Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:00:18 -0500
Reply-To: Derek Drew <derekdrew@RCN.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Derek Drew <derekdrew@RCN.COM>
Subject: Re: Syncro Springs and the correct way of lifting your Syncro
In-Reply-To: <AIEFIGCNNANNIHLNFBPEMEJECJAA.sales@fastforward.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
What David is saying is that he now feels it is better to change the
lifting of the vehicle more to the shock rather than the spring. This has
always been a plausible and interesting method. The main reason I did not
encourage it in early lifting thinking (e.g., 1996 or so) was uncertainty
about what it might do to the CV joints and other suspension components to
allow the lower control arm up there to drop down so much further, which is
what would happen if you installed a longer front shock. It is possible
that to make this work, one would want to purchase and install 16" front
axles which apparently have the 108 CV joints and can therefore comfortably
operate at a higher angle without harm. One might also need to install
something like the new upper control arms now in development by John
Wessels that allow an angled mounting of the upper ball joints. Wessels has
gotten busy, however, so this project is slow go right now. Possibly David
could pick up some momentum on this latter project as it might help,
provided that the engineering passes muster with us, which is another
story. Altering suspension components like this is very dicy because if it
breaks on the highway, you are likely to crash.
The addition of a shock that has adjustable ride height to our family of
options sounds very welcome indeed, and provides an alternative to the OME
shocks that seem like a marginal improvement over stock by all accounts.
That is, in David's post one can find a definite and important potential
advance.
Somebody should probably volunteer to edit further postings between these
two fellows to get the invective out and sort of sanitize them before they
go to the list. Notwithstanding that much of the criticisms between them
have an element of truth to them and are therefore amusing, it is
ultimately distracting. Possibly David will label his next post "Adjustable
Ride Height Shocks In Production," or "Fast Forward Switching From Spring
Raise To Shock Raise", either of which headline should be more efficient at
penetrating the real news into our consciousness.
At 10:54 PM 2/6/01 -0800, you wrote:
>I have stopped selling my springs due to the
>fact that after a lot of education on the subject from a lot of fine list
>members it is really the wrong way to lift the Syncro.
>My next generation lift kit features springs with the SAME ride height as
>the stock Syncro on most vehicles and up to 2cm taller on Syncros that are
>on a diet - or you can use the stock springs and save a few bucks. They
>will be not as stiff for better articulation when crawling over rocks and
>other items where it is important to keep all wheels on the ground - for
>those of us who do not have differential locks on both ends this will help a
>lot! The shocks that I am using have a threaded body that will allow for an
>adjustable ride height from 0cm increase up to 6cm on my prototypes - I
>might be able to get 7cm on the production models, but this will start
>introduce alignment problems. The fact that you can adjust the height in
>front will also assist in making the vehicle more balanced as you can lift
>one corner more than the other for better weight distribution. The shocks
>that I am using also have 5.5cm more travel than the Boge / Monroe / OME
>shocks. The other added advantage is user adjustable valving from a little
>soupier than new Boges to ultra control for the racetrack if you want them
>that stiff. It all comes down to user adjustable to taste or lack there of.
>Mine is set to +5 cm and I have as much suspension decompression as I did
>when it was stock. The valving is set to 4/10 for off road to 7/10 for
>highway cruising - usually they get left at 4 or 5/10. I can compress
>everything as much as stock too! The rears are not quite as fancy, they
>feature adjustable valving but no adjustable ride height due to the fact
>that it is too complicated to make an adjustable spring perch for the rear
>springs - I just using some excess 4cm shims that I had here. These have
>been over 1 year in development and I must say that I am truly impression
>with how much better a real lifted suspension is!
>
>Just some food for thought here... comments and criticisms are welcome and
>very expected! :)
>
>David Marshall
>
>Fast Forward Autobahn Sport Tuning
>4356 Quesnel Hixon Road
>Quesnel BC Canada V2J 6Z3
>mailto:info@fastforward.ca http://www.fastforward.ca
>Phone: (250) 992 7775 FAX: (250) 992 1160
>
>• Vanagon Accessories and Engine Conversions
>• Transporter, Unimog and Iltis Sales
>• European Lighting for most Audi and Volkswagen models
_______________________________________________
Derek Drew New York, NY
CEO & Co-Founder
http://www.ConsumerSearch.com/
===========================
"Best Expert Review Site"
for product reviews on the Internet
Jan. 2001, PC World Magazine
==========================
80 South Street, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10038
derekdrew@rcn.com
212-580-6486
Alternate numbers for the industrious phone caller that wants to try every
avenue: 917-848-6425 (cell); 202-966-7907 (Work), 212-580-4459 (Home),
202-966-0938 (Home), 978-359-8533 (fax [efax]), 212-269-3188 (Seaport
office), 212-269-3188 (Seaport main number).
| 
