Ride Comfort of Ridetech Coilovers

[David LaBuda]

For those of you using ridetech's coilovers (primarily the single adjustables) how is the ride comfort on softer settings? I have been told they are very harsh for a car that doubles as a daily driver. What are your thoughts on these coilovers in general?

[AintQik]

On soft I didn't think they were very uncomfortable at all on my Camaro. I do prefer things on the harsh side, but I don't think you would have a problem in the Chevelle.

[Schwartz Performance]

We use them as standard on our chassis . They ride great! Spring rate changes the ride quality too, not just the adjustable setting. So make sure you get a lower spring rate than a track car would!

-Dale

[Ron Sutton]

We use them as standard on our chassis . They ride great! Spring rate changes the ride quality too, not just the adjustable setting. So make sure you get a lower spring rate than a track car would!

-Dale

I concur with Dale. I have seen the shock dyno sheets, and the ride should be quite nice when you find the setting for you. So if it's too harsh, I'm thinking a possibility is you may have too stiff of springs.

a. What is your spring rate front & rear?

b. Do you notice the harshness more from the front end or rear end?

[Josh@Ridetech]

Getting the correct shock/spring combination for your car is key. We can get the ride quality and performance out of your car by going off of the vehicle weights, that's no issue at all. Alot of our cars get driven around town, to the shows/tracks, and driven back home. The ride quality is definitely achievable!

[Ron Sutton]

David,

You never posted anymore. Did you get your ride quality issue worked out?

If yes ... please share what the problem & solution was ... so everyone can learn. Thanks !

[marolf101x]

Ron,

I don't think David had a ride quality issue, I think he was just asking the question as maybe he was contemplating a purchase.

For those reading:
We've found that ride quality differs greatly from person to person. . .my butt dyno may like the ride a little more stiff than someone elses.
The main things to focus on are spring rate and the shock dyno graph. For optimum ride quality you need a few things:
1-a free moving suspension
2-enough suspension travel to adequately absorb the bumps
3-a spring rate that is high enough to hold the car up, not so soft as to let it bottom out, and not so stiff as to transfer energy back to the driver
4-relatively soft compression damping

In a ride quality application the job of the suspension is to absorb the bump, transferring that energy into spring compression while the shock helps to slow down the motion. This must all be done without moving the driver cabin (think of it like a hook from the sky holding the car. The suspension moves under the car, but the body itself does not move. That is the ultimate goal.)

You can quickly judge the ride quality of a shock absorber by seeing how much compression force it creates and at what shaft speeds. If you have a shock that "pushes" back with a bunch of force at a very low shaft speed you can infer that most of the energy from the bump will be transferred through the shock to the cabin. In this example the shock is essentially adding spring rate.

What you want is a shock that provides a little compression damping to help slow down the spring, but not so much that it transfers the energy. The force provided by the shock must increase as the shock shaft speed increases (this is basically saying that if you hit a small bump the suspension moves relatively slowly and does not need a lot of force. But if it hits a big bump the suspension is moving much faster, and therefore needs more force to slow things down.)

[Ron Sutton]

Thanks for clarifying that Britt,

After I re-read his post ... it became clear he was asking for other people's feedback & not asking about a problem with his car. I initially thought he had a rough ride scenario in his Chevelle which didn't make sense unless he had too stiff of springs.

Like I told him in a post, " I have seen the ridetech shock dyno sheets, and the ride should be quite nice when you find the setting for you. So if it's too harsh, I'm thinking a possibility is you may have too stiff of springs."

Thanks for the clarification & take care.

[Nicks67GTO]

Im interested in this as well. Im interested in ridetech stuff for my 67 GTO. My reservation about ridetech coilovers is that I dont want a lumberwagon for a driver and ive heard the same thing as David. Even on the softest setting the ride can be pretty harsh. The other issue with coilovers is that ive been told there isnt enough room in the A-body front suspension to properly set them up without extreme spring rates/ short springs causing the harsh ride. The only solution is the cut and fab kits like the UMI extension conversion.

[marolf101x]

Well, sounds to me like someone who doesn't sell coil overs is spreading rumors of hate and discontent.

