Re: Shock travel theory

["D.A.K." <dak@rochester.rr.com>]

>From what I remember about suspension design from the Mec E guys at school, you
would like to have about 2/5 of the suspension travel below the resting point
and
3/5 of the travel above. So, in full compression (bottoming out), you are 3/5
of
the total travel above resting, and in full droop, you are 2/5 of the full
travel
below the resting position. Make sense?
Now, when people put lowering springs in without modifying the suspension
swing,
more distance is below the resting point, but these springs are stiffer
(right?),
so it keeps the car from bottoming out. If reduce the distance below resting,
you will have more chance for the wheel to loose contact with the ground when
driving on bumpy conditions. The wheel simply cannot travel down far enough.

	David


"Iain Atkinson (ETL)" wrote:
> 
> Hi all
> 
> A friend of mine is just about to fit Sport Quattro shocks onto the front of his UR Q, these shocks have a 2.5cm shorter piston, he intends to use his UR Q springs. Is this going to cause him problems in handling/ride height/geometry? My theory is that with the piston being shorter at full downwards extension there will not be enough travel to prevent damage to the shock, is not better to fit the springs as well from the Sport Q? Any other comments appreciated as he is due to start re installing today.
> 
> TIA
> 
> Iain