Little Bird

Welcome to DezertRangers
Join the community. Register today for all the benefits of membership.
Register

littlebird

member
Feb 26, 2019
255
339
63
NY
2.5" W/1.25" shaft=3.68 Effective piston dia.
2.5" W/.875" shaft=4.3 Effective piston dia.
2.0 W/.625" shaft =2.84 effective piston dia.

So going up in shaft size lost you 17%

For fun, a 2.0 airshock/bumpstop is 1.92. Time to build a resi out the bottom bump.
Appreciate the technical knowledge!

I didn't have a choice in selecting shaft size for an 18" with this company, but I did realize a bigger shaft meant less oil and less performance.


Frankly, I've never been impressed with the performance of even the best short course setups compared to a traditional desert link. Kinda saddens me actually to see someone dump $100k+ and build a truck with a short course setup through Kibbe when much cheaper trucks with traditional links seem to work so much better. Not surprising those rigs end up for sale months later, too much cash for too little performance.

Didn't make sense to me to put $6k shocks on a truck with sub-optimal rear geometry and that will see 50% pavement.

Next truck, Big Bird, will get Fox all around.
 

marcytech

Mega Member
Mar 16, 2011
6,641
1,440
113
Appreciate the technical knowledge!

I didn't have a choice in selecting shaft size for an 18" with this company, but I did realize a bigger shaft meant less oil and less performance.


Frankly, I've never been impressed with the performance of even the best short course setups compared to a traditional desert link. Kinda saddens me actually to see someone dump $100k+ and build a truck with a short course setup through Kibbe when much cheaper trucks with traditional links seem to work so much better. Not surprising those rigs end up for sale months later, too much cash for too little performance.

Didn't make sense to me to put $6k shocks on a truck with sub-optimal rear geometry and that will see 50% pavement.

Next truck, Big Bird, will get Fox all around.
alot of that i think falls on using a 3.0 ibp c/o instead of a regular 3.0 c/o and not spending any time actually tuning the suspension. i had a link system very similar to the one youre building now and ill tell you the rear out performed the kit front a arm system it was paired with all day long

- with all due respect, i wouldn't use anything that comes out of that shop as a sort of performance standard at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the bodj

96f-u250

Senior Member
Sep 27, 2013
1,113
362
83
Phoenix
Wont a larger shaft cause the shock to become more progressive? Will this provide more gain than the 17% damping lost?
 

littlebird

member
Feb 26, 2019
255
339
63
NY
alot of that i think falls on using a 3.0 ibp c/o instead of a regular 3.0 c/o and not spending any time actually tuning the suspension. i had a link system very similar to the one youre building now and ill tell you the rear out performed the kit front a arm system it was paired with all day long

- with all due respect, i wouldn't use anything that comes out of that shop as a sort of performance standard at all.
Appreciate the input Marcy, she might earn a set of ibp's in a couple years..

You wouldn't use anything out of Kibbetech or out of BigShocks as a performance standard? lol
 

themoneypit

member
Jul 30, 2018
561
824
93
Missouri
I'm not sure I'd use the BigShocks coilovers in a single shock situation, but I wouldn't have any issue with using them paired with a traditional bypass. Even if the damping isn't amazing, it's fine for a play truck.
 

partybarge_pilot

Uno mas Cervesa!
May 14, 2004
14,698
7,995
113
Boringsville
Wont a larger shaft cause the shock to become more progressive? Will this provide more gain than the 17% damping lost?
No, it will add spring rate same as an air shock but the damping will not change. My other concern would be the small resi hose. It will act like a rate plate limiting high speed. Keep your motion ratio higher to avoid this.

Short course links can be made to work very well. They just take a lot more tuning due to the low MR. they also usually don't have more than 20" of travel. Not ever going to work better than a link set up with 28". But they will be light years ahead of leaf's with 20".
 
  • Like
Reactions: littlebird

marcytech

Mega Member
Mar 16, 2011
6,641
1,440
113
Appreciate the input Marcy, she might earn a set of ibp's in a couple years..

You wouldn't use anything out of Kibbetech or out of BigShocks as a performance standard? lol
i was saying i like the regular 3.0 C/O MORE THAN the 3.0 ibp. i believe the piston is smaller in the ibps? i could be mistaken.
i wouldnt use the vechicles from kibbetech as the standard of performance.
 

partybarge_pilot

Uno mas Cervesa!
May 14, 2004
14,698
7,995
113
Boringsville
i was saying i like the regular 3.0 C/O MORE THAN the 3.0 ibp. i believe the piston is smaller in the ibps? i could be mistaken.
i wouldnt use the vechicles from kibbetech as the standard of performance.
The IBP's have 2 pistons, a small piston that does most of the work and a full sized bottom out piston.
 

littlebird

member
Feb 26, 2019
255
339
63
NY
i was saying i like the regular 3.0 C/O MORE THAN the 3.0 ibp. i believe the piston is smaller in the ibps? i could be mistaken.
i wouldnt use the vechicles from kibbetech as the standard of performance.
Roger that. Is it the ibp making all the short course trucks I see buck like broncos? Seems like they have too much damping to my untrained eye..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

littlebird

member
Feb 26, 2019
255
339
63
NY
No, it will add spring rate same as an air shock but the damping will not change. My other concern would be the small resi hose. It will act like a rate plate limiting high speed. Keep your motion ratio higher to avoid this.

Short course links can be made to work very well. They just take a lot more tuning due to the low MR. they also usually don't have more than 20" of travel. Not ever going to work better than a link set up with 28". But they will be light years ahead of leaf's with 20".
Current geometry for a 90* trailing arm to shock angle has the shock way forward on the link compared to most short course setups, so that is in my favor in regard to MR.

My goal was primarily to get away from the progressive spring rate of leafs so hopefully that is achieved.

These hoses look about the same as my King 2.5s used up front, comparable resi size too.

Will less damping mean increased shaft speed? Hate to have it buck without actually bottoming out first.

222754
 

Latest posts

Today's birthdays

New Threads

New Classifieds

latest desert trips

Member Builds