Ride Quality:
Ride quality is subjective, but in general to achieve a great ride quality you want a lighter spring rate, very little compression damping, and plenty of suspension travel.
There are a lot of technical details that need to be addressed for a great ride. . .for example, wheel rates and frequencies. If you have a suspension system with an odd frequency the human body will detect that and interpret it as something bad, thereby making the person uncomfortable. Rob McGregor and I were just talking about this the other day, and guess what frequency the human body really likes? The same frequency you encounter when you walk.
Our spring rate calculator has this built-in, working behind the scenes to make sure you get the best possible options for your vehicle. When we first teamed up with Hyperco springs no other spring manufacturer had a calculator like this, and for good reason. . .there's a lot going on!

Suspension Travel:
As stated above, suspension travel is a major factor in achieving a great ride quality (and superb handling, for that matter!). The general rule is that the wheel and tire needs to move 5" from fully compressed to fully extended and that you need 4" of clearance for anything under the car. We like to set our systems so that you have 60% of available travel for compression, and 40% for extension, as the vehicle spends more time on the compression side and the forces are greater. So, when you hit a bump you want 3" of compression travel. You also want enough spring and shock force to slow down and stop the suspension travel before the suspension bottoms out on the bumpstops.

When using a coil over this is actually pretty easy to achieve. . .you move the upper coil over mount up, or the lower coil over mount down. As we interface with the OE chassis at the upper mount (so you don't have to cut and weld) we drop the lower coil over mount down in the control arm. This also provides us the ability to put that mount in double shear, opposed to the crappy t-bar style the OE used for the stock shock.

Coil Overs. . .shocks and springs:
A spring is a spring (when comparing comparable quality pieces). It's primary job is to hold the car up. It's secondary job is to "push" back when the suspension is compressed. By using a slightly lighter spring rate, and adding more preload you end up with a spring that will hold the car up, but not beat you to death when you hit a bump (if you need more info on this, see this post: https://www.pro-touring.com/showthre...-for-69-Camaro)
Shocks can dramatically effect the ride quality and handling of the vehicle. Basically you don't want much compression force. Compression force is just like adding spring rate. Let's take this example. . . you are driving down the road and hit a small bump. The shock (in a 2:1 motion ratio) is moving at a shaft speed of under 6 inches per second (ips). Shock #1 provides 100# of force at 5ips. Shock #2 provides 500# of force at 5ips. Which do you think rides better?
This is a whole other discussion about how to read dyno graphs. We can get into that if you'd like, but for now we'll let this soak in.

[UMI Tech]

Im interested in this as well. Im interested in ridetech stuff for my 67 GTO. My reservation about ridetech coilovers is that I dont want a lumberwagon for a driver and ive heard the same thing as David. Even on the softest setting the ride can be pretty harsh. The other issue with coilovers is that ive been told there isnt enough room in the A-body front suspension to properly set them up without extreme spring rates/ short springs causing the harsh ride. The only solution is the cut and fab kits like the UMI extension conversion.

Just to clarify, we have an extended travel coilover bracket coming out sometime soon which will allow the use of a standard 2-1/2" racing coil and a 7" travel shock. One of those shock/spring combos could certainly be Ridetech.

As for short travel stuff working/not working well, I have a ton of faith in Britt, Bret, Darren, etc. and would fully trust anything they recommend.

ramey

[Nicks67GTO]

Well, sounds to me like someone who doesn't sell coil overs is spreading rumors of hate and discontent.

Ride Quality:
Ride quality is subjective, but in general to achieve a great ride quality you want a lighter spring rate, very little compression damping, and plenty of suspension travel.
There are a lot of technical details that need to be addressed for a great ride. . .for example, wheel rates and frequencies. If you have a suspension system with an odd frequency the human body will detect that and interpret it as something bad, thereby making the person uncomfortable. Rob McGregor and I were just talking about this the other day, and guess what frequency the human body really likes? The same frequency you encounter when you walk.
Our spring rate calculator has this built-in, working behind the scenes to make sure you get the best possible options for your vehicle. When we first teamed up with Hyperco springs no other spring manufacturer had a calculator like this, and for good reason. . .there's a lot going on!

