Shock Modifcation question.

[thgear]

Any messing with shocks is 2 pips

is any messing with the bump stops, number of bump stops, size of the bump stops etc gonna cost me extra pips assuming a) ride height WILL remain OE, and b) NO modification will be done to the actual springs.

[Pete@Marcor]

Any messing with shocks is 2 pips

is any messing with the bump stops, number of bump stops, size of the bump stops etc gonna cost me extra pips assuming a) ride height WILL remain OE, and b) NO modification will be done to the actual springs.

You mean, OTHER than the suplementing of the spring rates with the bump stops? :D

[thgear]

well thats open for debate :D

but i think this is a gray area i would assume, its just that an engineer aquaintence of mine that digs suspension and VW's has recomended to me some DIY home style modifications to the shocks of the car, but it involves messing with the bumpstops

but the argument is that the bump stops are part of the shock assembly, independant of the springs.

but i would just like to have some clarification so that eyes brows dont go up on the track as to what the hell is going on with my car ;)

[thgear]

O CRUEL CCC WHERE ART THOU? :rolleyes:

[Dave]

The bump stops are considered an integral part of the shock, so if you modify them, it's 2 PIPs. If you only knew how the Sentra Series guys were using bump stops...

[Crusher45]

I'm shocked!!!

:eek: :eek: :eek:

[Carguy]

I'm shocked!!!

:eek: :eek: :eek:

LOL!

[Carguy]

You mean, OTHER than the suplementing of the spring rates with the bump stops? :D

I see... That's why you have to charge 2 pips for a bottomed-out shock... It actually raises your spring rate - dramatically! :p

[thgear]

no no, i am getting NEW AFTERMARKET shocks (2 pips) i'm asking if i will incur any additonal pips if i mess with the bumpstops along the way.

[gatherer]

no you will only take the 2 pips for the shocks... since the bump stops are part of the shock assembly have fun

[Dave]

Gatherer is correct. If you've already taken the 2 PIPs for shocks, you can modify the bump stops for free since they're covered by the 2 PIP shock category. Shocking, isn't it? :p Just don't stick your finger in a socket or you might get a shock. I think I may need shock treatment. Time to go shock the monkey...

[Rick S]

Dave, it shocks me how bad your jokes are.

[thgear]

well i'm not at all shocked, i just wanted some shocking clarification about my shocks.

:)

[RRRex]

If I raise the point the shock mounts to the car to get the car lower, is that any additional PiPs? I'm currently running non-stock full race coilover.

[Dave]

I'm not sure what you mean by that, Miles. Is there a product on the market you can link so we can better understand what you mean?

[thgear]

aside from some companys making kits, ive read about some of the VW guys welding on plates that essentialy raise the point where the shock attaches, there by lowering the car while keeping the shock travel intact...

[B18C5]

I think I know what you mean. Something like the Ground Control upper mount?
http://www.ground-control.com/images/honda/honda_topmount.jpg

I can't see how that could be a problem. It's not changing the chassis mounting point, it's just where the shock mounts. Even if it did, the geometry wouldn't change anyway.

Regardless, the spring's mounting points would be the same, so it wouldn't lower the car. It just does the equivalent to shortening a shock. It moves the range that it works in. Unless you mean another part?

[thgear]

i'm not quite sure what the guy had in mind, but this is what i'm thinking

if the spring rate and shock remain unchanged, and since the spring works of the plate on the shock, and you mount the shock higher than you normaly would, it would lower the car all else being equal

RED = chasis

green = control arm (lets use a macphearson design for simplicity)

blue = "welded on" plate to mount the shock higher.

now... if the spring is not attached to the shock, such as teh case of my cars rear end, you would be right, height would not be affected....

[RRRex]

i'm not quite sure what the guy had in mind, but this is what i'm thinking

if the spring rate and shock remain unchanged, and since the spring works of the plate on the shock, and you mount the shock higher than you normaly would, it would lower the car all else being equal

RED = chasis

green = control arm (lets use a macphearson design for simplicity)

blue = "welded on" plate to mount the shock higher.

now... if the spring is not attached to the shock, such as teh case of my cars rear end, you would be right, height would not be affected....



Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. Thanks for posting that! It's perfect. It would be something I'd get Ronnie or Darren to fab up for me. It's hard running DC shocks in an EF chassis since the stock EF shocks have less travel than the DCs.

Thanks Geo, but I'd need to move the spring up to get the car lower. Right now I'm sitting at 3 fingers of clearence and the only way to add camber is to lower the car unfortunately. :(

[thgear]

what kind of suspension is the EF running up front?

[Dave]

That Ground Control piece or something similar is legal since it doesn't change suspension geometry.

[RRRex]

By illegal, do you mean I can't do it? Or it's more PiPs? I know Tom's ol' skool civ has plates, so does Kensai's RSX and a few Mustangs I've seen. People do move the mounting points.

Sorry to kidnap your thread. I run a Type R suspension in a CRX chassis since finding EF performance suspension is next to impossible since it's not supported any more.

