Hmm...so I don't love Monroe shocks...

-
OK, how about some links to the Bilstein shocks for A bodies... Need something new for my 67 but seems like there is a sea of choices. Don't wanna just take a stab in the dark if I can avoid it :)
Want something for mainly road driving, performance oriented though.
 
72bluNblu said:
Exactly! :thumbup:

The Bilsteins are worth every penny. They ride far better than the KYB's, and don't punish you through bumps and potholes like the KYB's do. And they handle the higher spring rates of larger torsion bars with ease.
Click to expand...

I've got Bilsteins on my '68 Dart with a stock suspension and worn out bushings and the car drives amazing. Before that I had collapsed oe shocks up front and air shocks that can't hold air in the rear. That car was wavy on the freeway before, now it's very smooth. Almost like a new car.
 
After a lot of researching I'm going to bite the bullet and get the Bilsteins for my 65'.
PST and Firm Feel both sell em, for all four corners it's $410 @ pst and $400 at firm feel buttttt free shipping and a 10% discount for FABO members makes pst the place to buy. Talked to firm feel yesterday and they couldn't match pst, ironically firm feels site actually goes into more detail on the digressive valving that seperate these shocks from the rest of the pack essentially eliminating the need for an adjustable shock or at least that's the way I interpret it but what the hell do I know (ha ha !). Will provide feedback after I get em on the car and raise a little hell to try em out.

http://www.firmfeel.com/shocks.htm

http://www.p-s-t.com/s.nl/it.A/id.6374/.f?sc=12
 
One of my front Monroe's started leaking, I put on a complete set of KYB's and there was a huge improvement in my ride.
 
I'm running KYB's on the front and Monroe Sensatracs with helper spring on the rear for a few years already.
Have no complaints about the rear shocks but the fronts could be 'better' imo, in terms of less harsh on potholes but firmer on highway dips.
 
Hotchkis fox non adjustables are a huge step up even over Bilsteins. Pay a little now or more later, the Fox shocks are sweet.
 
I put Monroes on my Dakota...bad idea. They're pretty much shot.

They have <3500 miles on them. Thinking Edelbrock IAS now.
 
I've had Monroe's on my car for the past five years and haven't had any trouble out of them, but they've probably got less than 1000 miles on them. I was telling my buddy who has worked in auto parts his whole career about this thread. He said "oh yeah, Monroes are junk!" I said why did you let me put them on there then?!?! I'm gonna run em till I start having problems and then I'll upgrade.
 
moparlover said:
one of the gurus might pipe in. the rear, if the ubolts are overtightened will make a very harsh ride. someone posted before about what the torque specs are on those ubolts
Click to expand...

that has nothing to do with a harsh ride,you could,but doubtfull,collapse the tubes,if over torqued.
 
The tubes are about 1/4" thick at the housing ends.
One would have to be very moronic to murder an rear end like that.
I also think the threads on the nuts and U-bolts will give up before the axle starts to buckle.
 
72BBSwinger said:
Hotchkis fox non adjustables are a huge step up even over Bilsteins. Pay a little now or more later, the Fox shocks are sweet.
Click to expand...
on the site they say the non adjustable Fox shocks are for lowered or lower than stock ride height , how muck lower ? My car has stock suspension only change is Poly bushings . I am buying bilstein , but if the Fox fit and are better I will cancel and buy the Fox shox ,
So will they work on stock ride height ?
 
Hemioutlaw said:
Tell me why they are better then the Bilsteins. Have you had Bilsteins? I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

Just watch this video by Hotchkis...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3q5RCsWwYw"]Development of the New Hotchkis Tuned APS Adjustable Monotube Shocks - YouTube[/ame]
 
Hemioutlaw said:
Tell me why they are better then the Bilsteins. Have you had Bilsteins? I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

I've had both the Bilstein RCD's and the Hotchkis Fox non-adjustables on my Duster. The Bilstein's are a HUGE improvement over anything like the Monroe's, KYBs, etc. The Fox shocks I feel do a better job with the 1.12" torsion bars I have on my Duster. Not that the bilstein's didn't work well, because they did, but the Fox's just take it up another notch. The ride is a touch firmer with the Fox's, and I can tell that they do a better job damping the 1.12" bars.

For cars with smaller torsions bars, even in the 1" to 1.06" range, I think the Bilsteins would probably be all that you need. To go bigger from there though, like the 1.12's, the Fox's are definitely a better match. It's just about matching your damping needs to your spring rate, and the Fox's do a better job keeping up with the larger bars. At least in my opinion.
 
72bluNblu said:
I've had both the Bilstein RCD's and the Hotchkis Fox non-adjustables on my Duster. The Bilstein's are a HUGE improvement over anything like the Monroe's, KYBs, etc. The Fox shocks I feel do a better job with the 1.12" torsion bars I have on my Duster. Not that the bilstein's didn't work well, because they did, but the Fox's just take it up another notch. The ride is a touch firmer with the Fox's, and I can tell that they do a better job damping the 1.12" bars.

