mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Important Shock Absorber Follow Up Info (longish)

To: Andy Ramm <aramm@concentric.net>
Subject: Re: Important Shock Absorber Follow Up Info (longish)
From: mmcewen@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (John McEwen)
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 12:32:10 -0500
Hi listers:

There have been some cars which used the shock aborber as the axle travel
limiter.  Specifically, the Chev Corvair did this.  It used a rear
transaxle with swing axles and (in post '63 models) a transverse,
single-leaf camber compensator.  The axle however was not limited in
downward movement except by the shock.  I believe that this was the case on
other rear-engine cars such as the NSU Prinz and possibly the Fiat 600.
This would imply that one shouldn't be too afraid of the shock being
exposed to the stress of occasional over-extension.  I suggest that
considering weight and load factors, the Corvair shock would be a good
choice if it is still readily available.

Secondly, any auto good parts outlet should be able to look up your
requirements, - upper and lower mount types, extended maximum length,
collapsed length, maximum diameter if required - and give you a variety of
shocks and manufacturers which will fit your requirements.  This info is
readily available and very valuable to modifiers.

John McEwen




>Hi all, here is some interresting information you may find useful if you do
>the rear shock conversion.  This information is based on my measurements and
>based on information provided on the British Automotive website (url below).
>Again, I take absolutely no responsibility for what YOU do to your car, and
>also thanks once more to Dave Tietz who did the original research on this
>conversion.
>
>I have measured the Colt shocks and find the following:
>
>Extended length measured center-to-center on the mounting holes is 15-5/8".
>Compressed length center-to-center is 9-7/8".  This yields a total travel of
>5-3/4".  Because the shock will be tilted somewhat forward when mounted, there
>is not a 1:1 ratio when the suspension compresses and decompresses, so the
>effective travel is somewhat greater which is a good thing.  I have not
>measured the actual angle, so I can't give the true number here yet.
>
>BUT....  this 5-3/4" travel number is significant in the following way:
>If you have a rubber bumper car, the compressed length of the shock is fine,
>but the uncompressed length may be insufficient!  You want your axle check
>straps to be the final limiting factor during extreme rebound, NOT THE
>SHOCKS!!!!  If your axle hangs from the shocks, you may severely damage
>them!!!  If this problem occurs, shorter check straps P/N AHH6355 (Moss P/N
>267-565) length 8 1/2" or P/N AHH5081 (Moss P/N 267-610) length 9" can be
>fitted to 1974 1/2 on models and should already be fitted to chrome bumper
>models. Remember, stock shocks have a vastly greater travel (over 7" if I
>recall) than these telescopics.
>
>Note, the Spax kit has shocks with the following dimensions:
>16-1/8 extended length and 10-5/8 compressed.  This is OK because the Spax
>mounting bracket has a 1" upward offset.  But the total travel here is only
>5.5", so users of these may need shorter rebound straps as well, even on
>chrome bumpered cars.
>
>This information is on the British Automotive page here:
>http://www.mgbmga.com/tech/mgb13.htm.  Doug Jackson is the proprietor and
>really did his homework!  Thanks Doug!
>
>BTW, the shocks I'm using are the Sears Road Handler Performance Gas which are
>really Gabriels.  They have the "Velocity Sensitive Technology" which I guess
>is like a sensa-trak shock.  I haven't put them on, but they seem pretty durn
>stiff to me, though nowhere near (not by a very long shot!) as stiff as the
>Moss kit, so I think they'll do fine.  Those looking for a plusher ride should
>go with a softer shock than these.  'Nuf said.  I'll follow up after this
>weekend once I get the whole lot installed with my new springs.  :>
>
>TTFN,
>
>Andy



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>