Thanks again Dave:
Leaving out the cost issue for now, there are primarily two groups of people
who have responded to me on this question.
1. Road drivers. General consensus is that for the road the lever shocks
are as good or possibly better riding than telescoping shocks. If both are
in good, non leaking shape. (Remember there are list members who will
guarantee non-leaking shocks, right Peter>).
2. Race drivers: General feeling (is there ever really a consensus on a mail
list?) is that tube shocks will give better handling, and thus will give
better performance. Most in this group have agreed that seat of the pants
reasoning is good enuf. One can simply feel "better performance" so no proof
is needed.
I am in the first group, and I agree with most of the emails that have
recommended that I stay with (possibly uprated valves on the) lever arm
shock. They are quite inexpensive, can be easily worked on and they work
very well.
For those in the second group I have a question. If you were to change
camshafts to a more aggressive lift and duration, would you not expect to
see some facts on how much horsepower has increased on previous engine
conversions to the new cam? If I were a racer, the answer would be yes, but
that is me.
I really don't want to beat this to death (have we already??) so I won't
post to the list on this subject anymore. But feel free to contact me off
list if needed.
Thanks to all for the philosophical discussion...
Kind regards..
Tim
'69 MGBGT
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Hill" <Davhill@btinternet.com>
To: "Tim Economu" <economu@whidbey.com>; "MG List" <mgs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: Tube shock conversion data
> Hi, Tim-you're welcome.
>
>
> > Thanks Dave for the feedback.
> >
> > I don't think there was any question about being able to feel
different
> > amounts of damping. The question was is there a better ride or
> performance
> > increase by changing to tube shocks?
>
> I take the point but how do you quantify a 'better ride' other than by
feel?
> Short of rigging a car with all manner of accelerometers and motion
sensors
> for comparative readings, I can't see any other method.
>
> Ones that could be quantified, objectively rather than subjectively. What
> may be "way too firm" for you
> many be just right for me. But information like "It took me 4min 30 secs
> averaged over 3 runs with the Koni's and 4 min 20 secs (okay I am giving
the
> levers the advantage--but just hypothetically mind you) with the Armstrong
> lever shocks. Both in good condition. Track was at < you fill in here>".
> This would be indisputable and would be fact. Also might prove that the
two
> shocks types are closer in actual track performance than one might think.
> (Or not). It might just end up being a pure matter of taste. Whether you
> "like" the ride of a certain shock or not.
>
> Again, point taken and this would be an interesting exercise. However, I
> think you would find a car giving the best track performance would not
> necessarily be acceptable for even fast road use. This is naturally a
highly
> subjective matter but it would be equally interesting to see if anyone
> actually does use a track car on the road as well.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Hill
>
>
|