hybridmoments

http://www.wincom.net/trog/autocross_secrets6.html

don't read if you are a JIC, Tein, Tokico fan. it may hurt your feelings.

chrisw85

Penske...hmm i may have to fab up some mounts for these on my civic...

hybridmoments

i was gonna do the same thing
i almost bought a set off four this summer from a guy for $800 with the double adjustable canisters. and a huge box full of shims and valves.
they were about the length i was looking for.
i was thinking the easiest thing to do would be machine an aluminum piece that would fit into the shock fork, machine inside that piece, drill horizontally thru the piece of aluminum for the heim end, counter sink a hole on one side and thread the other. bolt one end of the damper (shaft side down {inverted mount} ) to the aluminum adapter and then into the shock fork.
and the top mount wouldn't be hard to make at all

CRX Lee

If you are going to make your own mounts to run it inverted in the front of a Honda, be extremely careful about the attachment of the fork to the piston rod as there is a serious weakness issue potential. Been thee, done that and not doing it anymore. The minute weight relocation gain to run it inverted can be offset by a much less robust mounting and often increased dead length in the mounts.

Also just because this person speaks with a tone of authority, don't assume by any means that it is all correct. There is some correct info and some very incorrect info and lots of in between in the article. You cannot take bits of information learned from certain shock types and designs and cross apply it to all applications, it simply does not work that way. One needs to make sure that info is only used in the context that it was learned, the rest in a guess and is often wrong.

speedball3

Any words on this person's take on Koni, CRX Lee? How true is his claim to the difficulty of getting any two koni yellow shocks to match forces, right off the shelf? He mentions that he's "seen Koni Yellows with the same part number that matched perfectly when one was 1/2 turn off full hard, and the other was at full soft - I consider the adjuster **** a way to match shocks on the dyno, NOT a tuning tool." Even though it probably doesn't make a huge difference on the street, having opposite sides of the car with vastly different damping forces sounds a bit scary...

And what of the claim to the adjustability of koni yellows (or lack thereof in the last 1/2 turn)?


Modified by speedball3 at 10:37 PM 1/3/2007

hybridmoments

i can't speak to the accuracy of the article, as this guy has way more experience then i.
i've never dynoed a shock, yet he is an engineer and has dyno'ed and built hundreds of shocks

though i would say i trust what he is saying about setupi don't know about the accuracy regarding his opinions of BRANDS and whether he is partial to a certain brand for underlying reasons


though i would say i trust what he is saying about suspension setup.

His History:

the 1998 Grassroots Motorsports Magazine ProSolo Rookie of the Year
the 2000 CENDIV Street Modified Divisional Champion
the 2000 BF Goodrich Divisional Series Street Modified Champion
the 2001 CENDIV Street Modified Divisional Champion
the 2002 SCCA ProSolo Street Modified Series Champion
the 2002 SCCA ProSolo Honda Street Challenge Series Champion
the 2003 CENDIV Street Modified Divisional Champion

there is alot of "champion" in that list

there are a coulple articles on his website aside from SHOCKS. and again these are pertaining more to Autox.
http://farnorthracing.com/autocross_secrets.html

TodaSi

Yep, Dennis Grant. Been around for a while...he first bought everything for his Talon then educated himself....that's why he suggests educating yourself first

He was/is a constant figure in the CENDIV/now Great Lakes region autocrosses, met him when I was running a friend's ITR back in '99. His article carries a lot of merit

erikiksaz1

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Dennis Grant &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Now its time for damping. I set mine according to the suspension velocity histograms, (which I'll describe later) but roughly 65% critical damping is almost always perfect. Why? I don't know; it just seems to work that way. Set 'em to 65% critical, and be done with it.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Say for example we have konis with 2.5 full turns to full hard, does he mean just to set it 65% of the way to full hard, and we'd be done with the damping?

I don't know what he means by "critical damping"

Tyson

critical damping is a mathematical term where the stars and moon align and damping is JUST right. its purely theoretical based on the mass, damping, and spring rate values. its not necessarily the best for real world, which is why he said "65% of the critical damping" is best.

how anyone could possibly calculate all the values for any bit of accuracy on a production car would be beyond me quite frankly.

btw, the author certainly is experienced and knows what he's talking about within his scope of writing (autocrossing a production vehicle). but its just an opinion. so take it for what its worth. granted it might be worth a lot to some, but not to all.

you cant take it as a slam to "JIC, Tein, Tokico fans". you wouldnt ever use motons (not even mentioned), penske or JRZ shocks on the street....