For cars with smaller torsions bars, even in the 1" to 1.06" range, I think the Bilsteins would probably be all that you need. To go bigger from there though, like the 1.12's, the Fox's are definitely a better match. It's just about matching your damping needs to your spring rate, and the Fox's do a better job keeping up with the larger bars. At least in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Well thank you,
I'm always suspect (like In the vid when one mfg. states his product is better then the competition) however an impartial opinion that had experience with both products, jeez what more could I ask for. I unfortunately was chomping at the bit to get something ordered and pulled the plug on the Bilsteins this morning. They were about $200 less and with a CURRENTLY all stock suspension I'm hoping that your assessment rings true. I do plan on upgrading other suspension components as I would like this car to handle but I literally just got it a couple of months ago and the drivetrain upgrade is at the top of the priority list. If I hadn't had the shock failure we wouldn't even be having this conversation but building these cars seems to always be full of detours and ever increasing additions to the knowledge base. Thanks for the honest assessment.
 
Ive had monroe and a bunch of the "best" autozone / napa shocks. They all turn to turds in 3 months with basic mild off road driving. Maybe last 6 months on the highway with declining control the whole way. That has been my experience.

I suppose if you drive like 50 mph on the straights and 20 in the curves you could get 5 years out of them. Personally I hate changing shocks and do not like poor suspension control. I had 5 year old rancho 5000s on my 4x4 dakota when I bought it They were too stiff causing hopping and lack of contact and when I pulled them, they had gaps in the control as they extended, like air gaps or something. Put RCD bilstiens on 4 corners and have been smoother on the highway and more logical proper control and contact offroad for a year so far.
 
Hemioutlaw said:
Tell me why they are better then the Bilsteins. Have you had Bilsteins? I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

I have had both and I wasnt expecting THAT much of an improvement. I was expecting the Fox's to be stiffer, and they are. What I didnt expect is the ride is SMOOTHER and way more controlled.
 
jerry6 said:
on the site they say the non adjustable Fox shocks are for lowered or lower than stock ride height , how muck lower ? My car has stock suspension only change is Poly bushings . I am buying bilstein , but if the Fox fit and are better I will cancel and buy the Fox shox ,
So will they work on stock ride height ?
Click to expand...
I look at it as they will allow you to run a lower ride height, are fine at stock ride height, but wont have the extension of a stock length shock.
 
Interesting that someone has commented on the damping match of the Fox's to a significantly stiffer T-bar. Thanks for that info, 72 blueNblu..... What needs to be realized is that there is a damping match in the shock for each spring rate...i.e., a stiffer spring requires a stiffer main shock 'rate' to minimize the suspension motion but not be too harsh.

Sounds like the Fox's will be too stiff for a smaller T-bar thant 1.12". You might not see this much but you WILL see an issue with too stiff a shock rate on rough pavement surfaces (like the Rancho shock story above); the wheels will tend to 'skitter' about on small bumps. This can compromise steering traction on rougher surfaced roads, sealed pavement cracks, etc.

Also (for jerry6), if the shock extension is not long eoungh, you will be using the shocks as the droop stops instead of the car's droop stops (the ones on the subfame that hit the uppper control arm). This will sooner or later blow out the shocks. So if you use these, lower the ride height, and then either never drive on rough roads or do any Dukes of Hazzard jumps, or make the droop bump stops taller to hit before the shocks are at full extension. I did not know this 40 years ago and blew out my first set of Bilstein's on my Ranchero; I modded the top mounts to give the shock more extension room and get it better centered in the travel (and was happy ever after).
 
nm9stheham said:
Interesting that someone has commented on the damping match of the Fox's to a significantly stiffer T-bar. Thanks for that info, 72 blueNblu..... What needs to be realized is that there is a damping match in the shock for each spring rate...i.e., a stiffer spring requires a stiffer main shock 'rate' to minimize the suspension motion but not be too harsh.

Sounds like the Fox's will be too stiff for a smaller T-bar thant 1.12". You might not see this much but you WILL see an issue with too stiff a shock rate on rough pavement surfaces (like the Rancho shock story above); the wheels will tend to 'skitter' about on small bumps. This can compromise steering traction on rougher surfaced roads, sealed pavement cracks, etc.

Also (for jerry6), if the shock extension is not long eoungh, you will be using the shocks as the droop stops instead of the car's droop stops (the ones on the subfame that hit the uppper control arm). This will sooner or later blow out the shocks. So if you use these, lower the ride height, and then either never drive on rough roads or do any Dukes of Hazzard jumps, or make the droop bump stops taller to hit before the shocks are at full extension. I did not know this 40 years ago and blew out my first set of Bilstein's on my Ranchero; I modded the top mounts to give the shock more extension room and get it better centered in the travel (and was happy ever after).
Click to expand...

