greddygalant

iTrader: (3)

Little update. Here are some shock dynos performed on a set of singles by an independent party. Also shown for comparison are shock dynos from some Moton triples. These are undoctored unlike 99.9% of the shock dynos you see online. Notice the consistency of the MCS. I'll let the dynos speak for themselves but if you have questions just ask.



Force vs. Absolute Velocity. Multiple runs ok various dampening settings.



Force vs. Displacement



Force vs. velocity

Now the motons for comparison



Force vs. Displacement



Force vs. velocity

curly

iTrader: (25)

Was this a local company that did the testing?

Very consistent, I like it. Maybe one day I'll try a set.

Until then, we have more testing to do...

Xida coilovers Miata

turbofan

iTrader: (1)

Josh, did that mean you've bought Xidas?
<br />
<br />Would definitely like to see a back to back comparison of those setups.

curly

iTrader: (25)

No, I just think it'd be really interesting to compare these MCS who everyone talks about to Xidas, which all the Miata guys talk about.

aidandj

iTrader: (5)

<p>Has anyone done a back to back yet?</p><p>Or even just drove both of them for a decent amount of time?</p><p>Martin have you drove Xidas? Richard was on them right? Were those gen1's or 2s</p>

greddygalant

iTrader: (3)

I've driven both gens of xida. Gen 2 only on the street. Gen 1 only on track.
They just aren't as consistent as the mcs nor do they ride as well on the street with big rates. I'll have a xida shock dyno sometime next week. Same dyno

aidandj

iTrader: (5)

<p>cool cool.</p><p>I'm going to try to work out some funds to get the feals either this winter or next, then we could do back to back to back testing.</p>

Savington

iTrader: (31)

Are the MCS shocks valved digressively? I don't see that in the charts.

turbofan

iTrader: (1)

<p>Yes indeed we will have a back to back test soon.</p><p>Is dynoing a shock hard on it? I wouldn't imagine it is but I know pretty much nothing about the process.</p>

aidandj

iTrader: (5)

<p>If you zoom in on the first graph it looks like they are. I think the scale is just adding fuckery to it. Most shock dynos don't go that far to the right.</p>

aidandj

iTrader: (5)

<p>It just goes in a machine that applies force to it, no harder than being on the track.</p><p> </p>

90civichhb

iTrader: (5)

What is the cost difference between the MCS in a similar trim (DAs, spring options, ect.) as Xidas?

hornetball

iTrader: (4)

They look linear to slightly progressive to me.

I dunno' about that. The velocity scale above only goes to 5"/sec. The one from Emilio's website goes all the way out to 9"/sec -- although the force units are cut-off for some reason. https://www.miataturbo.net/suspensio...1/#post1126295

emilio700

iTrader: (3)

The MCS plot published above are not digressive. Indeed, slightly progressive on the stiffer settings as Hornetball pointed out. Baffling valving choice overall for a Miata based on my experience. Polar opposite of Xidas.

aidandj

iTrader: (5)

<p><s>MCS are 3k without tophats or springs.</s></p><p>I misunderstood an earlier conversation. Correct answer below.</p>

greddygalant

iTrader: (3)

MCS are 2650 without tophats or springs

turbofan

iTrader: (1)

<p>^ right. $3k with tophats and springs, correct?</p>

Savington

iTrader: (31)

That's not what a $3000 shock absorber's dyno charts should look like, IMO.

stormin'norman

iTrader: (2)

Seems like it would be valuable for someone to provide a description of how each shock would feel/perform vs. one another for a user in layman's terms instead of saying shock X is better than Y because of Dyno graph Z.

Not everyone is a shock engineer or well versed in the art but these are both easily accessible suspensions allowing a wide range of users to quickly acquire and drive. Or maybe it's just me that would find that reading useful.

For record.. MCS 1wnr owner and very happy. Seat time on Xida gen 1's which were also very impressive but didn't blow me away for some reason. Again, my butt is not calibrated for high end suspensions so my comments mean near zilch.

Savington

iTrader: (31)

****, I've typed this post three times and the website keeps eating it. Something about the > and < signs is ******* it up.

Speaking generally, you can break it up into LESS THAN 3in/sec and MORE THAN 3in/sec

Below 3in/sec is what you feel when you turn the wheel, brake, etc. The shocks are damping driver inputs at low-speed. You want a fair amount of firmness here to ensure the car feels firm and planted when you turn into a corner or hit the brakes. Too little valving here and the car feels like a sloppy mess.

Above 3in/sec is where the shocks are damping potholes, curbs, road imperfections. You want enough force to control the rapid compression of the spring, but not so much that the shock applies a bunch of that force to the chassis. Too much valving here and the car crashes over curbs and the chassis gets upset.

This is like 75 words on a topic which people write books about on a regular basis, so keep that in mind.

Here's what I want my shock dyno to look like at that price point. I have $3100 into the shocks on Rover, which were originally gen1 XIDAs that were then upgraded by HVT to include digressive rebound pistons. Compare to the MCE charts and draw your own conclusions.