Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Im looking at putting these in the back of a GU leaf sprung ute to try and combat the rough ride.

Currently it has EFS elite's in there with most of the leafs removed.

How do the Tough Dogs go ?

Would adjusting them to a softer setting help the ride in the ute ?

Cheers.

shox wont make it a softer ride on a leaf spring vehicle, only different springs.

The adjustables have valving designed for coil sprung vehicles so they are much harder than probably those EFS ones u have now.

Try the tough dog foam cells.

Z()LTAN wrote:shox wont make it a softer ride on a leaf spring vehicle, only different springs.

The adjustables have valving designed for coil sprung vehicles so they are much harder than probably those EFS ones u have now.

Try the tough dog foam cells.

This post makes no sense. First you say shocks won't make the ride softer, then say shock X will be much harder. (So I assume you mean they will also make the ride harder, which is true)


Correctly valved shocks will make a big difference to how a leaf sprung car rides.

Personally, I reckon adjustable shocks are a gimmick. I had RS9000's in my Gwagen and after a while of kidding myself I was making the car work better offroad by fiddling with them, I gave up and left them alone. Buy the right shocks for the car and leave them alone.

Steve.

i have the adjustables and think they are great , although i have a coily , i still think you will find a huge difference between the hard and soft setting , i like mine set soft on road and firm off road , thinking about getting the in cab kit to make it easier to adjust , and adjust on the move depending on road conditions

the soft setting on road feels like a big cadilac and the hardest setting feels like welded up suspension

Gwagensteve wrote:
(So I assume you mean they will also make the ride harder, which is true)

U just answered ur own question Genius

Z()LTAN wrote:shox wont make it a softer ride on a leaf spring vehicle, only different springs.

The adjustables have valving designed for coil sprung vehicles so they are much harder than probably those EFS ones u have now.

Try the tough dog foam cells.

Tough dogs shocks are model specific, so a leaf spring model is designed to suit that particular model. I believe you will notice the difference, (the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!) but leaves do tend to be the determining factor in the ride department.[/i]

either way, your probably not going to have them in the truck for long ( tough dog adjustables) if you wheel it much,

because they will probably start leaking pretty quickly


Jes

Righto.

So Tough Dog Adjustables are not worth the money as they will not provide a noticeable gain in ride quality ?

Are the Tough Dog Foam Cell shocks a much better quality then the EFS ones ?

Is there a difference to be noticed there or should i just make do with what i got?

jessie928 wrote:either way, your probably not going to have them in the truck for long ( tough dog adjustables) if you wheel it much,

because they will probably start leaking pretty quickly


Jes

yep and when you get them custom made (add another $ 55 per shock)
they have no warranty

jessie928 wrote:either way, your probably not going to have them in the truck for long ( tough dog adjustables) if you wheel it much,

because they will probably start leaking pretty quickly


Jes

Sound like Rancho Adjustables

BBM Rick wrote:

Z()LTAN wrote:shox wont make it a softer ride on a leaf spring vehicle, only different springs.

The adjustables have valving designed for coil sprung vehicles so they are much harder than probably those EFS ones u have now.

Try the tough dog foam cells.

Tough dogs shocks are model specific, so a leaf spring model is designed to suit that particular model. I believe you will notice the difference, (the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!) but leaves do tend to be the determining factor in the ride department.[/i]

so the RANCHO factory valve them (adjustable tough dogs) for specific vehicles?.....namely a leaf sprung gu ute?....

BBM Rick wrote: the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!)

This is acutally the biggest problem I have with these things. NO responsible suspension engineer would possibly permit this range eof adjustment. The ability to make a car dangerously undrivable (or worse, have someone make it dangerously undriveable without your knowledge) is a major worry.

even correctly valved for the application, why on earth do you need 400% EACH WAY of valving adjustment in a shock? 20 or 30% would be all that's required even ifyou were swapping springs when you adjusted the shocks. It's just stupid.

On my Gwagen, my rear RS9000's are about 20% too soft for the application when turned all the way up (they are 5 speeds, not later 9 speeds) and it's loose but OK on the highway. At 4 it's VERY loose and suiltable only low range, and at three you can't drive the car. I've never gone below 3.

On the front I'm on 2 under all circumstances. A click each way and the results are dire.

Yep, I sure love that adjustability. Use it all the time.

It's a fawking gimmick. Buy the right shocks and call it good.

