[jamgood96]

Me and Pontiac were talking about shock lengths and I sent him this link below:

http://www.rockcrawler.com/techreports/korkyshocks/index.html

They have 9012's running in a cantilever(sp?) setup. He points out it only looks like there's 4inch of travel. If this is true, what's the point of running that long of shock? The axle will droop great, but what about compression? Is it even worth it? What about the cantilever(sp?) setup?

Now search friendly!

 

[pontiac58]

What i meant was that the shocks can only travel up four inches. So maybe the axle travel 6 inches. I know with my sua 4in lift that the rear moves more then that. It looks to me that the body of the shocks are too long. Maybe i wrong or maybe it is just the picture. If i am wrong someone help me out.

Can someone please bring me a hammer my 33's just ate my fender again. Damn i need more lift.

 

[260]

The shocks look right, maybe the guy has more droop than compression. You would have to take the jeep out and test it to make sure it worked right.

87 wrangler - 258

 

[pbmcauliffe]

Yes, a cantilever setup will give you more travel with a shorter shock. Look at the stock Jeep setup on older ones, they are angled towards the non shackle end, effectively increasing the travel. Four inches of shaft showing would get you about six inches or more inches of vertical travel depending on the angle (simple Geometry can tell you exactly). It does look somewhat limited in the phot of his uptravel, but on my CJ5 I had the 9012's vertically thru the tub with about six inches of shaft showing, and would start pushing tires into the inner side of the tub before they were and inch from bottoming out. With that setup I still had about seven inches of shock travel in the downwards direction.
In a simple answer, a cantilever setup (forwards or inwards) gives you more usable travel with a shorter shock.

pbm

ROLLED The 74 CJ5, so I am now building a 78 CJ7

Support Search and Rescue.......Get Lost! /wwwthreads_images/icons/shocked.gif