DTSFab.com (Desert, Trail and Sand)
Automotive Powered Off Road (AKA: Buggys, Jeeps, Trucks, Etc,Etc. ) => Chassis and Suspension => Topic started by: fabr on November 12, 2010, 05:08:27 PM
-
Some good info here.
http://www.offroad-engineering.com/foxvsking.html (http://www.offroad-engineering.com/foxvsking.html)
-
excellent info fabbr, very good caparison!
-
They are so similar, its like China copied one. But I guess there are only so many ways to skin a cat.
-
I can say this about the fox 2.5 air shock, I was told by the fox rep that it was designed ( or one of the reasons ) to hold up a rear engine v-6 rail or rock crawlers for the front 4 link. I know in my case I wish I would have gone with the 2.5 air in the rear of my rail instead of the coil assist 2.0. I don't like the coil hum or the feel of the transition between the primary and secondary coil rate. I have never had that with air shocks once they have been tuned right! I know many pre-fer coil overs but I'm not one of them. now I know on enemy's rail we installed 2.0's in the rear in the beginning and as the weight started adding up they were to light for that weight class so he was running 700 psi in them which in turn created higher heat so they faded quickly. he then went to the 2.5 also valved differently and reduced down to 400 psi which in an air shock that massive. also doesn't have the heat issue anymore either. now that he has added more weight I'm sure he wants to re-valve a little again and the front is going to need as well. these fox airs are so easy to re-valve and the coil assist airs as well but the remote reservoir coil overs not so much imo.
-
The article says that the King lower spring perches reduce travel. They only shift the spring upward from where it would be with a Fox style perch. The shock body can go down inside the King style.
The article also said that the King style of threading the top cap on the outside of the body made it harder to change to triple rate. I guess what they are saying is that swapping the spring off the bottom is harder than the top since you can leave the main spring on. The flaw I find with that, is that you can't get the springs past the reservoir lines on either shock. It only works with the ones they had which had the reservoir lines removed. An advantage to the King setup is more travel for a given length shock. Without the cap threading into the body, the piston can go up higher.
-
The article says that the King lower spring perches reduce travel. They only shift the spring upward from where it would be with a Fox style perch. The shock body can go down inside the King style.
With the King bottom coil mount you will loose .25" travel over and non-coil shock. It sits on top of the shaft end reducing travel.
-
I assumed they were like the ones on my Bilstein shocks where the seat sits on a ridge around the shock eye rather than on the end of it.
-
That pitting on the shaft of the king means cheap/no chrome on the rod. From my experience on large hyd cylinders.
-
Ya,there is a difference in flash chrome plating and hard chrome plating. That was not addresses in the article. It would be nice to know.
-
Finding a good platter in Kalifornia is difficult. With all the hoops you have to jump through to keep the EPA at bay, quality has taken a hit. Several of the platting company's I have used over the years closed shop due to the cost of doing business here. I have had very few problems with King shafts unless they were dinged which takes a pretty good hit.
-
Doesn't matter the brand, they all take a beating.
-
Are you saying rocks don't care whose name is on the shock?