Remote Reservoirs?

[Fastfred92]

Damn, my old revalved non adjust Bilsteins just plan suck.... But I will say I don't think I have ever lost a race to a car just because it had cans or extra shock knobs that most IT guys have no clue how to adjust... Now that ECU Armageddon is upon us I say let shocks be free once again!

[924Guy]

Damn, my old revalved non adjust Bilsteins just plan suck.... But I will say I don't think I have ever lost a race to a car just because it had cans or extra shock knobs that most IT guys have no clue how to adjust... Now that ECU Armageddon is upon us I say let shocks be free once again!

My exact thought reading this... I guess I'm leaving about $4k on the table here even under the current rules!! LOL I probably haven't spent enough on my motor either...

Just cause you CAN buy RR shocks for $5k, does it mean you should?? I see a lot of posts here about how much you CAN spend on shocks; isn't it more relevant to state how much you NEED to spend on shocks? My budget's $1k for the car, and my shocks last years. Adjustable would be lovely... IF I didn't give up reliability/durability.

Perspective question: how many races do you have to win to recoup the cost of the $16k shock package in gained prep work for your shop?? Then again, I probably don't want to know, I'd be kicking myself for not opening my own shop... :cool:

[betamotorsports]

Perspective question: how many races do you have to win to recoup the cost of the $16k shock package in gained prep work for your shop?? Then again, I probably don't want to know, I'd be kicking myself for not opening my own shop.

My shop's been open for over 5 years and I still don't think I've recouped the cost of the custom built Penske 8760s I had made for my 1970 Datsun 240Z. Wanna know how to make $50,000 a year in the race prep business? Quit your $150,000 a year day job, open a shop, and work 80 hours a week on other people's cars. :eek:

[jimmyc]

the no RR rules is an outdated attempt to have rules control costs. The current ITAC, doesn't feel strongly enough about it to change the ruling yet, but it wont be to much longer untill they allow them IMO.

RE: the cost

The reason why it is talked about is because Jake, Andy, and Krik have stated that it was put in the rule book to cut costs. That is a fallacie and the rule should be removed. Just like the stupid rule about 'threaded body shocks".

You can spend what ever you want, the fact remains that there are a lot of cars running around with ~$4,000 dollar legal shocks. There are RR shocks around this price point. If you only want to run around on Tociko Blues and stock springs good for you, but that is not going to get you to the front at big races and competitive classes.

[lateapex911]

RE: the cost

The reason why it is talked about is because Jake, Andy, and Krik have stated that it was put in the rule book to cut costs.

Just to clarify, none of us three were on the ITAC when the rule was put in place, so we're just reporting what the rational was, to the best of our understanding.....

[Andy Bettencourt]

...and IIRC, the ITAC was split right down the middle on this topic.

[Z3_GoCar]

So, after remote resovoir shocks are allowed, what's next? Poly/delrin motor mounts? Custom fabricated suspension components? Non stock cams, injectors, intake manifolds? Where is the line drawn? We all have commonaly availble options, and if you want to sink big money, you can have somthing custom build. Hell, I could spend time on a shaker table to tune my koni's, how's that for a big dollar waster. You can't tell me that making RR-shocks avalible will make anything cheaper. That's nuts, because how much will it cost for the extra resovoir with a pressurized seal and a braded steel hose. Materally, it's got to cost more. Also, don't tell me that it can't be better than an integrated resevoir shock, because you've got a larger resevoir with more oil, the oil temp stays cooler, and shock resistance to movement is more consistant. If you get the really high dollar RR shocks, you can even adjust the high speed damping internally, and stay with-in the two external adjustment part of the rule. If the shock resevoir rule is opened up, you've just made eveyones current shock and strut setup obsolete. It really is that simple.

James

[Jason Saini]

So, after remote resovoir shocks are allowed, what's next? Poly/delrin motor mounts? Custom fabricated suspension components? Non stock cams, injectors, intake manifolds? Where is the line drawn? We all have commonaly availble options, and if you want to sink big money, you can have somthing custom build. Hell, I could spend time on a shaker table to tune my koni's, how's that for a big dollar waster. You can't tell me that making RR-shocks avalible will make anything cheaper. That's nuts, because how much will it cost for the extra resovoir with a pressurized seal and a braded steel hose. Materally, it's got to cost more. Also, don't tell me that it can't be better than an integrated resevoir shock, because you've got a larger resevoir with more oil, the oil temp stays cooler, and shock resistance to movement is more consistant. If you get the really high dollar RR shocks, you can even adjust the high speed damping internally, and stay with-in the two external adjustment part of the rule. If the shock resevoir rule is opened up, you've just made eveyones current shock and strut setup obsolete. It really is that simple.

James

This is an incredibly short-sighted view. All of the rules creep that you mentioned are completely apples-to-oranges in comparison. RR shocks are not intrinsically better, nor are they always more expensive. The rule simply doesn't do anything to control costs.

Cost in shocks is not in the material (i.e. more metal, hoses, etc.), it's in how intricate and complex the engineering of the components (pistons, shims, etc.) are. There are simple RR shocks, and there are complex non-RR shocks.

There's just too much of a lack of understanding of the factors at play here.