Steve.

Gwagensteve wrote:

BBM Rick wrote: the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!)

This is acutally the biggest problem I have with these things. NO responsible suspension engineer would possibly permit this range eof adjustment. The ability to make a car dangerously undrivable (or worse, have someone make it dangerously undriveable without your knowledge) is a major worry.

even correctly valved for the application, why on earth do you need 400% EACH WAY of valving adjustment in a shock? 20 or 30% would be all that's required even ifyou were swapping springs when you adjusted the shocks. It's just stupid.

On my Gwagen, my rear RS9000's are about 20% too soft for the application when turned all the way up (they are 5 speeds, not later 9 speeds) and it's loose but OK on the highway. At 4 it's VERY loose and suiltable only low range, and at three you can't drive the car. I've never gone below 3.

On the front I'm on 2 under all circumstances. A click each way and the results are dire.

Yep, I sure love that adjustability. Use it all the time.

It's a fawking gimmick. Buy the right shocks and call it good.

Steve.

It sounds more like you have an imbalance in your vehicle rather than a problem with the shocks if they're not stiff enough on their stiffest setting for the rear and you need to have them so soft at the front. It almost sounds like an IFS setup for dirt roads.

In general, leaf springs need lower shock valving rates than coils. This is because leaves have friction between the leaves, which does part of the job that a shock would normally do.

Some trucks with huge leaf spring packs with lots of leaves don't have shocks at all - the interleaf friction is enough.

If you have springs with very few leaves (or parabolic-type springs), your interleaf friction is closer to how a coil spring behaves, so you need stiffer shocks.

If your spring rates are already too stiff - which it sounds like they are - then adjustable shocks probably won't help. To see if they will, remove your rear shocks and drive around (carefully).

IMHO - I agree with Steve that the adjustable shocks are more a gimmick than anything else. I think some people with (too)soft flexy coils probably use them to improve on-road handling, and people who have moved their shocks inboard can crank them up to compensate, but apart from that...

Gwagensteve wrote:

BBM Rick wrote: the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!)

This is acutally the biggest problem I have with these things. NO responsible suspension engineer would possibly permit this range eof adjustment. The ability to make a car dangerously undrivable (or worse, have someone make it dangerously undriveable without your knowledge) is a major worry.

even correctly valved for the application, why on earth do you need 400% EACH WAY of valving adjustment in a shock? 20 or 30% would be all that's required even ifyou were swapping springs when you adjusted the shocks. It's just stupid.

On my Gwagen, my rear RS9000's are about 20% too soft for the application when turned all the way up (they are 5 speeds, not later 9 speeds) and it's loose but OK on the highway. At 4 it's VERY loose and suiltable only low range, and at three you can't drive the car. I've never gone below 3.

On the front I'm on 2 under all circumstances. A click each way and the results are dire.

Yep, I sure love that adjustability. Use it all the time.

It's a fawking gimmick. Buy the right shocks and call it good.

Steve.

Yes, I guess that is why they are the best selling shock in the country, because they are so dangerous.

sorry guys but tuff dog are crap. they are a over rated and crap . ive had them in a patrol and within the year they had leaked and now i have 600 of crap sitting beside my shed .

BBM Rick wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

BBM Rick wrote: the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!)

This is acutally the biggest problem I have with these things. NO responsible suspension engineer would possibly permit this range eof adjustment. The ability to make a car dangerously undrivable (or worse, have someone make it dangerously undriveable without your knowledge) is a major worry.

even correctly valved for the application, why on earth do you need 400% EACH WAY of valving adjustment in a shock? 20 or 30% would be all that's required even ifyou were swapping springs when you adjusted the shocks. It's just stupid.

On my Gwagen, my rear RS9000's are about 20% too soft for the application when turned all the way up (they are 5 speeds, not later 9 speeds) and it's loose but OK on the highway. At 4 it's VERY loose and suiltable only low range, and at three you can't drive the car. I've never gone below 3.

On the front I'm on 2 under all circumstances. A click each way and the results are dire.

Yep, I sure love that adjustability. Use it all the time.

It's a fawking gimmick. Buy the right shocks and call it good.

Steve.

Yes, I guess that is why they are the best selling shock in the country, because they are so dangerous.

sorry to say mate, but that doesnt mean jack shyte,

windows vista biggest selling also, but its the biggest bucket of custard, buggy, slow, crashes, freezes........


