DTSFab.com (Desert, Trail and Sand)

UTV's Off Road ( RZR, YXZ, Mini Buggy, Carts,etc.) => UTV Chassis and Suspension => Topic started by: 455bird on July 07, 2009, 01:46:37 AM

Title: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: 455bird on July 07, 2009, 01:46:37 AM
Do you have to run limit straps with fox 2.0 air shocks? I run the straps last year to take some of the travel out and drop the degree I had on my CV but when I rebuilt the back of my car this winter I made it where the shocks drop all way down and still have 18* on the CV. My question is this going to hurt the shocks when they bottomed all the way out
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Rick S. on July 07, 2009, 04:39:48 AM
Probably not a problem. Fox doesn't recommend it, but plenty of us are doing it, and I've never heard of anyone having a problem.
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Dunebound69 on July 07, 2009, 07:43:05 AM
I would run the limit straps. If you have outboard brakes you want them. If you have a lot of un-sprung mass (tire, wheel, brake, trailing arm etc) when your suspension unloads to you are beating your shock. The straps won't hurt anything but could save your shocks. So why risk your $200+ a shot shocks.

I run the straps. But I have outboard brakes on four corners.
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Yoshi on July 07, 2009, 07:59:08 AM
Probably not a problem. Fox doesn't recommend it, but plenty of us are doing it, and I've never heard of anyone having a problem.
actually, FOX says it's fine......

I don't run limit straps...........
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fastcorvairs on July 07, 2009, 08:43:15 AM
I'm with Dunebound on this one.  I have been into my Fox shocks and there is not much that holds the gut's in them.  One small spring ring that sets in a grove. With the weight of the brakes and the force of the springs unloading downward that is a lot of mass slamming againest that small circle clip.   I have talked to Mark at Mark's sand trans and he has told me that Fox say that if you put on limit straps just be carfull not to limit the travel to more them one half inch of full travel.  Ifen you have a 12 inch travel shock then limit it to 11.5 inch of travel.  Any more then that and the shock can not perform correctly. That's my story and im sticking to it.   :)
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Rick S. on July 07, 2009, 09:07:30 AM
I agree that if you have alot of unsprung weight like outboard brakes you probably should use them. If you don't have the wieight problem then I think it's a waste of money.
Can anyone show us a damaged Fox 2.0 air from topping them out?
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Dunebound69 on July 07, 2009, 10:17:08 AM
I think pics of the failed shock from over extension could be hard to find. If you are running single shocks and loose the bottom end it is going to bury in and take out your arms the shock and more. Why not error to the safe side? You already have the straps. Those shock ends are just threaded alm. 
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 07, 2009, 02:14:08 PM
Do the airs have an aluminum spacer on the shaft internally? If so replace it with a poluurethane one and problem is solved.No straps and no hammer effect to POSSIBLY cause a circlip failure. Those things are very strong anyway.n
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Doug Heim on July 07, 2009, 04:02:04 PM
The ring and the groove it sits in is very small. I was surprised the first time I puled a shock apart, The more I thought of it though the more I came to the comclusion that it will take a $hit load of force to push past it. That was also when I thought the shock bodies were Aluminum. Their not. many think so. The Fox bodies are infact steel. Dont believe me then take a magnet to them.

A limit strap IMO is cheap insurance but at the same time I dont run them either.
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 07, 2009, 04:14:40 PM
Yes, consider that you would have to shear the clip 360 degrees to have it fail . So long as it is seated in the groove properly and fully there's no way that's failing. Same thing really goes for the threads in the shaft end. Now the real weak spot ,if it is in fact weak, is the eye that the rod end is in.
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 07, 2009, 04:16:09 PM
AND the threaded portion that the piston is on also that is ;D.
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: artie on edge on July 07, 2009, 05:55:59 PM
I agree that if you have alot of unsprung weight like outboard brakes you probably should use them. If you don't have the wieight problem then I think it's a waste of money.
Can anyone show us a damaged Fox 2.0 air from topping them out?

A guy posted on the edge site recently with continuing crushed springs which he says was from topping out. He also said a lot of other things which was when I started to ignore him... ill try and find the post and steal a pic...

Found it... hard to 'prove' what the cause was though... like to see the complete shoch disassembled (witness marks etc)...

(https://dtsfab.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi293.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fmm54%2Fartieonedge%2FFox.jpg&hash=4851c214d822e8b77e69cfa7c3b02fd0974bd755)
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 07, 2009, 07:25:10 PM
Do the airs use that spring to dampen the jolt of max extension?
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Rick S. on July 07, 2009, 08:39:42 PM
I was told by Fox that this is what the spring is for. They also admit that it doesn't really offer much protection.  I researched using a heavier spring, only to find out that what 's in there now is about a heavy as you're going to get. Fox also told me that any internal stop spacers need to be steel. Anything less will be destroyed. This is what they told me.     
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 07, 2009, 09:01:15 PM
i cannot see how a PU spacer of fairly firm shore hardness could be harmed in any way used in place of that cheapo spring.IMO they're just too fricken greedy to put something better in place of that piddly spring..
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: artie on edge on July 07, 2009, 09:03:02 PM
i cannot see how a PU spacer of fairly firm shore hardness could be harmed in any way used in place of that cheapo spring.IMO they're just too fricken greedy to put something better in place of that piddly spring..

Thats mostly how its done. I cant see that it would be a bad mod for your own shocks...Ill be looking into it on mine..
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 07, 2009, 09:08:10 PM
 i replace the aluminum spacer in the coilovers with a PU spacer. They don't have a pissant spring. They really CLUNK without straps if not replaced. BTW the pu will not stretch (or deform)!
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Rick S. on July 08, 2009, 06:18:30 AM
I agree. This is just what Fox said.
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: fabr on July 08, 2009, 08:11:50 AM
Thats mostly how its done. I cant see that it would be a bad mod for your own shocks...Ill be looking into it on mine..
I HAVE done it. It works for me anyway and that annoying clunk is gone. One caution tho is to not set it up at Max droop as the PU WILL crush slightly(very little) depending on what shore  you use. Maybe allow 1 degree safety margin. Anyone want to step up and make these things? Sounds like a niche market opportunity to me!   
Title: Re: fox 2.0 airs question
Post by: Doug Heim on July 08, 2009, 10:13:16 PM
You know I can knock a bunch out if someone wants me to do up a small run (20-100 pieces)
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal