Adjustable Vs Conventional Shocks

Hi Hero,

I had a 1988 Toyota 4Runner with IFS front/Leaf rear.When I bought the truck I fitted OME leafs and 4 OME shocks. This was a vast improvement over the factory setup. When the shocks finally clapped out after about 120000k's I fitted Rancho 9000 shocks. For the first 6 months these shocks drove me completely nuts as I would find myself constantly tweeking the adjustments looking for the ultimate ride. I finally found a setting I was happy with by dialing a setting between the detents, i.e between 2 & 3. This gives you a much greater range then just the 5 stage adjustment. But I will admit that the final ride comfort I expected was not obtained, and I put this down to the 4Runner's suspension setup and not the performance of the shocks. I now have a 100 series 'Cruiser that is still on it's factory springs/shocks and at the moment I'm happy with the on road ride comfort. Haven't had the chance to take it off road yet, I've only had it a couple of weeks. Would I put Rancho 9000's on it? To be honest, I'm undecided. They are more expensive, and past experience has not convinced me (not to blame the Rancho's). I guess I would be looking to test drive my type of vehicle with them fitted before I decide. Time to hit the clubs...

I have Rancho 9x's and when the incab kit works, theres nothing better...

The ability to turn your car into a sports car or a marshmallow rules. Just wish someone made quality incab ajustable shocks. My compressor died in weeks, and I've heard of lots of them doing it.

In my opinion,,,,,, i have used rancho recently on a rough trip of about 11000kms on all types of roads at all sorts of speeds and i am still wondering what all the fuss is about with having lots of settings because it didnt do much for me..... I feel the most important thing is to have the correct shocker travel with a quality shocker..... We have enough things to think about let alone rootin around with the novelty of having shocker settings which make a difference which would have to be measured on a poofteenth scale.......

But thats my opinion only.... _____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

I have a set of the 9x's aswell and found on a recent trip to landcruiser mountain that my road settings for the shocks of 7 in front and 8 in back were too harsh for rough tracks. I turned them right down to 1 all round and the landcruiser just soaked it all up. There is a huge difference in the settings although it is hard to tell the difference between just changing it one or two settings around. I would like the in car adjuster to make life easier but have heard a lot of reliability probs so will just take the 30 secs to get out and change them for now.

good luck,

Charlie

This is my theory and I would be interested in other opinions.
Shock absorbers stop the spring from oscilatting.
The rougher the road the more the spring oscillates.
The more the spring oscillates the more the shock absorber works.
The more the shock absorber works the hotter it gets.
The hotter it gets the more likely it is to fail.

In Australia there is a wide variation of road surfaces.
A shock absorber set firmish for smooth roads for good cornering will have to work bloody hard on the CSR. A none adjustable shock absorber will be less able to cope with all road surfaces.
With good quality shock absorbers wound back a little for rougher roads (I can suffer a little wallow) they will work less hard, get less hot and fail less.

On the CSR a couple of months ago we met up with 6 vehicles with failed shock absorbers. 5 OME and another non adjustable Rancho model.
Always carry spare shock absorbers on such a remote trip.

Mike

Sounds like GSXR suzuki motorbikes. Just cos you can adjust it doesnt mean u need to or should. A lot of the tiems there's no need.

in cabin adjustability is good, but with the failure rate I just bought standard shocks.

Remember Springs are gonna have more impact on ride than shocks anyway......