Notice: We request that you don't just set up a new account at this time if you are a previous user.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
Recovery:If you cannot access your old email address and don't remember your password, please click here to log a change of email address so you can do a password reset.
Which type of Damper is best for what use?
Moderators: toaddog, TWISTY, V8Patrol, Moderators
Which type of Damper is best for what use?
[b][i][u][color=Orange]LIFE AIN'T WORTH LIVING WHEN YOU DIE BEFORE YOU'RE MEANT TO![/color][/u][/i][/b]
Re: Which type of Damper is best for what use?
there are advantages and disadvantages to either type.
monotubes have in their favour a piston which completely separates the gas from the oil. they also dissipate heat well so are good for applications where there is a lot of high speed action. their downsides are are a reduced travel length for a given tube length, and susceptibility to damage - as the outer tube is the tube the piston slides inside, even a small dent can render them useless. due to their usually narrower caseing they will fit in places where it is difficult or impossible to fit a twin tube damper.
twin tubes have the advantage of maximised travel for a given shock length, but they are more susceptible to fade as (1) the oil and gas can mix fairly freely causing emulsification of the oil so reduced damping. (2) heat that builds up in the oil does not dissipate as easily as the damper is insulated by the outer tube.
foam cell technology combats the oil/gas mixing very effectively but it makes the heat dissipation problem worse.
a good compromise is the remote canister type shock which has some of the advantages of twin and monotube designs - they still have the susceptibility to damage of monotubes but they have the length to travel ratio of twin tube designs and the heat shedding capability and oil/gas separation of a mono.
does that help?
cheers
Brian
Free air locker to the first 20 callers!
Re: Which type of Damper is best for what use?
dumbdunce wrote:
there are advantages and disadvantages to either type.
monotubes have in their favour a piston which completely separates the gas from the oil. they also dissipate heat well so are good for applications where there is a lot of high speed action. their downsides are are a reduced travel length for a given tube length, and susceptibility to damage - as the outer tube is the tube the piston slides inside, even a small dent can render them useless. due to their usually narrower caseing they will fit in places where it is difficult or impossible to fit a twin tube damper.
twin tubes have the advantage of maximised travel for a given shock length, but they are more susceptible to fade as (1) the oil and gas can mix fairly freely causing emulsification of the oil so reduced damping. (2) heat that builds up in the oil does not dissipate as easily as the damper is insulated by the outer tube.
foam cell technology combats the oil/gas mixing very effectively but it makes the heat dissipation problem worse.
a good compromise is the remote canister type shock which has some of the advantages of twin and monotube designs - they still have the susceptibility to damage of monotubes but they have the length to travel ratio of twin tube designs and the heat shedding capability and oil/gas separation of a mono.
does that help?
cheers
Brian
Sure does.
What exactly is 'Foam Cell' All I've come up with, is that it's a Multi-Viscosity Oil.
[b][i][u][color=Orange]LIFE AIN'T WORTH LIVING WHEN YOU DIE BEFORE YOU'RE MEANT TO![/color][/u][/i][/b]
Foam cell is a very cheap and low tech way of manufacturing a hydraulic twin tube damper.
Instead of using high pressure gas to try and prevent the oil foaming, the gap between the inner tube and the outer tube of the shock contains a strip of high density foam, much like roll bar padding. The idea ( I believe) is that the foam traps the gas bubbles and reduces the formation of an emulsion.
I believe that these shocks are often padded with low pressure nitrogen so that the thermal expansion and corrosion problems of using air in the shock body are reduced.
Most "Quality" twin tube dampers use higher pressure gas and eliminate the foam cell. I guess this permits a greater volume of fluid/gas and provides more accurate damping rates as the oil/gas is not impeded by the foam as it moves around the shock.
Feel free to correct/flame me as appropriate if i'm wrong, but that's my understanding.
Cheers, steve
Instead of using high pressure gas to try and prevent the oil foaming, the gap between the inner tube and the outer tube of the shock contains a strip of high density foam, much like roll bar padding. The idea ( I believe) is that the foam traps the gas bubbles and reduces the formation of an emulsion.
I believe that these shocks are often padded with low pressure nitrogen so that the thermal expansion and corrosion problems of using air in the shock body are reduced.
Most "Quality" twin tube dampers use higher pressure gas and eliminate the foam cell. I guess this permits a greater volume of fluid/gas and provides more accurate damping rates as the oil/gas is not impeded by the foam as it moves around the shock.
Feel free to correct/flame me as appropriate if i'm wrong, but that's my understanding.
Cheers, steve
[quote="greg"] some say he is a man without happy dreams, or that he sees silver linings on clouds and wonders why they are not platinum... all we know, is he's called the stevie.[/quote]
Gwagensteve wrote:Foam cell is a very cheap and low tech way of manufacturing a hydraulic twin tube damper.
Instead of using high pressure gas to try and prevent the oil foaming, the gap between the inner tube and the outer tube of the shock contains a strip of high density foam, much like roll bar padding. The idea ( I believe) is that the foam traps the gas bubbles and reduces the formation of an emulsion.
I believe that these shocks are often padded with low pressure nitrogen so that the thermal expansion and corrosion problems of using air in the shock body are reduced.
Most "Quality" twin tube dampers use higher pressure gas and eliminate the foam cell. I guess this permits a greater volume of fluid/gas and provides more accurate damping rates as the oil/gas is not impeded by the foam as it moves around the shock.
Feel free to correct/flame me as appropriate if i'm wrong, but that's my understanding.
Cheers, steve
no flames necessary
in a foam cell shock, the gas is encapsulated in the foam and therefore prevented from mixing with the oil. in a gas twin tube shock there is nothing to prevent the oil and gas mixing - so foam cell is an improvement on twin tube gas. a 100% oil filled foam cell shock can be run in any orientation but a gas charged twin tube must be run close to upright.
Free air locker to the first 20 callers!
Slunnie wrote:What about the LTR? Monotube interior to prevent airating, remote canister to restore lost travel, outer shell to prevent damage. Bloody expensive also.
I made a dumb uninformed statement. see below message.
Last edited by dumbdunce on Fri Aug 13, 2004 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Free air locker to the first 20 callers!
Damn, I missed the slam.
I was just at Auto Alliance this afternoon, and the now have a Rancho pro shock or something. $440ea for basically the same as the LTR except it also has a 9 step damper adjustment! Only come in about 850 and 950mm open measurements though.
I was just at Auto Alliance this afternoon, and the now have a Rancho pro shock or something. $440ea for basically the same as the LTR except it also has a 9 step damper adjustment! Only come in about 850 and 950mm open measurements though.
Cheers
Slunnie
Discovery TD5, Landy IIa V8 ute.
Slunnie
Discovery TD5, Landy IIa V8 ute.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 164 guests