Suspension Travel:
As stated above, suspension travel is a major factor in achieving a great ride quality (and superb handling, for that matter!). The general rule is that the wheel and tire needs to move 5" from fully compressed to fully extended and that you need 4" of clearance for anything under the car. We like to set our systems so that you have 60% of available travel for compression, and 40% for extension, as the vehicle spends more time on the compression side and the forces are greater. So, when you hit a bump you want 3" of compression travel. You also want enough spring and shock force to slow down and stop the suspension travel before the suspension bottoms out on the bumpstops.

When using a coil over this is actually pretty easy to achieve. . .you move the upper coil over mount up, or the lower coil over mount down. As we interface with the OE chassis at the upper mount (so you don't have to cut and weld) we drop the lower coil over mount down in the control arm. This also provides us the ability to put that mount in double shear, opposed to the crappy t-bar style the OE used for the stock shock.

Coil Overs. . .shocks and springs:
A spring is a spring (when comparing comparable quality pieces). It's primary job is to hold the car up. It's secondary job is to "push" back when the suspension is compressed. By using a slightly lighter spring rate, and adding more preload you end up with a spring that will hold the car up, but not beat you to death when you hit a bump (if you need more info on this, see this post: https://www.pro-touring.com/showthre...-for-69-Camaro)
Shocks can dramatically effect the ride quality and handling of the vehicle. Basically you don't want much compression force. Compression force is just like adding spring rate. Let's take this example. . . you are driving down the road and hit a small bump. The shock (in a 2:1 motion ratio) is moving at a shaft speed of under 6 inches per second (ips). Shock #1 provides 100# of force at 5ips. Shock #2 provides 500# of force at 5ips. Which do you think rides better?
This is a whole other discussion about how to read dyno graphs. We can get into that if you'd like, but for now we'll let this soak in.

I see. So it sounds as if someone were to purchase your front coilovers, it would be wise to at least use your lower A arms to get proper travel? Lets say a guy already has nice lower A arms like the SPC pieces ive been eyeballing, or global west, DSE or other. Do other aftermarket lower A-arms typically have the drop/mounting provisions available built into them to allow for full travel with your front coilover systems?

[marolf101x]

I cannot comment on other manufactures control arms. . .I have simply not physically test fit each and every one of them to each and every application we offer.

I would strongly suggest you buy a complete package. If you do not like the ridetech kit for whatever reason, there are many manufactures who now offer our coil overs in their kits. This way you are guaranteed proper fit and proper function.

I will say one thing while I'm on this subject. . .I personally HATE trunnion mounts in loaded applications and do everything I can to design them out of existence. It's so easy to make a couple of mounts and use a proper bolt and spacers. . .I just do not understand why people still use those damn things! I've seen trunnions fail. . . I've seen control arms fail at the trunnion mounting point. . .I just don't trust them. My apologies to anyone using these things. . .maybe you get along fine with them, but my luck has been quite terrible.

[Classic Nova & Performance]

As has been stated by several people, the ride quality on the ridetech coilovers shouldn't be a problem. My guess is the people who complain about a harsh ride either have the shocks set too stiff, or the wrong spring package. A big plus is that ridetech weighs cars at most if not all the meets that they attend & have a database that is priceless.

[SLO_Z28]

Ride quality has to do with a lot of things. The tire size, type and condition, wheel size, width, and offset, bushing materials, camber, caster, and toe settings, installed height of the coil spring, spring rate relative to motion ratio (also known as wheel frequency), suspension bushing material, motor and transmission mount material, aerodynamic propertys. That said the ridetech has a ton of the properties that a good street street shock would have, they are definitely not a performance oriented shock, but should out perform the vast majority of the people on here.

[bret]

...and what properties would make it "not a performance oriented shock"?

I'm sure Mary Pozzi, James Shipka, Rob Mcgreagor, Kevin Miller, Jimi Day, Roger Burman, Josh Leisinger, Brett Cambell, Sal Solorzano, Blake Foster, Troy Trepanier, Alan Johnson, Trent Summers and a few thousand others might be interested in that evaluation.

[SLO_Z28]

...and what properties would make it "not a performance oriented shock"?

