One of the main things often overlooked is the added travel one would gain in the rear of the car with removing the compression assembly from the bottom of the shock. These cars already have limited travel, so freeing up that travel (IMO) is something of added benefit.

Personally, I'm at the opinion that 2WR valving is better than 2WNR. 2WNR graphs from what I've seen are just not desirable for my application. Stratcaster outlined it pretty well. If you have dyno's from your shocks - I'd like to compare against mine. Mine are not OE builds anymore, they have been rebuilt to reduce initial nose-in with revalving and coated pistons because one of the main issues you pointed out - dramatic range of valving is not preferred. I'd rather have 10 usable clicks for my given spring rate and setup vs 2

Finally, something often overlooked but 2WRs have a schrader valve which allows for gas pressure adjustments via a N2 bottle. Changing gas pressure can help fine tune setups onsite.


Just IMO/YMMV - I simply was stating if you're spending that amount of money, it may be worth saving up a bit more for some stuff that I think is of added benefit.

Setup - 400/350, 17x9, AO52s (I just picked up some scrub R7s for HPDEs). Non-Aero since I'm still legal STX setup but I'll be doing TT this year.

FWIW - My laps at Mid-Ohio Club Course in Oct (50F ambient) on BFG Rivals were 2 seconds quicker than an AER FRS w/Aero when they ran in September. I think we can all agree driver mod will make any shock platform work /shrug

I have Bilsteins, not OEM dampers. It was implied that Bilsteins do not have adequate longevity. The set on my car has been in service for quite some time and was still competitive with new Bilsteins throughout the season. Type and age of tires is a much bigger deal in terms of competitiveness.

Obviously, the car would be less competitive if the dampers are worn. The car would also be faster with higher end dampers that are rebuilt every season, but I don't have the resources for that.

Bilsteins make a good starting point for others with limited resources and it's unlikely that the service life is shorter than more expensive options. They are certainly adequate for the casual track day participant or even uses beyond that.

I am of the belief that any damper, whether a BC Racing, Tein, JRZ, or Penske, or any other brand, should be serviced every 25-50 performance driving hours or 30k miles, because they will ALL be compromised by then.

It's an unfortunate consequence of having such a short body in the rear of the car, and even with remote reservoirs, will still cause the rear to degrade quickly.

This is shock oil from a auto-x only car, that was only driven for 2 seasons. New oil is bright amber.

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...b0&oe=5E8FFA77.

Where can I find them so cheap?

Your local facebook buy/sell group for 86's.

Just from my rebuild service - 2 years on the car and 10k miles approximately.

Front guide shafts were worn and shaft had lateral play in the shock body. Minor, but it was present.

The rears, surprisingly were in better conditions. The shims were all in good condition. By MCS's estimate, maybe a year or two longer I could have ran the shocks - but they recommended the guide shafts replaced at that time anyways (which I obviously did)

Do the remotes give you more rear travel in CS/DS or only STX?

CS/DS Legal shocks are 1" longer than STX Shocks that are a smaller shock body. So technically you have additional travel already built into the shock itself for CS/DS. Since you're not lowering the car at all and maintaining OE ride height, it's not as critical to free up additional travel as it probably won't be used.

So, yes - you'll have additional travel still since you're removing the compression out from the bottom of the shock. However, the shock body is already longer so it may be something you never utilize anyways.

I'm kind of looking at TRD springs - basically debating whether to be underprepared for STX or in the wrong car for CS (or do nothing and stay DS). I don't really care about the competitive aspect but if stock shocks on TRD springs means no rear travel then that'll be a pain for a DD on New York roads. The car as it is rides pretty well on the stock base 2020 suspension.

I can't really imagine not giving up travel if you went to the TRD springs with stock length shocks. The SSC setup certainly compromises rear travel.

Street ride generally isn't bad in an SSC car, but there are some expansion joints on I-40 east of me and also some washboarded intersections in town that are absolutely brutal.

edit: While I'm okay driving the car around in TN, the car has seen a lot of miles around town in Lincoln, NE and I absolutely would not daily it there.

Any idea how much of that is spring/shock vs the bound up rear sway? In CS you can fix the bar, leaving the TRD bar "stock" up front and using whatever in the back.

I think that particular issue is all spring/shock.

I won't even begin to predict what you find to be acceptable, though.

Because I'm like that, I made a picture to show why a remote reservoir shock (usually) has more travel than a non-remote shock, assuming you're talking about shocks that have the same length for the main body.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...977a58c9_o.png

The free piston (separator piston) and gas chamber are moved to the remote canister, which opens up a little room for the shaft to travel.

- Andrew

Makes sense. I figured CS was a bad idea but kinda hoped that it wasn't. Maybe with the right shocks and bump stops it would be OK but the shocks likely cost as much as just getting the STX coilovers. Dunno.