Jes

Your right Jes, but my point was that to say that they are dangerous is just silly. That is all.

BBM Rick wrote:Your right Jes, but my point was that to say that they are dangerous is just silly. That is all.

i dont agree they are dangerous ( because of the adjustment )
the adjustability is great, like all great car and bike shocks:)

they just have to sort the issues they have with the seals.

Jes

Slunnie wrote: It sounds more like you have an imbalance in your vehicle rather than a problem with the shocks if they're not stiff enough on their stiffest setting for the rear and you need to have them so soft at the front. It almost sounds like an IFS setup for dirt roads.

I didn't really want to go into the specifics of my setup because it's not really applicable to this thread.

I have a lifted Gwagen and my rear shock fitment was as recommended by the Rancho distributor based on length and configuration. They did (do?) not sell shocks based on valving, only on fitment. They use the 800% figure as a blanket saying "of course they will work on your car, there's an 800% adjustment. This is not the case.

I ingored the Rancho recommendation for the front of my car ( luckily, because they recommended the same shock be used as in the rear, but upside down) and chose a different shock, which is much more suitably valved for the application.

My vehicle has basically stock spring rates - I'm about 10% over stock front and rear. he imbalance is in the widely variable valving in the Rancho product across part #'s which is not publicsed, and the fact that there is just too much adjustability in the shocks, a problem shared with the tough dogs AFAIK.

Even with 9 steps in the controls, that's 89% per step. Ask a suspension engineer how your car will be if you reduce the damping by 90% They'll laugh at you.

Also, please don't confuse popularity with the performance or quality of the product.

Steve.

BBM Rick wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

BBM Rick wrote: the difference in rate from softest and hardest is something like 800%!!)

This is acutally the biggest problem I have with these things. NO responsible suspension engineer would possibly permit this range eof adjustment. The ability to make a car dangerously undrivable (or worse, have someone make it dangerously undriveable without your knowledge) is a major worry.

even correctly valved for the application, why on earth do you need 400% EACH WAY of valving adjustment in a shock? 20 or 30% would be all that's required even ifyou were swapping springs when you adjusted the shocks. It's just stupid.

On my Gwagen, my rear RS9000's are about 20% too soft for the application when turned all the way up (they are 5 speeds, not later 9 speeds) and it's loose but OK on the highway. At 4 it's VERY loose and suiltable only low range, and at three you can't drive the car. I've never gone below 3.

On the front I'm on 2 under all circumstances. A click each way and the results are dire.

Yep, I sure love that adjustability. Use it all the time.

It's a fawking gimmick. Buy the right shocks and call it good.

Steve.

Yes, I guess that is why they are the best selling shock in the country, because they are so dangerous.

and Australia has one of the largets population of sheep...not the woolen kind either.

Serg

I have just spent the last 20 minutes on the phone with Simon from Tough Dog.
Simon said to me and I quote,

"If any customer has a genuine failure, we will cover it. Always have, always will. The biggest drama we see are folks doing silly things like running huge coils spacers (which can cause the shock to "top out" and damage the internals), running their shocks without a black cover, and the classic one is overspray on the shock shaft! If you have damaged or lost your black cover, Tough Dog will always replace them, free of charge. Always have, always will. Given the lack of shocks we see coming back for leaking seals, I can only guess that people are not returning them for warranty claims. I urge anyone with a real issue to call me nd ask for me directly. I will bend over backwards to help you out."

To me, you simply cant ask for more than that. So all of you guys who are reporting failures, why not call Simon and see if he can help you out?

Rick.

BBM Rick wrote:I have just spent the last 20 minutes on the phone with Simon from Tough Dog.
Simon said to me and I quote,

"If any customer has a genuine failure, we will cover it. Always have, always will. The biggest drama we see are folks doing silly things like running huge coils spacers (which can cause the shock to "top out" and damage the internals), running their shocks without a black cover, and the classic one is overspray on the shock shaft! If you have damaged or lost your black cover, Tough Dog will always replace them, free of charge. Always have, always will. Given the lack of shocks we see coming back for leaking seals, I can only guess that people are not returning them for warranty claims. I urge anyone with a real issue to call me nd ask for me directly. I will bend over backwards to help you out."

To me, you simply cant ask for more than that. So all of you guys who are reporting failures, why not call Simon and see if he can help you out?

