Rear Pushrod Damper Setup...........

[SoSideways]

Friend just showed this to me...

http://www.fatcatfabrication.com/id3.html

I don't know, seems like a good idea, just not implemented very well...

The bolts that mount the canisters seem kinda small, plus the blue bar is only tied to the strut towers and not any other part of the chassis, so wouldn't it flex?

Looks flimsy...

Thoughts?

[a_ahmed]

I found these a few months back and posted right away... ppl dissed. Meh...

I said "think of the possibilities" but people said boo. Ohlin TTX possibility anyone? These are bike shocks... but yeah... looks pretty at least.

It has its flaws as you've mentioned but the effort is there... No reviews from people.

[Def]

Under-engineered POS.

[SoSideways]

That's what I was thinking.

There aren't any bracing, and the hardware look weak.

Def got any ideas to improve that POS? lol

[RBbugBITme]

Def got any ideas to improve that POS? lol

Plenty but not really worth it until you can figure out the front as well.

[jmauld]

Plenty but not really worth it until you can figure out the front as well.

That's what I'm thinking. This setup does nothing to address the rear tire lifting, which seems to be the biggest problem that we have with the rear suspension.

For the best results, focus on the front of the car.

[Umai Kakudo]

Scrap the silly idea entirely.

There is absolutely no reason to add all those components or complexity unless you had a really legitimate reason to need a variable rate motion ratio for your damper travel.

The only other reason I can thing of is if you scored some pimptasitc short travel race dampers and needed to convert the motion ratio to make them work.









Still too much action for not enough payback. At that point you'd be better making a brand new rear suspension to fix all the geometry issues and then your back to the point you should just buy a different car.

[Def]

Def got any ideas to improve that POS? lol

There is nothing wrong with the stock rear shock placement. I wouldn't go through the trouble, increase the rear CG, and use some POS "whatever they could find" hardware tossed together.

At least the stock setup has some engineering behind it I can be confident in.

[stewiefied]

Main problem i see is that almost everyone building a budget 240 track car has rules and regulations to follow. And if you have the budget to be in a class that allows inboard suspension, you most likely have the money and time to make a better setup.

[SoSideways]

Eh... just an interesting setup that I came across.

I knew it wasn't a very good one just by looking at it, and was just wondering if there are ways to make it work better with some reasonable tweaks.... but there's not, so no biggie.

I'm with Def on this one... nothing wrong with the stock placement of shocks and arms.

[RBbugBITme]

The only other reason I can thing of is if you scored some pimptasitc short travel race dampers and needed to convert the motion ratio to make them work.

If I were to go through with this project I'd be looking for higher motion ratios, not lower like the short travel race dampers you put pics up of would need. Those go on Formula and Prototype cars that require very little wheel travel.

[Def]

If I were to go through with this project I'd be looking for higher motion ratios, not lower like the short travel race dampers you put pics up of would need. Those go on Formula and Prototype cars that require very little wheel travel.

And AFAIK, most Formula cars use a higher motion ratio rather than a reduction in motion ratio with their pushrod setups. They have super low wheel movement, which translates into a little more damper movement so it can control the wheels better.

[RBbugBITme]

Oh geez, I totally mispoke! I meant that Formula cars have small wheel movement which allows for a smaller shock even when they have high motion ratios. It wouldn't be possible to use short stroke fancy race shocks on a 240sx unless you were also intentionally limiting the wheel movement to something like +/- 1".