In fact, I'll make it a question for you rally guys. Given limited shock travel compared to off-road rigs, do you still try for equal jounce and droop travel or do you sacrifice droop travel to get additional jounce? RallyX courses are only smooth in the morning.
I have operated in the "Is it broken?" realm of thought for the past 15+ years.
I have done little or no testing of almost anything for various reasons, and think that many, if not most, club level guys are in the same boat.
Doesn't travel just lower suspension loads and improve ride quality? What's the mechanism by which performance would improve, in terms of the car going faster and/or handling better?
Is it just a factor of saying that the mean surface roughness requires equal travel? What compresses must decompress? If that's the case, you wouldn't need equal travel unless you have equal damping rates would you?
Someone, perhaps Alex, punched a strut through his shock tower. That's what we're trying to avoid by supplying adequate jounce travel. But since we have only so much total travel available you need to allocate it between jounce and droop. Track most often uses a 50/50 split, but they don't deal with rocks etc. I was wondering if you rally guys favored more jounce and less droop. That would not provide better handling but better reliability in abusive conditions. And allow you to press harder.
I tend to go with the motorcycle 1/3 droop 2/3 bump rule. However, in rally I think if you have adequate bump to prevent bottoming, lots of droop is good because it tends to keep the wheels on the road. Steering, breaking, accelerating isn't very effective in the air.
If you look at the better cars, they tend to favor good handling setup and ride height with lots of droop travel to maintain control and land the jumps without bottoming.
If you don't have much to work with you just have to limit top speed to keep it controlled.
Mine is an inverted strut so a little difficult to determine stroke since it's on the car. The polished hydraulic unit sticks up 6". That would imply 6" stroke at the strut and perhaps a bit more at the wheel given motion ratio. But I'm sure it won't actually stroke 6" because there's a bumpstop in there which takes away from stroke. Don't know what the Cusco bumpstop is but a similar Bilstein inverted strut uses a 67mm (about 2.5") bumpstop. Since it compresses significantly before becoming a thud, I figure I have maybe a 5" stroke at the strut.
I think it makes sense to go high on front jounce (bump) travel to maintain speed through the rough stuff, and high on droop in the rear to maintain contact in corners. The rear doesn't seem to bottom. And has no CV to damage.
I'm just finishing up my adjustments and decided the old O-ring tell-tale trick will work here. I tied a rubber cord around the hydraulic unit which will get pushed up as that unit descends into the threaded body. That should give me my jounce, droop and static height positions....and I can adjust from there.
Someone, perhaps Alex, punched a strut through his shock tower.
i just noticed this thread sorry.
i didn't punch it through shock tower, mine are reinforced pretty good.
it was a tophat that failed.
M-sport recommended installing modified stock top mount which i did.
and they don't hold that well because made out of thin metal. took two rallies for one to fail.
now i take them off for inspection after every event and if one doesn't look good (dimple inside )then i just get a new one.
they're fairly cheap from a stealer.
and i use a sizable washer under it.