Raceland Dyno Test Results
12-06-2010, 12:32 AM
#81
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
We're literally comparing something equivalent to $9.99 Pep Boys OEM replacement shock mechanism to AST/JRZ/Moton's. Naturally, after all the work I put into getting the Xida's made for you guys, I bristle and the ill-informed inferring that these $10 shocks are "similar".
Reply
0
0
12-06-2010, 12:37 AM
#82
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
It sounds like the devil is in the details...particularly around that transition area and at low speeds. Also, as is often mentioned, monotubes are a bit like big brakes in their ability to dissipate heat. I wonder the Raceland twintubes would be better or worse with the big external tube cover (would it act as an insulator or a heat sink?)
A trailer bumpkin wanted to race me today in his broke-*** Grand Am. He had the same logic as you, "I wonder [if] the Grand Am would be better or worse with the side dump exhaust?"
Reply
0
0
12-06-2010, 11:52 AM
#90
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
I think the only comparison was the shape of the curve. The fronts as measured, look very similar to the shape of the Xidas at mid stiffness, the end.
All I know is that they are not digressive. Have dampening as you should expect for the spring rates in the front, have stock dampening in the rear, and have lot of hysteresis. that's about all i know.
All I know is that they are not digressive. Have dampening as you should expect for the spring rates in the front, have stock dampening in the rear, and have lot of hysteresis. that's about all i know.
Reply
0
0
12-06-2010, 06:01 PM
#94
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Fairfield, California
Posts: 436
Total Cats: -7
I'm mostly just playing with you, Jacob, but if you could get in there I don't think you'd find much to work with. I could be wrong, but I don't think I'd want to risk an eye to find out.
As Wannafbody points out in the Raceland Revealed thread over at Clubroadster, there are better solutions at a similar price. Funny how some of the boys over at CR didn't cotton well to that notion.
As Wannafbody points out in the Raceland Revealed thread over at Clubroadster, there are better solutions at a similar price. Funny how some of the boys over at CR didn't cotton well to that notion.
Reply
0
0
12-06-2010, 11:09 PM
#95
Newb
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24
Total Cats: 0
The idea of people buying this garbage and then spending as much money again on upper mounts, replacement rear springs, FCM bump stops, etc trying to make them serviceable is totally illogical, IMO. The idea of doing all that plus replacing the crap dampers with something decent...well, you'd finally have the performance, but I'm not sure that's going to make $$$ sense.
And why would you not used a GC sleeve? You just want your shock to weigh twice as much or something?
Sure my Illuminas w/GC cost 3x as much as Rocket Shocks, but I get a reliable shock from a real company (ie: they actually sent me dyno chart, I know their address, etc) a lifetime guarantee on springs that I actually know the rate of, and adjusters made from aluminum that has a very low chance of being filled with bubbles and crumbling to dust after a winter drive. The Rocket Shocks might be prettier, but that's about it.
Reply
0
0
12-07-2010, 07:27 AM
#98
Newb
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24
Total Cats: 0
He does have a point. There might be a reason the rebound is utter crap in the rear. That might be the best insert they could get in that size. Even a high performance shock made for that same application might still have a similar tendency.
Reply
0
0
