Actually - the more I think about it . . . the more I think the TR trailing
arm suspension has a lot of merits.
I can't comment on the geometry of it - but having the shock act way out
there on the tip and the bump stops located as they are makes a lot of
The amount of leverage you get at the shock mounting point on and IRS TR is
great. It means you shock doesn't have to be as stiff to get the same
results. (the lever arm setup also does a good job of allowing clearance
for wheels and tires and stuff too)
Switching to a shock inside the coil spring means that you've got to have a
hell of a stiff shock since it is acting with so much shorter of a torque
arm. also - that part of the trailing arm - the spring pan - is going to
see a lot more localized forces acting in different directions than it was
designed to see.
I think this leverage factor is what goes wrong with some tube shock
conversions.... When I put the KYB's on my car - they were way too stiff to
drive around on (for my taste). I don't know what the intended application
is for those KYB shocks is - but I wouldn't be surprised if it were a
suspension with the shock inside the coil spring. (I mean - they may fit
and have the right range of travel - but surely they weren't designed and
spec'd by KYB to go on an IRS TR tube shock conversion kit.
I switched to adjustable Spax - I still haven't ironed them out completely -
but if I dial them up to mid range (13 of 27 clicks) - they will be too
stiff. If that spax shock were on some other car that located it inside a
coil spring - it might need to use the upper (stiffer) half of its range.
Okay - done typing. I'm about to jump on a plane headed to Denver.
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html