Moparts

More shock discussion

Posted By: tboomer

More shock discussion - 12/09/13 12:58 PM

I got to thinking about all of this talk about front shocks. My 64 is just a bracket car that I would like to keep around a 10.0 or so. My CE 90/10s are going on 14 years old so I think it is time to replace them! I don't think I need a 500 dollar shock. So I am leaning towards a QA or Afco shock. What do you guys like and if possible how about a part number? Thanks!! Ted
Posted By: 1967dartgt

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:34 PM

At 9.90 or slower you can use a calvert front shock. Worked great on my car till I turned up the wick. If you get a adjustable shock you are going adjust it to basically a 90/10 shock any way.
Posted By: tboomer

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:36 PM

Thanks! The reason I was looking into the Afco or QA 1 is that Summit will soon have their big sale...
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:40 PM

Ted I run Strange stuts on the front of both the P-
body and the Rampage... rears on the P are QA-1 and
Strange rears on the Rampage.. all of them are adjustable
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:45 PM

Quote:

Thanks! The reason I was looking into the Afco or QA 1 is that Summit will soon have their big sale...




The Calverts are not adjustable but work well... I
prefer ajustable shocks if you race different tracks...
the Afco is a little better than the QA-1 if you ask
some people... I'm VERY happy with the old QA-1s on
the rear of the P-Body.. they are the old 12 click
but they dont make them any more
Posted By: tboomer

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:50 PM

Mike...I have the Alstons on the back.
Posted By: MR_P_BODY

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:56 PM

Quote:

Mike...I have the Alstons on the back.




I never tried them so I dont know anything about them..
I assume they are from Alston Chassis... so someone
built them for them.. but I have on idea who
Posted By: tboomer

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 02:58 PM

Yes..They are the Vari-Shocks..
Posted By: TheOtherDodge

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 04:33 PM

Ted, if it's working for you, stick with it! And if you decided to not upgrade, I have a set of 3 way adjustables that I took off the front and replaced with QA1's if you want them. The are eye/stud style but not sure of the ext/collapsed length but can check for you if you are interested.
Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 05:56 PM

Quote:

I got to thinking about all of this talk about front shocks. My 64 is just a bracket car that I would like to keep around a 10.0 or so. My CE 90/10s are going on 14 years old so I think it is time to replace them! I don't think I need a 500 dollar shock. So I am leaning towards a QA or Afco shock. What do you guys like and if possible how about a part number? Thanks!! Ted




At 14 years old I`d be amazed if they were working properly unless there`s little time/passes on em and the Calvert fixed 90-10`s work well so far but I too am leaning towards a single adj. up ft. and doubles in the rear...........
Posted By: Al_Alguire

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 06:08 PM

VariShocks like others out there use Koni valving. They are pretty decent pieces from what I have seen.
Posted By: dartman366

Re: More shock discussion - 12/09/13 06:55 PM

Quote:

VariShocks like others out there use Koni valving. They are pretty decent pieces from what I have seen.


I have heard the same thing about the vari-shock,,I personally run the QA-1's double adjustable on the rear and singles on the front, I have been curious about using doubles on the front and if it would be worth the extra money.
Posted By: Leigh

Re: More shock discussion - 12/10/13 03:23 AM

Quote:

At 9.90 or slower you can use a calvert front shock. Worked great on my car till I turned up the wick. If you get a adjustable shock you are going adjust it to basically a 90/10 shock any way.




I agree with this, with an exception. Bump valving is key. Hal Lees told me years ago, a steel bodied, oem type shock, can't absorb the loading seen on a wheelstand landing. The internal valving will "freak out" (how he described it), and blow by, letting the car crash down. He had a hand in the original 90/10 shock design. I have experienced this "freak out" valving first hand. I would go with Afco, QA1, or Strange doubles, just to have the extra tuneability, and a real adjustable shock, instead of an oem body, with their inherent limitations.
Posted By: 493_DART

Re: More shock discussion - 12/10/13 04:07 AM

I would leave the old CE on...

I have the Calverts---the extension on them vs any other standard 90/10 shock is WAYYY more loose.

I "pull tested" them on the bench....my old Summits were kind of difficult to pull apart..... the calverts pull out EASY and fast.
Posted By: tboomer

Re: More shock discussion - 12/10/13 01:34 PM

Thanks,guys! These pull out easy and fast! I think too fast!
Posted By: hemi-itis

Re: More shock discussion - 12/11/13 03:24 AM

I'm in shock shock right now myself.I need to upgrade my shocks this winter.
At what ET,speed or HP do you need to step up to the Santhoff shock??? I'm kinds liking the Vi-king da's
Posted By: loaderpro

Re: More shock discussion - 12/11/13 08:21 AM

Harcourt (Hal) Lees is the man responsible for a lot of technology in the shock world. Yes he had a hand in the first 90/10. Did a stint with Koni Americas and the then Alston Engineering and developed the Koni 82 series SPA-1 valving for drag racing. Had his own shock company, AVO USA, which later became Hals Shocks, which was bought out by QA-1 whom also bought out Carrera. Left QA 1, went back to work for Chris Alston (Chassis Works) and helped them design and build the Varishock, Which incidently are manufactured and built in house at Chassisworks. So when you say "Koni valving" That is all Hal Lees! The last I heard he was doing business as Hal Lees Enterprise (performance shock rebuilding and sales) in Palm City Fla.

Attached picture 7955064-pomona.jpg
Posted By: Irun5snd8th

Re: More shock discussion - 12/12/13 05:01 AM

90/10's and loose front shocks are not always the best thing. What happens is when you run them that loose you get all the hit all at once and when the shock tops out it can unload the tires. Cars often benefit from stiffer shock settings on the front rather than all the way loose like is commonly thought for the reason stated above. Especially on big power cars this is often true. Good shocks are also velocity sensitive, meaning that the faster they move, the more they absorb with the valving. And the valving on the compression side is equally important. When you the car lands it needs to absorb the weight coming down so as not to hit and unload the rear tires. Any car that lands from a wheelie hard enough to bounce the front tires back up in the air is a perfect example of this. If you had a data logger on one of these cars you would see increased driveshaft speed as the front end lands. Go watch a round of Super Stock and watch how many of the really good cars land and just touch and stick the front end. Violent launching and landing looks cool but typically is not fast nor consistent.
Posted By: tboomer

Re: More shock discussion - 12/15/13 04:26 PM

Thanks to dvw(Doug) for the part number!!
© 2024 Moparts Forums