Originally Posted by
Tak
Hi Jake-
I just don't see the point in RR for a DA shock (The mechanical engineer in me speaking). Even if there is not a 3rd (or 4th) external adjustment, an RR shock is capable of superior low velocity damping control--and an element of tuning that I don't believe belongs in IT.
However, I suspect the current request for RR is from people with cars where the length of the damper is THE restriction in lowering the car. And no, I don't think they should get special treatment.
Tak.
Tak,
Your thinking on damper adjustment shaft velocity ranges is incorrect. Damping tuning in the lower shaft velocities is more beneficial. High speed adjustments are good for curbs and other large imperfections (overly simple examples). The damper spends most of its time in the lower shaft velocity ranges. To back my arguement up take a look at a damper histogram. It looks like a flattened bell curve (er, should). So having the low speed adjustments is what you want. Why have an adjustment that effects 25% of your overall damping?
____________________
Additionally most folks look at RR's, adjustments, mono-tube, twin-tube, triple-tube etc. in isolation. The damper is a system in itself and must be looked at with that understanding. Additionally there are different operating principles that various manufacturer's prefer. Some work best with a RR and some don't.
Damper tuning is emperical engineering and not theoretical engineering. So formulas, degrees and such don't mean as much as a good testing regiment. The best sedan damper guy I've worked with only has a HS diploma, but he works magic on chassis setups.
Bottom line is if you don't corner balance your car regularly and change setups at the track you're wasting time and money on adjustable dampers.
David Russell
IT Volvo 242
Bookmarks