Fox 2.5 air shocks

Patches · May 1, 2007

I have an S-10 with 4-link and Rockwells, hummerbead locks and 42" Swampers. My question is? Will the new Fox Pro 2.5 air shock handle the unsprung weight of my axles?

I have talked to Off Road Warehouse and they said that these new 2.5's will work fine. Any input would be awsome as I am about to buy a set.

Thanks, Lynn

Not Jobless · May 1, 2007

Patches said:
I have an S-10 with 4-link and Rockwells, hummerbead locks and 42" Swampers. My question is? Will the new Fox Pro 2.5 air shock handle the unsprung weight of my axles?

I have talked to Off Road Warehouse and they said that these new 2.5's will work fine. Any input would be awsome as I am about to buy a set.

Thanks, Lynn

Your rig is pretty big...I would go with coilovers.

Harvester of Sorrow · May 2, 2007

Jobless said:
Your rig is pretty big...I would go with coilovers.

I agree with Jobless...

My rig weighs 4700lbs...with the split being 2500 front/2200 rear...

I am full width and will be probably pushing the limits when I go with 2.0's...

I will be staying leafs in front....:masturbanana[1]:

Jason C · May 2, 2007

something like this in addition to the coils you already have would give you the best performance.

http://www.polyperformance.com/shop/product.php?productid=640&cat=34&page=1

the BBC shock they sell I think would give you good results as well.

mark · May 2, 2007

Jason,

slight thread hijack, but in your opinion, whats the typical weight threshold to run a 2" or 2.5" strut?

Figure a truggy type rig. What (realistic) weights should one be shooting for to effectively run them? The 2"er would of course be preferred since they are significantly cheaper... to me (uniformed opinion) if your getting to the 2.5"er you might as well look at coil-overs.

correct me if I'm wrong.
________
EXTREME Q TOWER VAPORIZER REVIEW

Jason C · May 3, 2007

mark said:
Jason,

slight thread hijack, but in your opinion, whats the typical weight threshold to run a 2" or 2.5" strut?

Figure a truggy type rig. What (realistic) weights should one be shooting for to effectively run them? The 2"er would of course be preferred since they are significantly cheaper... to me (uniformed opinion) if your getting to the 2.5"er you might as well look at coil-overs.

correct me if I'm wrong.

There are alot of factors involved. it depends on the suspension, and the way it is set up. Our general 2 seater buggy weighs around 3000 lbs. subtract about 1K for tires wheels and axles and you end up with about 2000 lbs of sprung wight. my car is about 65% bias towards the front. I run my struts at 330 PSI at full extension and about 32cc of additional oil (basically full). at static height it sits with about 5" of exposed shockshaft. at this point the ramp of the springrate is increasing fairly fast and works very well for my particular application. so basically any more weight than what I am currently running I would not reccomend. the sad part is most are drawn to the air strut because of low cost but most do not realise it is the bare minimum you can use for a suspension. I chose to try them because the AS#'s are quite hight in my car. by lowering the rig and getting rid of some of the assisted pressure from the coilovers it gave my rig a very dead feel to where it will consume terraine VS tiptoew over the top. I personally like this since it gives me as a driver a better feel for the car and terraine underneath me. for heavier applications they reccomend you add shock oil to prevent the bottoming noise. at a point you are going to make the shock go into hydrolock before the shaft will bottom out and not let you use the full travel of the shock which than becomes poijntless since you cannot use all of the shock. you could use them on something over 2K (sprung weight) but to make the shock work proper you would only end up with about 2 or 3" of exposed shock before bottoming making the focus of your suspension on droop. this is fine if your in a low slung car but in the case of a truggy it will not allow the suspension to travel deep into the car giving more stability when consuming terraine giving you a more "tipsy" feel. as for the rear of a truggy that is linked depending on the amount of metal in the rear you could use them there and get a fair amount of exposed shockshaft. If you throw some gear in back you may want it to sit like a stinkbug prior to loading it. the rig will have a front leady feel (kinda like 1/4 eleptic) so you would want to assist it with a swaybar to throw load to the front to try to get your leafts to take on some of the job as well.

the 2.5" airstrut or coilover is a gimmic and is a waste of $$. more volume of oil is not going to help as much as one would think. the internals are the same as well as most of the parts. you coult achieve similar results with valving to slow the oil rather than shoving volume through a piston and washers.

In a nutshell I think I am at the max for what I would consider "reliable" for weight. if you feel you may be aproaching the "max" for a strut I would buy coilovers. they are better for trails anyway and have a much better ride, more reliable and if you shop around you can find a good used set for a pretty decent price.

mark · May 3, 2007

Thank Jason, that pretty much makes up my mind then. I'll stick with my orignal plan of basic coils to start (cause they are cheap and I have them), then maybe switch to a coil-over as $$, time and the truck evolves again for a cleaner set-up and better tunning/performance.

I liked the Strut idea since they are very clean, resonably cost effective and compact... plus all the cool kids have them

.

If I can get the whole truck under 3K when all is set and done I'll be shocked... and rush out to by a lottery ticket. I'll be happy with 4K, but am not crossing my fingers (LSI would help... but not going to happen

)

:beer:

Now I just need to get all my ducks in a row, finish some projects and spend some money at your 'buggy store' :redneck:
________
Maine Dispensaries

Harvester of Sorrow · May 3, 2007

Jason C said:
the 2.5" airstrut or coilover is a gimmic and is a waste of $$. more volume of oil is not going to help as much as one would think. the internals are the same as well as most of the parts. you coult achieve similar results with valving to slow the oil rather than shoving volume through a piston and washers.

I agree with this thought 100%...thanks for stating it Jason...

Because of this, I am either going with 2.0's or full coilovers in the rear. It will pretty much depend on my weight and final link layout as you mentioned.