[Chris Wire]

So, after remote resovoir shocks are allowed, what's next? Poly/delrin motor mounts? Custom fabricated suspension components? Non stock cams, injectors, intake manifolds? Where is the line drawn? We all have commonaly availble options, and if you want to sink big money, you can have somthing custom build. Hell, I could spend time on a shaker table to tune my koni's, how's that for a big dollar waster. You can't tell me that making RR-shocks avalible will make anything cheaper. That's nuts, because how much will it cost for the extra resovoir with a pressurized seal and a braded steel hose. Materally, it's got to cost more. Also, don't tell me that it can't be better than an integrated resevoir shock, because you've got a larger resevoir with more oil, the oil temp stays cooler, and shock resistance to movement is more consistant. If you get the really high dollar RR shocks, you can even adjust the high speed damping internally, and stay with-in the two external adjustment part of the rule. If the shock resevoir rule is opened up, you've just made eveyones current shock and strut setup obsolete. It really is that simple.

James

Preach on, Brother James!

This is the age-old scenario of turning IT cars into "real race cars" by seeking inclusion in our ruleset for what the "big boys" run. Fully programmable ECUs, diff and trans coolers, brake fans, lexan windows, etc., they've all been requested at one time or another. GT is out there for anyone that has to have it all. And you'll never convince me that the arguement for RR shocks is for anything other than a competitive advantage. I, for one, have enjoyed the discussions on this site since the rule took RR shocks off the table. The mere fact that we haven't had this discussion in a while tells me that not having RR shocks isn't really as big a deal as some would like to make it.

It's interesting to note that while placing restrictions on the type of shocks allowed doesn't guarantee lower cost IT suspensions, it does seem to have had that very result from perception alone. That being that it's far more difficult (or expensive, or both) to achieve with a custom non-RR shock that which might be readily available from the current market of RR shocks. Thus you have far fewer takers going down the custom road to achieve the same result than you would have spending the same money on RR shocks if they were legal.

I'm with Bill on this one, I just don't think the need in IT is there, and I'm plenty comfortable with the rule as it currently stands.

[seckerich]

So, after remote resovoir shocks are allowed, what's next? Poly/delrin motor mounts? Custom fabricated suspension components? Non stock cams, injectors, intake manifolds? Where is the line drawn? We all have commonaly availble options, and if you want to sink big money, you can have somthing custom build. Hell, I could spend time on a shaker table to tune my koni's, how's that for a big dollar waster. You can't tell me that making RR-shocks avalible will make anything cheaper. That's nuts, because how much will it cost for the extra resovoir with a pressurized seal and a braded steel hose. Materally, it's got to cost more. Also, don't tell me that it can't be better than an integrated resevoir shock, because you've got a larger resevoir with more oil, the oil temp stays cooler, and shock resistance to movement is more consistant. If you get the really high dollar RR shocks, you can even adjust the high speed damping internally, and stay with-in the two external adjustment part of the rule. If the shock resevoir rule is opened up, you've just made eveyones current shock and strut setup obsolete. It really is that simple.

James

Missing the point James. We already can do that inside the shock. No RR needed. Just CHEAPER and easier on the outside. When the RR was taken away we just moved the valving. You can actually have 4 way adjustment inside the shock. The RR might be a help in an enduro but no noticable heat difference in a sprint with good units. Your shock is probably already obsolete if you don't know this.

[lateapex911]

So, after remote resovoir shocks are allowed, what's next? ......... Custom fabricated suspension components? Non stock cams, injectors, intake manifolds? Where is the line drawn? We all have commonaly availble options, and if you want to sink big money, you can have somthing custom build. Hell, I could spend time on a shaker table to tune my koni's, how's that for a big dollar waster. You can't tell me that making RR-shocks avalible will make anything cheaper. That's nuts, because how much will it cost for the extra resovoir with a pressurized seal and a braded steel hose. Materally, it's got to cost more. Also, don't tell me that it can't be better than an integrated resevoir shock, because you've got a larger resevoir with more oil, the oil temp stays cooler, and shock resistance to movement is more consistant. ..............
James

James, James James....that's some apples to oranges comparisons going on there, but I guess I can see how you arrived at that point.

When the subject initially came up, I thought, "Again? This RR thing is sure controversial, what IS the truth on them?" (I wasn't convinced they were the be all end all of dampers but some sure think they are, and I wanted to learn more) So I did some research.

And you know what? It's like nearly anything, advantages and tradeoffs. Your "runs cooler" advantage, according to sources I contacted in the shock manufacturing world, is merely an old advertising ploy. More consistent? Again, there are companies that feel thats not limited to a RR architecture. It has been argued that some companies use the RR architecture as a crutch, because they don't have the manufacturing capability to make the dampers operate effectively, and adjust in a standard architecture. And, that an RR design can actually hurt certain aspects of a dampers performance.

So, I am not convinced that allowing the architecture (while keeping the two adjustment rule) is similar to opening Pandora's box, and I certainly think it's not in any way comparable to allowing cams or intake or injector changes. (Custom suspension components have been allowed for a looooooong time)

Now, I can see both sides of the issue, but I stop short in thinking that it will cost everybody money, because "the bar will have been raised". Critical thinkers will do their homework, and they will find that there's no simple trade....they won't send off a check for $4K, and bolt on 2 seconds of improvement. They'll find that it's way more complex...and smart money will look at the bigger picture, and find ways to spend that same amount more effectively.

The inverse is true too....the dumb money might just jump at the chance, and they will turn the same lap....which, to a guy like you, who spends his resources wisely, would be a good thing.

Bottom line, I don't buy the 'sky will fall' prediction, but......all rules changes have costs, and I realize there needs to be a strong motivation to change a rule, as the advantages need to be greater than the costs.