I'm sure Mary Pozzi, James Shipka, Rob Mcgreagor, Kevin Miller, Jimi Day, Roger Burman, Josh Leisinger, Brett Cambell, Sal Solorzano, Blake Foster, Troy Trepanier, Alan Johnson, Trent Summers and a few thousand others might be interested in that evaluation.

No manufacturer support for re-valving. No availability from the manufacturer of a scaled PVP dyno thats properly scaled to be useful. Adjustments are not even in the amount they adjust. The force for low velocity is way to low for any car, let alone muscle cars. The force at low IPS (0-1.25) should be much higher with a much sharper break in the digressive sections. The form factor of the shock makes it not friendly to opening up and tuning, or self rebuilding (because warranty or not, this shock is going to wear out, everything does). There is also a little too much low speed bleed for my likes, especially in an autocross situation where you can use that as a tuning tool.

Anyways im off the the race track, we will see of I know what the hell im talking about in the feature

[Rod]

[bret]

No manufacturer support for re-valving. No availability from the manufacturer of a scaled PVP dyno thats properly scaled to be useful. Adjustments are not even in the amount they adjust. The force for low velocity is way to low for any car, let alone muscle cars. The force at low IPS (0-1.25) should be much higher with a much sharper break in the digressive sections. The form factor of the shock makes it not friendly to opening up and tuning, or self rebuilding (because warranty or not, this shock is going to wear out, everything does). There is also a little too much low speed bleed for my likes, especially in an autocross situation where you can use that as a tuning tool.

Anyways im off the the race track, we will see of I know what the hell im talking about in the feature

I think you've got our shock program confused with someone else's. Your information is inaccurate on all accounts.

We can customize ANY parameter of the valving. And have. Routinely.
We can and have supplied dyno sheets for any shock. (Yes, we have a Roerhig 10hp shock dyno that is used 8 hours per day)...and a few people who know how to use it)
The adjustment clicks are progressive on purpose. The closer to full firm you get, the larger the increase in force. This is how we achieve a wide range of adjustment. In terms of simple force values, the spread per click increases...in terms of percentage of change, it's much more linear.
As far as force values... Totally a matter of opinion. We(and our customers) like ours fine. BUT.. Are certainly willing and capable to customize the force values to a particular application.
Opening the shock? Under 30 seconds. Pop the bottom bearing out, bleed off the nitrogen charge, pry off the dust cap, pop the snap ring out of the seal head, and pull the piston and rod assembly out.
Low speed bleed... Again, a matter of opinion. Certainly tunable to the customers taste and application.

[marolf101x]

I grew up at the track where we were running on an Ohlins deal for many years (hell, we still carry a shock dyno in the trailer!). Not exactly cheap to be on the "the deal". . .$1600 a corner, and the "cheat sheet" was $500. . .but you did have a guy at the track that would "assist". So I know where you are coming from with most of your concerns.

No manufacturer support for re-valving.
-We do in fact offer repair services, rebuild services, revalving services, or just a plane old dyno pull (http://www.ridetech.com/tech/shock-service/)
-We also have valving kits for the person who wants to do this at home or at the track (includes the nitrogen charging tool as well)

No availability from the manufacturer of a scaled PVP dyno thats properly scaled to be useful.
-you tell me what you want and I'll put it up here

The force for low velocity is way to low for any car, let alone muscle cars. The force at low IPS (0-1.25) should be much higher with a much sharper break in the digressive sections.
-how much you want? Please see attachment. This was a quick valve stack we tossed together for testing to see how far was "too far"

The form factor of the shock makes it not friendly to opening up and tuning, or self rebuilding (because warranty or not, this shock is going to wear out, everything does).
-I assume you are talking about the nitrogen filling port? This was a conscious effort. When we released the Select Series shocks we used the tried and true Schrader valve on the end cap. The problem was most everyone in this market was pretty new to trick shocks, so they tended to push the Schrader out of curiosity. This let the nitrogen out, so they had to come back to us for a re-charge (only a select few have a nitrogen charging kit). So when we came out with the Fox based parts we decided to hide the fill valve. It is more of a pain to change, but it's not too bad when you get used to it.
-The rest of the shock is VERY easy to get apart. Knock off the cover, press the seal head down to expose the snap ring, remove snap ring, remove shaft/piston/stack assy