Page 1 of 1
rancho RS99117s for a sierra?
Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 1:29 pm
by stumped
usta own a rocky that i had to take these lovely shocks off after i parked it on its side...
just bought an 87 sierra, am looking to put 2" OME springs under it... was wondering if it's going to be possible to use my RS99117s on it? need to convert from pin to eye at the top; does anyone have any ideas 'bout length and that kinda thing? would be nice to be able to use em, make the suspension setup cheaper...
any ideas?
Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:16 pm
by redzook
they are 12.250 compressed and 18.625 extended 6.375 travel
pretty short they may work spua as i dont know how far the shock mounts are apart?
ive got some 9008 that i will be gettin rid of soon eye to eye might be a bit long for you though?
Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 5:27 pm
by stumped
that sounds 'bout right, lol... pretty sure that is it actually. planning on staying spua unless someone convinces me otherwise
what're the measurements of the 9008s? i guess compressed is the main thing... wouldn't wanna limit the springs too much. wouldn't mind checking out ur rig sometime before i start doing mods to mine if ur willing. gimme a week or so to finish uni exams and stuff, and maybe we can work something out?
Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2003 6:07 pm
by redzook
no worries let us know when u want a look (nuttin suss
)
Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2003 1:47 pm
by stumped
just wanna to see what NOT to do
do you have any problems with cops or rego or insurance with spoa? are you able to insure it at all? did you do the conversion, or get it done... and how much $$? how does it go with the raised cog, any issues with it being easier to tip?
20 questions, lol
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:16 am
by greg
Don't forget about the valving on the shocks guys... I see you are talking about eyes / pins / lenghts - but you also need to work out if the shocks are going to be hard / soft enough for your car...
sadly i don't know of anywhere that this information is listed about ranchos
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:54 pm
by stumped
ahh... thanks greg...
no idea if that will cause problems. the rocky was 1.6t, the zook plate says it's about 1.3t (is that right? i thought they were lighter...), so maybe the difference won't call a problem...??
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:00 pm
by greg
stumped wrote:ahh... thanks greg...
no idea if that will cause problems. the rocky was 1.6t, the zook plate says it's about 1.3t (is that right? i thought they were lighter...), so maybe the difference won't call a problem...??
I think a hardtop 1.3L sierra is about nine hundred and something kilos...
The application guide for ranchos is a bit confusing though - the shocks i am running are designed for using as duel shocks on the back of toyota pickup trucks or bronco's or something...
Then again, my swampers are meant to be used as duelies too
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:06 pm
by stumped
yeah, i thought it was sposed to be less than a tonne...
dual shocks eh? does tyre choice make any difference to shock choice at all? (forgive the stupid questions, lol)
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:13 pm
by greg
stumped wrote:yeah, i thought it was sposed to be less than a tonne...
dual shocks eh? does tyre choice make any difference to shock choice at all? (forgive the stupid questions, lol)
I guess the weight of a tyre pulling down on the spring and shock could have some affect about what shock valving should be, but i don't really think so.
However, tyre choice does affect your shock choice in a slighty more indirect manor - for example, if you want to run tyres beyond a certain size, you will need to do some changes to the positioning of your axels under your car (i.e. move the front axel forward) to allow bigger tyres clearance around the firewall etc... This would affect your suspension setup, and that would affect what shock you would want to use.
make sense?
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:28 pm
by stumped
yeah, makes sense...
what do you run on ur zook? springs, shocks, tyres, engine etc... what 'abnormal' mods have you done (eg move axle, weld stuff etc)
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:33 pm
by greg
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:48 pm
by Guy
for me I am using shocks designed for an 80 series crusier in the rear of mine .. but at the angle they are mounted yo uget greater mechanical advantage over them, The rear of my hardtop Zuk is soft enough for me (I also carry alot of crap in mine) and the front I use gabriel "Red Ryder" shocks for the rear of a HQ or VL commodore or something like that. as they are soft and have a 11 or 12 inch stroke .. and they cost $40
Really need something a bit stiffer IMHO. But was experimenting with setups at the time..
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:53 pm
by redzook
lovemud do u have any pics of ur zuk? on here?
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:07 pm
by Guy
Dunno .. dont think so ..
Will post a couple once I get home
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:24 pm
by greg
love_mud wrote:Dunno .. dont think so ..
Will post a couple once I get home
here's some:
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:25 pm
by greg
last ones...
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:52 pm
by Guy
Thanks mate
.. guess you can see where the screen name comes from now ..