Rick.

that black cover is another issue unto itself.
they should just put on a boot like the rancho's.

Jes

thats true jessie the black cover on the shocks are crap . most people cut them off . i know of alot of people that the black dust cap scrapes the out side of the shock and scratches it and the rear one gets caught in the coil and breaks . in my case i didnt like them once they failed and never want to run them again so i didnt worry about warranty . i know of a few more people who have done the same

in24bn wrote:thats true jessie the black cover on the shocks are crap . most people cut them off . i know of alot of people that the black dust cap scrapes the out side of the shock and scratches it and the rear one gets caught in the coil and breaks . in my case i didnt like them once they failed and never want to run them again so i didnt worry about warranty . i know of a few more people who have done the same

The rubber ones like on a Rancho hold the mud and grit in. Grit is the seals worst enemy.
The black guards are not the best, but they do protect the shaft from nicks and scratches, again, the leading cause of seal failure. If you damage your guard, call TD for a replacement.

Both my rear black guards on my Tough Dogs got ripped apart by exhaust pipe/coils and/or ripped through at the top and slid down the shock.

I have left them off as they give me the sh1z big time
If there are rubber boots for them, I'd take 4

Gwagensteve wrote:

Slunnie wrote: It sounds more like you have an imbalance in your vehicle rather than a problem with the shocks if they're not stiff enough on their stiffest setting for the rear and you need to have them so soft at the front. It almost sounds like an IFS setup for dirt roads.

I didn't really want to go into the specifics of my setup because it's not really applicable to this thread.

I have a lifted Gwagen and my rear shock fitment was as recommended by the Rancho distributor based on length and configuration. They did (do?) not sell shocks based on valving, only on fitment. They use the 800% figure as a blanket saying "of course they will work on your car, there's an 800% adjustment. This is not the case.

I ingored the Rancho recommendation for the front of my car ( luckily, because they recommended the same shock be used as in the rear, but upside down) and chose a different shock, which is much more suitably valved for the application.

My vehicle has basically stock spring rates - I'm about 10% over stock front and rear. he imbalance is in the widely variable valving in the Rancho product across part #'s which is not publicsed, and the fact that there is just too much adjustability in the shocks, a problem shared with the tough dogs AFAIK.

Even with 9 steps in the controls, that's 89% per step. Ask a suspension engineer how your car will be if you reduce the damping by 90% They'll laugh at you.

Also, please don't confuse popularity with the performance or quality of the product.

Steve.

I'm not sure why you're responding to me saying not to confuse popularity with performance or quality of the product. I think the Rancho is a shit shock in terms of durability and that they were only ever popular due to the sizings available. I also don't believe that they adjust by 800% to be honest, or if it does, then that is based on a super soft softest setting. I know thats the claim, but the claim does not even remotely correlate with my bum shock dyno. As much as I hate Ranchos and actually any foam cell shock these days, as you've been doing, they are a good shock for setting up suspension and adjusting shocks to get the ride, traction levels and balance that you want - as opposed to being given. If you're using it, then it has value, irrespective of the range.

Have you guys considered Boss adjustable shocks. The adjusters have been re designed, they are a bit softer on compression then Tough Dogs and are available in a lot more lengths from shorter to longer then the Tough Dogs and they cost less.

Here are some of the lengths availble in eye to eye. All these lengths are also available in pin pin an eye pin etc and in large and small pins and eyes. More lengths will be available over time.

1058
617

904
540

828
502

748
462

728
452

713
444

694
435

653
414

646
411

628
402

Cheers
Shane

GeeUte wrote:Im looking at putting these in the back of a GU leaf sprung ute to try and combat the rough ride.

Currently it has EFS elite's in there with most of the leafs removed.

How do the Tough Dogs go ?

Would adjusting them to a softer setting help the ride in the ute ?

Cheers.

Back to the beginning. We have often found that harder is better with leaf springs to get a softer ride.

If the shock is firmer then the leaf doesn't get a chance to hit the bottom of the cycle with full force so you don't get the immediate and violent halt to momemtum and then the immediate and equally violent rebound.

A softer landing makes for a more comfortable ride, even though you the ride is a bit harsher on the small road undulations.

Shane

How much do the Boss adjustables sell for mate ?

Im willing to try anything to get a softer ride with out the engineering and paperwork headache of 5 link conversion.