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:



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.



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



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!

[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.