In a message dated 10/06/00 6:08:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
barrier@bconnex.net writes:
> I am a bit puzzled about tube shocks. If they are no better than the old
> Armstrongs why do the hot boy racers of MGs, who are after performance
> including road holding, prefer them? There are so many of these people who
> extol their virtues as against those who do not, that it sort of says
> something does it not?
I have no idea who you are talking about.
Everyone that I know that actually races an MG uses Armstrongs.
If you are talking about people who 'race' on the street, as your "hot boy
racers of MGs" all it probably says is that they will put anything flashy and
'neat' on their cars, but have no real way of actually testing whether they
work better or not.
If you are talking about actual road racers or slalom competitors, tell us
who you are referring to.
And as for the theoretical advantage you cite for tubes, first, the action of
a conventional tube _is_ linear just like a lever shock - it is simply fluid
being forced through a restricting device, (except for the 'gas' shock, which
does use a chamber to allow compression of gas, which does indeed result in
non-linear response.)
Second, just how long do you think your car sits at one height, gently
wavering within the very small dimension in which your theoretical Armstrong
fails to exhibit damping? In fact, the movement of the suspension on a normal
road is of such gross dimension, that any notional 'dead' spot is of no
actual consequence. I suppose if you set the thing up on a giant paint
shaker, and set the shaker to oscillate gently, so as not to displace the
suspension beyond the 'dead' range of the Armstrong, you might detect a
difference. Remind me to stay away from paint shakers!
For my race car, I hard chrome the shafts on new shocks, replace the seals
with better specced ones, and fit different valves. They will last more like
100,000 miles (not the 20,000 someone opined about), if kept properly filled.
BTW, I also race an all independent suspension car with tube shocks all
around, and so I think I have a pretty good basis for comparison, based on
actual track experience, though I fail to qualify on the middle aspect of
being a "hot boy racer" by a few years (used to be, though - got my CASC
licence at 21).
Many problems wrongly attributed to shocks turn out to be incorrect spring
rates, or something else.
BTW, there are some very real limitations on lever shocks, but nothing that
causes problems in normal use. They are not, for instance, nearly as good at
dissipating excess heat as a modified, finned tube shock can be. So if you
are heading for Baja to do some serious off road work in your MGB, I would
start looking for a tube conversion ;-)
Bill
|