Shock performance

Shock performance

Author
Discussion

Ex-Biker

Original Poster:

1,315 posts

248 months

Thursday 20th November 2003
quotequote all
How much difference is there between using 1.9 dia shocks compared to 2.25 dia?

gdr

586 posts

261 months

Thursday 20th November 2003
quotequote all
I'm not an expert but assume performance will depend on quality and adjustability of the damper. Only downside to the smaller one I think is that less oil volume might mean it is more prone to getting hot and hence damping characteristics will change with oil vis.
Of course, this may be complete bollocks.

LocoBlade

7,622 posts

257 months

Thursday 20th November 2003
quotequote all
I think its to do with the surface area of the piston compared to the friction it creates at the edges. A 2.25" damper has a better ratio so theoretically less friction and more piston area, so less stiction. Also the oil issue mentioned does also have an effect, the more oil, the cooler it stays, the more consistent the damper performs. Whether us average kit car drivers would detect any noticable difference with any of this tho is another matter!
Also bear in mind that springs seem to be more readily available in 2.25" ID, so you might get a better choice if you want to play around with the handling characteristics at a later date.

Chris

Wacky Racer

38,173 posts

248 months

Thursday 20th November 2003
quotequote all
Ex-Biker said:
How much difference is there between using 1.9 dia shocks compared to 2.25 dia?



.35"

Avocet

800 posts

256 months

Friday 21st November 2003
quotequote all
...but once they got hot, I guess the one with the less oil and proportionally bigger surface area would cool quicker?

I haven't a clue which it better but a mate of mine had a 1956 MG Magnette and the rear dampers were finned to cool the oil. I haven't seen this on modern cars and I guess it doesn't make that much difference with pressurised units but I'm open to correction!