Jump to content

Dirt Drags...


bkabina

Recommended Posts

I have tried both. I think the strut works much better. I have 1.5 short times on dirt with the strut and 1.7 with the shock ( Marvin Shaw). I have tried the shock at different pressures and it never got better. The wieght transfer was just really bad. The stock shock is even worse than the Marvin. I spin real bad with the stock shock. My motor is a 85 horse GRR Alky drag motor on a GRR suspended drag chassis running 4.40's on dirt. But the results were pretty much the same with the stock frame. Now I have heard of some people modifying the rear Marvin so there is a minimum of travel and it works real well. They let out all of the nitrogen then fill it with oil so the shock only has a inch or so of travel. Then you fill it back up with 600-900psi of nitrogen. I have heard real good things about this setup and will try it this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well what works best for me is a stock shock tied down almost all the way leave about 3-4 in of travel and you will come out of the whole like a rocket but the reason people use strut so h.p. an torque get to the ground faster but with a banshee stock tied down works better than strut cause they have so much wheel spin a 250r or lt500 dont have that much wheel spin and thus is why they use struts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

One thing to consider also is that a strutted rear end is much more consistant than a shock. The quad will react the same each time during the launch as far as the suspension is concerned. It essentially takes one of the changing variables out of the equation. As a shock begins to heat from multiple runs, it's motion will change as far as compression and rebound speed. A solid vs. suspended rear end will require different set ups in tire selection and/or tire pressure to achieve optimum launch at the line.

 

Lightninn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I run a 565 10 mm w/ a +12 and marvin shaw shock....I don't see any one who runs those goofy struts at any tracks In MI except for asphault. I do know that your bike needs weight transfer coming out of the hole on dirt and sand and there is no way that a strut will do that. So i see no advantage to running a strut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO...AlcoholBanshee and Lightninn2 are right on.

 

I do know that your bike needs weight transfer coming out of the hole on dirt and sand and there is no way that a strut will do that.

 

Think about it....both a strut and a shock transfer the SAME amount of weight...why wouldn`t they? The main variable involved is the amount of TIME that it takes to transfer this weight.

 

With a strut, the weight transfer is instantaneous...(and consistant every time)

 

With a shock (depending on valving/settings/rider weight...and so on) it takes TIME to reach 100% of the weight transfer. And yet another thing to keep in mind, ALL shocks have some kind of rebound to them (otherwise they would`nt be a shock) and at one point or another that rebounding effect is going to try and do just the opposite of what you are trying to acheive with weight transfer.

 

I`m not saying a shock is bad.....just different, and before you knock a strut...try it.

 

I ran with a strut last season, on dirt, and in the latter part of the season, managed a consistent high 1.4 second 0-60`.

 

As Lightninn2 said.....it`s in the SETUP !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...