Very useful information and perspective, feel better now about not coughing up the extra $200 for the Fox's.
Thanks
 
nm9stheham said:
Interesting that someone has commented on the damping match of the Fox's to a significantly stiffer T-bar. Thanks for that info, 72 blueNblu..... What needs to be realized is that there is a damping match in the shock for each spring rate...i.e., a stiffer spring requires a stiffer main shock 'rate' to minimize the suspension motion but not be too harsh.

Sounds like the Fox's will be too stiff for a smaller T-bar thant 1.12". You might not see this much but you WILL see an issue with too stiff a shock rate on rough pavement surfaces (like the Rancho shock story above); the wheels will tend to 'skitter' about on small bumps. This can compromise steering traction on rougher surfaced roads, sealed pavement cracks, etc.
Click to expand...

The only issue I see here is that the shock "rate" is not a linear affair. Or at least, it doesn't have to be. The valving in the shock determines how quickly the shock reacts and with what amount of resistance. But the shocks can react differently depending on the speed and force of the spring input.

Higher end shocks have better valving, allowing them to compensate better over a wider range of suspension inputs. The shock piston will travel at different speeds and travel over different distances depending on the suspension inputs, which of course is related to the spring rate. But improved valving will allow better compensation over that entire range of movement.

So, what I'm saying is that the fox shocks will probably perform just as well on lighter torsion bars, because their valving is better. But, you may or may not notice as much of a difference compared to the Bilsteins with lighter bars as you would with the really heavy torsion bars, because the valving on the Bilsteins is good enough to deal with the lighter spring rates. The Fox's aren't just a stiffer shock, they're a better shock. But, if you aren't pushing the limits of the Bilsteins, the Fox's could very well be overkill.
 
Thanks for that info 72blu & nm9. Just what a needed to hear.
I'm still on the fence on upgrading my ride (daily street use only) with the 1" JS bars, Hellwig swaybar and KYB's in the front and Monroe Sensatracs (w/ helperspring) in the rear with 7 blade springpacks.

I have no complaints about the rear of the car yet, but on the front I would like to see some improvement.
It's either upgrading (again) from 1" to 1.06/1.10" orso tbars, or upgrade the shocks, both of which are costly upgrade. I'm thinking I want better shocks first, given the variety of different roadsurfaces I encounter everyday.

What I think I dislike about my current setup is the too harsh/ sudden 'quick' shock motion (speedbumps & potholes), and not enough damping with 'long/slow' shock motions.
I also feel there's not enough rebound dampening in the front shocks as noticed on speedbumps where the nose of the car raises quite a bit after the first 'jolt' of the onramp of a speedbump.
 
I got my set of KYB's off a 65 dart at the junkyard. Seriously, i dont think he had more than 20 miles on these. No rust even on the bolts, werent even dusty. Rubber was new looking, $5 a piece! Best 20 i spent and I wasnt even looking to buy anything, just strolling through on my lunch hour, even had to borrow a wrench. Too good to pass up or come back for. The shocks i took off my car were blue metallic painted, unknown brand. The KYB's had to be tied down to install, the gas was serious in them.
 
nm9stheham said:
Interesting that someone has commented on the damping match of the Fox's to a significantly stiffer T-bar. Thanks for that info, 72 blueNblu..... What needs to be realized is that there is a damping match in the shock for each spring rate...i.e., a stiffer spring requires a stiffer main shock 'rate' to minimize the suspension motion but not be too harsh.

Sounds like the Fox's will be too stiff for a smaller T-bar thant 1.12". You might not see this much but you WILL see an issue with too stiff a shock rate on rough pavement surfaces (like the Rancho shock story above); the wheels will tend to 'skitter' about on small bumps. This can compromise steering traction on rougher surfaced roads, sealed pavement cracks, etc.

Also (for jerry6), if the shock extension is not long eoungh, you will be using the shocks as the droop stops instead of the car's droop stops (the ones on the subfame that hit the uppper control arm). This will sooner or later blow out the shocks. So if you use these, lower the ride height, and then either never drive on rough roads or do any Dukes of Hazzard jumps, or make the droop bump stops taller to hit before the shocks are at full extension. I did not know this 40 years ago and blew out my first set of Bilstein's on my Ranchero; I modded the top mounts to give the shock more extension room and get it better centered in the travel (and was happy ever after).
Click to expand...

I ran them with 1.06" bars and they still felt perfect IMO. The fact that they are a rebuildable monotube shock sold me from day one since I have rebuilt shocks before. I wasnt expecting the valving to as spot on as it is though. I imagine the difference in these shocks is only more glaring with stiffer bars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top