Modified by Tyson at 1:12 PM 1/4/2007

hybridmoments

last time i checked i thought "moton" was the Thai translation of Tokico
kidding.

i don't know, he may never have tested any moton made parts. they certainly are expensive enough. or it's possible he found lower priced alternatives just as good. i mean he isn't talking about using an off the shell shock. he is talking about dyno testing them many times and building them to his exact specs
and alot of what he is saying is about the inconsitancy of certain brands. he isn't saying he uses them that way.

the question to me would be , if you are going the route of valving and building your own dampers and dyno'n them til you reach your specs, are you going to get any better performance out of a Moton compared to a Penske, or a custom built bilstein?
i would certainly like to know the answer
i know the penskes have a wide array of parts for valving that are readily available.

i certainly can't afford to spend $5000 on Motons. yes they are extremely well made and reliable from what i've read and heard. but how much more then say $2000 - $3000 worth of dampers ( koni 8012, penske 8100)

CRX Lee

I don't really want to get involved with it too much because these are battles that tend to be hard to win. The internet tends to reward those who speak the most or speak last over those who really know of that they speak. I mentioned this and another thread on this topic to one of my associates in the R&D dept. who said he'd prefer to just stay out of it because the time and energy it sucks away and the blood pressure it raises without necessarily being able to have the real answers come out. I am responding though because there were some specific attacks on Koni products that are false and unfair.

Let me just simply say that I take exception with most of the comments that he makes about the KONI units being inconsistent, needing big changes in adjustment to match them, exploding, etc. I certainly think his issues with some Konis must at least come from a pretty limited sample if he has seen issues that vast because every sinlge Koni damper is dyno tested in the factory before being painted and packaged and variations as he mentions are hugely unlikely in not basically impossible to happen. The part about revalved Konis having a tendency to explode is total hogwash, I have never once seen that happen in 11 years. If someone mistakenly overfilled a shock so it hydraulicaly locked then it could leak heavily (can't recall seeing that happen recently either) but to say they "tend to explode" is dramatic but untrue.

I have met DG one time that I know of when he pushed very hard that we open him up as an authorized Koni rebuilder and we turned him down (and basically everyone else who asks because there is a lot more to it than what one might see on the surface, nothing against him specifically). I do recall that he seemed quite proud of what he felt was his thorough understanding of shocks and I think this article shows his pride in knowledge and opinion. I don't doubt that he has dyno tested a lot of dampers and serviced a bunch as well but maybe some info is being applied a bit outside of the context that it should be.

The comments about F1 teams not using adjustable shocks is not totally true, some use adjustables and some do not. Those that do not are because of weight reduction primarily and test dampers are often adjustable. F1 dampers also move very little and make very little damping force generally. Basically their goal is not to weigh much and to help optimise tire grip as best you can, especially over bumps. Most F1 surfaces are extremely smooth except when hitting curbstones and berms and that is when tuning and testing is used a lot. The shaker rigs he mentioned are very common, I witnessed their use when I visited the BAR team headquarters in England when they had adjustable Konis on their cars. KONI had adjustable dampers on Jaguar F1 and they followed to Red Bull. Last year, several teams worked with a few Konis and for this year a technical partnership has just been announced with Koni and McLaren F1 using adjustable dampers with FSD. I don't know what his actual experience with F1 dampers is.

DG has certainly won a number of championships and is due respect for many accomplishments including that he has taught himself quite a bit about shocks that has helped him. A problem with being self-taught is that you also don't know what you don't know and you may not know what you have that is wrong.

The comments about 65% critical is generally pretty ballpark true although not quite that easy. You can get into some pretty decent ballparks with some basic information and calculations but it is not the final tuning. I do very much disagree with the comments that you can tune your shocks entirely on the dyno and not on the car.

Let me follow this up by saying that I am not an engineer nor do I claim to know or understand everything about shocks. I know that there is a lot that I don't know and that I don't understand but I do know a bit gained primarily through 11 years of on the job training, working with some very good people who know and understand a hell of a lot more than I ever will and who deal with damper design, street and racing development,etc. to the highest levels. I will also very quickly and happily refer someone to an associate if there is a technical question that I don't know the answer to or someone else can better answer it. I learn what I can from hose more knowledgable and experienced than I, ask questions, formulate ideas and apply and reason the best I can. Do the best you can and know your limits.

