjustable is that you can independently control the restistance force. The compression/bump is not tied to the extension/rebound. The DA shock was designed with more available compression because of this. It would be extremely unlikely that anyone would run both knobs a full 16 clicks tight.

Likewise, running a QS2 full soft on both paths would cause the car to 'wallow' as the valving is essentially turned off. You would basically be running on just the springs. What you are descibing to me sounds like a spring rate issue but could be any number of issues.

In the end, if you're having ride quality issues you need to talk to the guy who configured your package. You have our shock, but not springs, spindles, or a-arms that we supply; all of which matters in the overall setup. Mark Savitske is one of our most intelligent dealers, has written an excellent book on suspension tuning, and is the best person qualified to discuss his setup.

When you made your purchase, SC&C gave you very specific settings to use, along with specific ride height requirements. Go back to the original settings and set-up and start logging data about what setting you used and how the car responds, etc. We can then talk about how to make adjustments to create the ride and performance you want.

[Henesian]

To the original poster: Have you checked your front suspension for bind? Having obsessed over this myself recently (1963 Falcon), my most recent changes have finally gotten rid of the the jarring/shudder that once seemed ever-present in every early Mustang I ever had (about six). Two main elements seemed to make the greatest difference: control arms/spring saddles with bearings in them, plus Koni shocks. The Konis (classics--compress and twist to adjust) are a huge pain to adjust, but it only seems to take one or two adjustments past the baseline to get the sweet spot. Konis do about the opposite of what KYBs seem to do; the adjustments stress rebound damping long before compression stiffens up. This makes all the difference in the world when trying to combine ride quality with performance.

My car sits pretty low, to the point where I've had to raise bump stops (and shock travel, to a lesser extent) on the front end 2-3 inches; in the rear, I actually had to recently raise the rear of my driveshaft/transmission tunnel nearly three inches. I still have good travel, however. With the right combo, you can still get a very good ride at a low height, and slam through turns confidently. I recently laughed myself silly with an M3 in my rear view...

At any rate, my normal drive, from my driveway, consists of ten miles of twisties and two bridges (not the smoothest joints). The comfort of my suspension has been largely accidental, but at the peak of my Falcon's development, it has oddly reached its most comfortable ride quality with peak handling (to date)...
I had the exact same experience with Koni shocks vs KYB shocks. But my set are original 30 year old red Special D's. Just wanted to 2nd all of what you said.

[Marcus SC&C]

Collin, you`re getting your head all wrapped up in dyno numbers. Let`s get practical, you`re not going to use the softest end of the adjustment range in any Varishock with your application. You`ve already noticed that range is too soft (as it should be), so who has the softest ultimate numbers is academic. Throughout this whole thread you have never mentioned what shock settings you are actually using. What are the shocks set at currently? You mentioned that you have set them so that the car is too soft and begins to wallow, what settings was that. You mentioned that set firmer the car handles well but fells more harsh. At what setting did that take place?
Ride quality involves a great many things besides the shocks and the devils as I said before is always in the details. Just because you`re focusing on the shocks doesn`t make them the issue. Cars that are initially harsh but smooth out throughout their travel (as you mentioned yours does) always suggest to me that something in the systems in having to reach an excessively high break free torque before it begins to move. One common cause of this is poly bushings that weren`t properly lubricated or bushings that have been over tightened to the point of binding. The back end of the rear trailing arms is a common location for this. Other things can do it as well. Tire pressure ,as mentioned can have a large effect on ride quality, especially with low profile tires. The tire type can make a huge difference, if you`re running y speed rated supercar tires that were never designed with ride quality in mind, then the ride quality of you car will suffer. If you`re trying to build a touring cruiser you would want to look toward the tires used on European sedans not Lambos. Etc. etc. As you know all of our clients are welcome to call for a detailed one on one consultation at any time. But we can`t help much if you don`t call.

[andrewb70]

I'll throw another data point out there. I just swapped tires on my GTO. I was running the Falken RT 615s in 255/40-18 in the front and 295/40-18 in the rear. I swapped to the new BFG Rivals, with 275/35-18 in the front and 295/35-18 in the rear. We set the new tire pressure at 38 in the front and 36 in the rear. The front wheel were widened from 8" to 9.5".

The Falkens were 28lb front and 33lbs in the rear.

The Rivals are 27lb front and 29lbs in the rear.

With the wider front wheels, the weight might be a wash. However, in the rear I lost 8lb of unsprung weight. That seems like a lot.

The ride quality with the new tires are is better than with the old tires.

Andrew

[Bryce]

thanks Andrew. Any noticeable reduction in sidewall stiffness with the lower weight?

