• Forum membership has its advantages....

Shock angle for spring setup

NorCal_Prerunner

Well-Known Member
#1
Simple question, probably a simple answer.

On a rear leaf spring setup, why does everyone angle the shocks toward the cab?

I'm thinking that if you have a Deaver Race pack with long shackles that cycles 18"s of travel, you'll have to run a 18" travel shock? Since the rear axel will swing toward the cab at full extension, the 18" travel shock will need to be vertical at the point of full extension to accomadate the travel. Am I even close here, or are there other reasons? Thanks in advance....



jnie
 
#3
Shocks are usually angled forward so that you don't need an 18 inch travel shock if you have 18 inches of travel, you can get away with running a 14 or 16 inch stroke. The angle changes the ratio of wheel travel to shock travel, the more it is angled, the shorter the shock needs to be, however, the shock is not as effiecient when angled which is why some people mount them straight up and down, also the bed cage looks SO COOL when it sticks out 2 feet above the bed.
 

BIG_FAT_LOSER

Well-Known Member
#4
forward, bacward, to the side. In theory i beleive they can be positioned anywhere within an imaginary cone from the lower mount upward. Take stock location for example. but forward makes for a compact cage

<font color=red>PAT KAPKO</font color=red>
<font color=yellow>Fab by travolta</font color=yellow>
 

drtdevil93

Well-Known Member
#5
you use the pythagorean theorem to get the proper angle. the way i do it there is no equation to tell you exactly where it goes, you just keep plugging in numbers til it gives you what you want. remember, when you say the shock efficiency is lower, thats not exactly correct. if the shock is valved properly to be angled, there is no difference, other than a shorter shaft is less likely to break.

erik

ps. let me know if you need a little more info about how to use the equation to get what you want
 
#6
Actually Erik, it is not as effiecient when laid at an angle because the shock will have to work harder given the same size bump and it will also build up more heat because the shaft speed becomes greater when the shock is angled in comparison to having it cycle in a 1:1 ratio
 

NorCal_Prerunner

Well-Known Member
#7
Erik, and all, thanks for the posts. Erik, I'll need to talk to you next week about ordering some springs. What is the best way to get in touch with you, #, email? What's Deaver's number? How realistic is a 18" travel deaver spring setup? What length shock stroke do you suggest? 16" stroke angled, 18" stroke almost vertically mounted. Yoo hoo, shocks and bed cage 2 feet over the bed. :O)

jnie
 

drtdevil93

Well-Known Member
#8
number to deaver: (714) 542-3703 ( i think we have some 62" in stock.
my personal email: [email protected]
18" is no problem
i recommend the a 2.5x16 (bypass if you have the money)
you dont need a whole lot of angle. email me if you need help with this part
the most important thing is you want to use up the majority of the shocks travel. this will help keep the shocks cooler. as long as you arent bottoming or overextending the shock, you will be good.
 

Dylan

Well-Known Member
#11
Rick: I think you ment to say that the shock shaft sped is "slower" the more its angled. the other problem with angled shocks is that the angle changes throughout the travel. This give a falling rate shock as it lays over more into compresion. this is not really what we want. You can actualy get some advantages by angling the shocks towards the center of the vehicle insted of forward. when angled toward center they will be more effective in roll than in bump, this helps the roll stability but you still have a falling rate problem in the bump direction. to bad it doesn't look good when angled in. hope this helps, a little forward is ok but you will probably only gain about an inch of travel
Dylan
 
Top