Cooling system upgrades

[Dunebound69]

Enemy you have reminded me that my rad looks like crap. I will have to remedy that in the future. I have thougt about putting panels to cove my entire motor, gas tank, rad. Basicly from behind the seats to the back of the car. Like any rail I have a lot I would like to do. Things I need to do. Power steering is creaping its way up on the list.

[Enemy]

I've been tinkering with the idea of PS as well, but I think I am getting very close to not having the juice to run anymore goodies.

[fabr]

Get rid of goodies and get ps in the car. Best goodie there is.

[dsrace]

ps is looking like a winter project here along with a few other poss mods! 

[dsrace]

so nothing to do with your cooling system....yet 

so i still find this interesting and where i don't have all the data yet, we have enough to discuss it.

so while we re valved enemy's rear 2.5 shocks last sat, i noticed a few things. we slowed his comp down half a step to 90 and slowed the rebound down 1/2 a step to 2-1. now he didnt want to slow the rebound down but the board voted and voted against him   

he asked what comp rate i run in my normal rail. i looked and i run a 50 comp rate in my rear 2.5's that is a faster comp rate then his by almost double the rate. my rebound is 2-1 in the rear and it was needed as it would buck in the whoops and that stopped the rear issue. 

 i run 385 to 400 psi in the rear and enemy i believe said 420 ish psi. my rail is 500 lbs heavier and definitely heavier in the rear. both have 24" wheel travel utilizing 14" stroke fox shocks. to be exact in my case i have 23.75" of actual wheel travel with 4" GC at full bump. enemy would need to chime in to be sure but i think he may tap out at the moment his shock bottoms out or right before. been so long i don't truly remember and have had a crap ton going on this year! both are a-arm rears roughly the same length a arm. he has joints so his may have an extra 2" stand off on each side.

so the question is, why does a 500 lb lighter rail need 40 psi more pressure and need to operate twice as slow on compression??

walked out and measured my lower rear shock mounts in relation to the wheel bearing carrier lower a arm bolting position. mine are 8.75" but lets call that 9" as i was using a tape measure and some cv grease leaped out and bit me.  enemy measure his later that night and reported 13" so 4" farther up the a arm then mine. 4" seems to make quite a bit of difference!  both with a stroke rate of 1.71:1 but due to frame packaging enemy is 4" higher up the a arm and a tad straighter then i am.

[fabr]

so nothing to do with your cooling system....yet 

so i still find this interesting and where i don't have all the data yet, we have enough to discuss it.

so while we re valved enemy's rear 2.5 shocks last sat, i noticed a few things. we slowed his comp down half a step to 90 and slowed the rebound down 1/2 a step to 2-1. now he didnt want to slow the rebound down but the board voted and voted against him   

he asked what comp rate i run in my normal rail. i looked and i run a 50 comp rate in my rear 2.5's that is a faster comp rate then his by almost double the rate. my rebound is 2-1 in the rear and it was needed as it would buck in the whoops and that stopped the rear issue. 

 i run 385 to 400 psi in the rear and enemy i believe said 420 ish psi. my rail is 500 lbs heavier and definitely heavier in the rear. both have 24" wheel travel utilizing 14" stroke fox shocks. to be exact in my case i have 23.75" of actual wheel travel with 4" GC at full bump. enemy would need to chime in to be sure but i think he may tap out at the moment his shock bottoms out or right before. been so long i don't truly remember and have had a crap ton going on this year! both are a-arm rears roughly the same length a arm. he has joints so his may have an extra 2" stand off on each side.

so the question is, why does a 500 lb lighter rail need 40 psi more pressure and need to operate twice as slow on compression??

walked out and measured my lower rear shock mounts in relation to the wheel bearing carrier lower a arm bolting position. mine are 8.75" but lets call that 9" as i was using a tape measure and some cv grease leaped out and bit me.  enemy measure his later that night and reported 13" so 4" farther up the a arm then mine. 4" seems to make quite a bit of difference!  both with a stroke rate of 1.71:1 but due to frame packaging enemy is 4" higher up the a arm and a tad straighter then i am.

Smallish differences in angles and leverage ratios make big differences in shock/spring needs . Actually,if I read that right your differences are  substantial.

[dsrace]

Yes they do!
In this case, with the same shocks same motion ratio and 500 lb lighter wet weight........ I thought surely they would be in the same ball park.  Clearly an extra 4" of leverage makes a sizable difference!  I say that based on. A 500 lb  difference. Wonder how far thr spread would be if weight was equal?

[fabr]

Weights the same, I think the differences in the a arm mounting angles due to ride height is the biggest factor in this.  It's not just motion ratio.

[dsrace]

Weights the same, I think the differences in the a arm mounting angles due to ride height is the biggest factor in this.  It's not just motion ratio.

i would think the weight bares some load difference but apparently not as much as leverage on the shock via location on the arm.

[fabr]

Location and angle from perpendicular

[dsrace]

Location and angle from perpendicular

So thats the interesting part and would be interesting to compare side by side but that won't be possible for some time. I believe his shocks are mounted more vertical the mine.

[fabr]

Doesn't take much angle difference to make massive difference in springing/damping needs.

[dsrace]

Doesn't take much angle difference to make massive difference in springing/damping needs.

This is true as we have seen. We will have to see what it will take to get closer to the wheel.  The angle on his shock is not much, I think this is more leverage from the wheel.