[CFster]

Collin, you`re getting your head all wrapped up in dyno numbers. Let`s get practical, you`re not going to use the softest end of the adjustment range in any Varishock with your application. You`ve already noticed that range is too soft (as it should be), so who has the softest ultimate numbers is academic. Throughout this whole thread you have never mentioned what shock settings you are actually using. What are the shocks set at currently? You mentioned that you have set them so that the car is too soft and begins to wallow, what settings was that. You mentioned that set firmer the car handles well but fells more harsh. At what setting did that take place?
Ride quality involves a great many things besides the shocks and the devils as I said before is always in the details. Just because you`re focusing on the shocks doesn`t make them the issue. Cars that are initially harsh but smooth out throughout their travel (as you mentioned yours does) always suggest to me that something in the systems in having to reach an excessively high break free torque before it begins to move. One common cause of this is poly bushings that weren`t properly lubricated or bushings that have been over tightened to the point of binding. The back end of the rear trailing arms is a common location for this. Other things can do it as well. Tire pressure ,as mentioned can have a large effect on ride quality, especially with low profile tires. The tire type can make a huge difference, if you`re running y speed rated supercar tires that were never designed with ride quality in mind, then the ride quality of you car will suffer. If you`re trying to build a touring cruiser you would want to look toward the tires used on European sedans not Lambos. Etc. etc. As you know all of our clients are welcome to call for a detailed one on one consultation at any time. But we can`t help much if you don`t call.

The current settings are 6 and 5. Any less than that and I'm unhappy with the handling. I don't think it's a break free issue. As in, if I set the shocks to 3 I can easily bounce either end of the car up and down by hand. There doesn't appear to be anything binding.

I run 30psi tire pressure. I'm currently running Continental DWS's, which can be classified as a European tire. Initially I had Bridgestone RE050's, and while they stuck like a mother they rode like crap. I understand there are other options, but I refuse to put a Japenese tire on this car.

All I'm looking for is input from people who have maybe tried different types of shocks. This car may be doing some long "tours" and I'm just trying to maximize ride quality. I understand this is a 46 year old car so there will be sacrifices.

[alocker]

I went from an American 15 (at least the brand is American) to a Japanese 18 and surprisingly the ride quality improved considerably. Just curious why no Japanese tires?

[andrewb70]

thanks Andrew. Any noticeable reduction in sidewall stiffness with the lower weight?

Not that I can notice. The reason for the weight reduction is that I went from a 40 series rear tire to a 35 series.

Andrew

[CFster]

I went from an American 15 (at least the brand is American) to a Japanese 18 and surprisingly the ride quality improved considerably. Just curious why no Japanese tires?

Personal preference. I just don't think they belong on an American icon.

I'm a gadget freak, with an iPhone, iPad, Android tablet, HDTV, computers etc and I drive a Nissan daily. All made or designed in Japan or China. The '67 Pontiac though? That's sacred.

I understand the Conti's I'm running now are German, and the Bridgestone's I tried first are Japanese, but not obviously so - at least they don't have blatently Japanese names like Toyo, Yokohama or Nitto.

[Smoker03]

Was Marc able to give you some advice on settings when you called him? Just curious if his recommendations helped at all.

[CFster]

Haven't talked to him yet. Probably this week.

[XTRMEASURES]

Great thread, i was reading about shocks and came across this thread and lots of info guys. This should help anybody looking for new shocks and it should became a sticky.

[djfxall]

I'm no expert but I know your goal of suspension is to keep that tire following the road with a constant patch. I have found that properly set up it feels smoother properly adjusted with performance setup set to your car. It is all in tuning and understanding what you are tuning for your wheel to do. I am reading this carefully as I have not planned out completely my suspension setup yet but feel it will deal with 2 way or 3 way anjustable coilovers with remote reserviors and a NOTEBOOK for settings to tune it in. I am from a race bike background on this so I am no expert but understand the fundamentals at play. I am sure you will figure it out and believe you will get it tuned right but it's true you can't beet that ease of adjustment.

[SSLance]

I'm going to be really forward and cut to the chase here so forgive me....

Is it really possible to have a shock that rides super smooth on the street and can get turned up to outperform the competition on the track? It seems like too much win. Like its too good to be true.




It is absolutely true... Last October I installed a set of Ridetech TQ Triple Adjustable shocks on my car and tuned them for the last autocross event of the year. I was helped though the tuning process for handling by Ron Sutton and we ended up with what I would call a very aggressive setup that was frankly flat out uncomfortable to drive on the street, but handled the autocross course crazy good. The compression and rebound settings would let the car fully compress on the front entering a corner and hold it there through mid turn and then let the weight transfer to the rear for corner exit traction. I took an autocross veteran that had never ridden in my car on a run that day and he made the comment that "it just feels like an autocross car". I finished 31st out of 124 cars that day driving a completely new setup to me on just 4 runs...not too bad for an old Monte Carlo competing against, Miatas, Minis, Beemers, and other autocross specific types of cars.

After the event I started driving the car on the street and adjusting the compression and rebound settings per Ridetech's instruction sheet. I stopped 3 or 4 times during one 15 mile trip to town to adjust the very easy to reach knobs on all 4 shocks and by the time I got to town I had a compliant yet still firm ride that actually had a better feel than Edelbrock IAS shocks I took off of the car. Over the next few days I tweaked on it a bit further and I now have them set where I like them for a near perfect street ride. It is compliant over bumps small and large, yet at the same time doesn't wallow and still corners better than it ever has before. The wife acceptance factor has been great as well. She was skeptical while I was doing all of the suspension work that she wouldn't enjoy riding in the car after but on her first ride she commented that "it feels better than it did before".

I can't comment on the other brands of shocks or even the other Ridetech shocks as I have no experience with them, but I can say for a fact that with the Ridetech Triple Adjustable TQs...yes you can have the best of both worlds and easily adjust between the two of them.

I do believe that the whole suspension package plays a part in this. Having the correct spring rates, non-binding bushings, proper travel to keep from topping or bottoming out the shocks and staying off of the bump stops, and lastly good quality tires with proper air pressures in them all contribute to a good ride on the street, but you need a good shock to be the brains of all of the rest of that for it to really work.

[Nicks67GTO]

It is absolutely true... Last October I installed a set of Ridetech TQ Triple Adjustable shocks on my car and tuned them for the last autocross event of the year. I was helped though the tuning process for handling by Ron Sutton and we ended up with what I would call a very aggressive setup that was frankly flat out uncomfortable to drive on the street, but handled the autocross course crazy good. The compression and rebound settings would let the car fully compress on the front entering a corner and hold it there through mid turn and then let the weight transfer to the rear for corner exit traction. I took an autocross veteran that had never ridden in my car on a run that day and he made the comment that "it just feels like an autocross car". I finished 31st out of 124 cars that day driving a completely new setup to me on just 4 runs...not too bad for an old Monte Carlo competing against, Miatas, Minis, Beemers, and other autocross specific types of cars.

After the event I started driving the car on the street and adjusting the compression and rebound settings per Ridetech's instruction sheet. I stopped 3 or 4 times during one 15 mile trip to town to adjust the very easy to reach knobs on all 4 shocks and by the time I got to town I had a compliant yet still firm ride that actually had a better feel than Edelbrock IAS shocks I took off of the car. Over the next few days I tweaked on it a bit further and I now have them set where I like them for a near perfect street ride. It is compliant over bumps small and large, yet at the same time doesn't wallow and still corners better than it ever has before. The wife acceptance factor has been great as well. She was skeptical while I was doing all of the suspension work that she wouldn't enjoy riding in the car after but on her first ride she commented that "it feels better than it did before".

I can't comment on the other brands of shocks or even the other Ridetech shocks as I have no experience with them, but I can say for a fact that with the Ridetech Triple Adjustable TQs...yes you can have the best of both worlds and easily adjust between the two of them.

I do believe that the whole suspension package plays a part in this. Having the correct spring rates, non-binding bushings, proper travel to keep from topping or bottoming out the shocks and staying off of the bump stops, and lastly good quality tires with proper air pressures in them all contribute to a good ride on the street, but you need a good shock to be the brains of all of the rest of that for it to really work.

Nice! I think the TQ's are only sold as a coilover or shockwave right? I wonder if there's any plan for a smooth body triple adjustable shock?

[marolf101x]

If the lengths fit your vehicle the TQ can be used without the springs as a "stand alone" shock package.

[Larry Navarro]

ok.....I don't plan on doing much as far as autoX goes but I do like the fact of the ease of adjustability for road conditions.
Currently starting from square one on my '79 trans am with plans for control arms and shock setup from Ridetech. Undecided which way to go as far as shocks go......coil-over or conventional.
Which option would be most cost effective?

[marolf101x]

If you are using OE control arms you'll want our smooth body OE replacement shocks.
These can be had in both RQ (fixed valve) and HQ (rebound adjustable) variations.

If you are going with our control arms you'll need to run coil overs (the lower arm will not accept a "standard" spring).
These can be had in RQ (fixed valve), HQ (rebound adjustable), and TQ (single rebound, dual compression adjustable) variations.

You can see them all for that application here:
http://www.ridetech.com/store/musclecars/?subcats=Y&features_hash=V265.V328

[Larry Navarro]

Looking at the remote resi's for the "TQ" package.......where would these be typically mounted?

[marolf101x]

Typically in our 4-link kit. We have brackets that fit the shocks correctly.

However, in a stock configuration (leaf springs) the OE shocks have a trunnion at the top and a stud at the bottom.
OE shock dimensions are 12.25 compressed; 20.5 extended; with 8.25" stroke (though the rear only uses around 5" of the available stroke).
If you took our 6.9" TQ and used a short stud top you'd have 13.43 compressed; 20.33 extended.

You'd have to drill the hole out on the leaf spring mount to 3/4" to fit our "ball and socket" mount.
Here's a link to the stud mount, to give you an idea of what it looks like:
http://www.ridetech.com/store/coilover-non-adjustable-2-stud-shock-mount.html

You'd use this trunnion:
http://www.ridetech.com/store/trunnion-mounts-2.25-2.562-90002055.html

All these parts would be included in the overall price of the shocks, so don't add up the "part prices" and expect it to cost that much.

You'll have to measure your car to know for sure if they'll fit. If it's lowered, the shock may be too long, in which case we'd spec a shock that fits your application.

[Larry Navarro]

my bad, guess I should have been more specific.
front suspension, ridetech control arms and shocks, how and where would the resi's mount?

[marolf101x]

anywhere within 31" of the shock.

The resi's come with some nice aluminum clamps. Typically we put them on the inner fenders where they are easily reached when you open the hood.