[B18C5]

With a double wishbone suspension the geometry isn't going to change. The spring/shocks don't have any bearing on it at all. I can understand what you're trying to do. Basically, by raising the height of the upper shock mount you'd be getting the same suspension travel as the EG, allowing EG coilovers to be used as intended.

There are two reasons why that might not be the best idea. One is that there's very little room between the top of the shock tower and the hood. There might not be enough room to extend the shock towers. The other is that even if you had more suspension travel you wouldn't be able to use it. The tire would top out inside the wheel well. There really wouldn't be any benefit.

There are two issues with running EG suspension in your car, one is that the springs raise the car too high, which I assume is bothering you the most. The other is that the shocks will be operating out of their range, since they're expecting to be extended further.

For the height problem there has to be a shorter spring. If you switch from an 8" to a 7" spring you can adjust the height of the coilover up a bit and have full range of adjustability.

For the shock issue, you can use something like the ground control piece easily enough. If you've got Konis or something easily rebuildable you can get them professionally shortened.

[Dave]

Miles, Eibach does make 7'' springs in the correct diameter for the BC shocks. Pete @ Marcor can get them for you. I already looked into this for Mohamed's car since BC didn't have high enough spring rates for the rear at the time we ordered them.

As for those adjustable top mounts you're referring to on RSX's and other Mac strut fronts, those are camber adjustable devices. They don't actually move the shocks/springs up any higher from their OE mounting point, or at least not the ones I've seen.

Serge, physically changing the mounting location of the shocks via strut tower area modification is illegal, so it would automatically bump your car to Modified.

[Pete@Marcor]

I would disagree about the lack of support. In fact, Koni just released off the shelf, race valved single adjustable shocks for the EF. The bodies are shortened, to avoid bottoming out of the shock. Also, the mounts that Ground Control make are an upper mount that allows more shock travel,by about an inch, if I recall.

But, I have to admit, I am not sure all of this work to increase the amount of compression travel is worth it. When I raced my EF Civic, if I ran the car too low, I would bottom out the upper control arm on the body.

VWs are much more of an issue with compression travel, as are Neons.

I am not sure where these questions are going, as I would assume that they all would be covered in a suspension PIP.

As far as lowering your car, Miles, are you at the bottom of your height adjustment? If so, you need shorter springs.

[RRRex]

Yes, I'm at the bottom of my adjustibility. Carl from Trac told me about the Yellows and recomended them as the way to go, and in retrospec he might have been right. It's just I've run Buddy Clubs in the past and liked them so I went back to what I know, but they don't make EF parts anymore as don't a few other brands I looked into. I also went back to BC becuase they offered to revalve my old shocks for no cost so in effect I got 2 sets of working race shocks for the price of 1. And I've read some really good reviews of them and so far I've been really impressed with their performance - whether they were designed for my car or not. I have 7" springs on the front already from BC.

Do 6" springs exist? What harm am I doing if any to running the shocks at the lowest setting then forcing it to go even lower? Do I risk bottoming out the shock bottom?

[B18C5]

I'm sure you can find a 6" spring. I dunno what I was using on the ITR, but I kept going to a shorter spring when I kept increasing the spring rate. The 22k ones were REALLY short, quite possibly 6".

There's nothing wrong with running the shock low, you just might be operating the shock out of the optimal range. That's what the Ground Control mount fixes. Since you probably won't shorten your BCs that's probably the best option, but it's not entirely necessary. You could also modify your OEM shock top. There are a few guys on honda-tech who have cut the tops off their OEM mounts and welded tubes in the middle. Basically the same as the GC mount.

You're probably more likely to hit the tire or UCA on the body before you bottom out the shock. You can always mount the shock in the car without the spring to test it for range and to see what's going to hit first, easy enough.

[Pete@Marcor]

If you are at the bottom of your spring height adjustability, putting a 6" spring on the shock will not affect anything, except lower your vehicle. It is another situation about your shock travel. You need to check to make sure that you are in approximately the middle of its travel, and make sure it is not bottoming out, or going to full droop too soon.

6" springs do exist, and we tend to keep some in stock.

Email me directly, if you want to see what is available.

[rpr]

Miles, I'm sure Dave and Hanif can tell you that going too low does nothing but hurt suspension performance. I raised my teg UP at Shannonville after some deliberation over it. I should probably raise it even more, especially since all my shocks appear to be blown...

If you need camber, get some adjustable UCA's (or modify OEM UCA's like mine), don't try and hack a solution by lowering too far to get some camber. I know it LOOKS better, but it doesn't PERFORM better.

And my Civic has plates because that is how you adjust camber and caster on pre 88 Civics, and the RSX/newer Civics.

Tom

[Dave]

FYI Miles, Leitner Performance in Toronto can turn your OE front upper control arms into Skunk2-style adjustable ones for $300ish. Give them a call to see if they're still doing this.

[rpr]

Or you can just move the mount holes at the chassis side. Much easier, although not adjustable..

[RRRex]

Ahh, I see that's just for camber then. My bad. I just assumed they did both like this one:

Link: (http://jwfisher.com/sec-ford/projects/project99/pro-5/pro-5-thumb.jpg)

Shows how little I actually know. Pete - email sent. I'll also look into fabbing up a Skunk2 style upper CA.