This has gone much further than I wanted it to. I don't mean to attack DG, I barely know him and have no reason to. I do feel that I needed to defend against some accusations though and a few items that were stated as fact that were in fact not.

slammed_93_hatch

Moton's are most certainly worth the money. All the drivers i have worked with love them, and can tell the difference within a lap. the penske units also a lot of people love, same with the JRZ.


As far his statement about koni and there consistency, not what i have what i have found to be true. I had the owner/operator of another shock manufacture take a look at my dyno charts and asked him about the difference he said it was fine, and really small.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by hybridmoments &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

i certainly can't afford to spend $5000 on Motons. yes they are extremely well made and reliable from what i've read and heard. but how much more then say $2000 - $3000 worth of dampers ( koni 8012, penske 8100)</TD></TR></TABLE>

They are worth there weight in gold. Tons and Tons of pro teams run the motons. They might be able to reach the performance of a moton, but at what cost? Lbor for some one rebuilding and rebuilding the shocks, testing on the track. All that equals time and time equals money.

the guys that i know who run the penske's run a one that is around 6-7,000 dollar price range. With one team running the 10,000 or so dollar units.

Him leaving Moton and JRZ off the list baffles me though

ATS*Mark

the first thing that came to mind when i read this :
"Not on this list? Almost certainly crap." was where is moton on the list.....

interesting article although it seems rather narrow minded .

DG-FNR

Hey guys, isn't Google wonderful?

The reason why JRZ and Moton aren't on the list is simple - I never dynoed any. In the absence of any dyno information one way or the other, I chose to remain silent.

So then, why "not on this list, almost certainly crap"? Because the amount of crap I found on the dyno is simply staggering. It was INSANE just how much blatent, evil-wrong stuff I found running shocks on the dyno. Stuff that I had always considered decent based on reputation and referral turned out to be crap once tested.

With that track record, any given shock is more likely to be crap than not - especially if the shock supplier can not or will not provide an individual dyno trace for each shock he sells you. If he can not (because he doesn't have a dyno) then HE has no idea what the shock is doing either, and if he will not (he dynoed it but won't give you the data) then he is hiding something and should not be delt with.

And my criteria for "crap" is actually pretty basic:

1) A rebound adjuster should only adjust rebound and a compression adjuster should only adjust compression. A *small* amount of crosstalk is acceptable (a couple of percent) because building truly independent adjusters turns out to be trickier than it sounds, but if a "rebound" adjustment makes a similar or greater (!) change to compression (or vice versa) then it is "crap".

Koni Yellows pass this test; all the ones I dynoed (that weren't obviously dead) are pretty good about rebound-only with little to no crosstalk.

2) Any adjuster, when adjusted "harder" or "softer" should actually go in the correct direction. If you move the adjuster "harder" and the shock gets "softer" (or vice versa) - crap.

Again, Konis pass this test.

3) The adjuster should be as linear as possible, meaning that the force change per click should be equal throughout the adjustment range. This turns out to be REALLY difficult to do, and even the best shocks struggle to pass this test - particularly on the "full soft" portion of the range. When you understand how the adjusters work, this makes total sense - if, for example, you are dealing with a low-speed bleed adjuster, once you have reached the flow limit of the bypass passage no amount of "softer" on the adjuster will have any effect.

So I'm willing to apply a little common sense here: nonlinearity at the extremes of the adjuster is OK as long as there is SOME portion of the range that is linear. Konis pass this, with the caveat that the last half-turn before full hard is usually VERY nonlinear (with very small adjustments making very large force changes) and the last half-to-full turn before full soft usually doesn't do very much.

4) Adjusters should be repeatable, meaning, if I set the shock to a particular setting, it should produce a particular force, within a couple of percent. Some shocks care about *which direction* you come from, such that the shock will produce a different force depending on if you got there by softening or stiffening (most of the time, this was hysteresis in the adjuster detent) and that is OK as long as it is repeatable.

Any shock with a non-detented adjuster is going to struggle on this test, more so depending on how sensitive the adjuster is. The Penske rebound adjuster can be made nearly perfect by matching the shocks and then clocking the adjuster window. Konis wind up eyeballing the ****, and the maximum realistic resolution is 1/8 turn. Depending on where you are on the adjustment range linearity, this may or may not be good enough.

For most people, assuming you have dyno-matched shocks, you can get away with this on a Koni Yellow. It's not perfect; it's not as good as Penske, but it is close enough for government work.

Any shock where the adjuster is a random force generator == crap.

5) Any two shocks with the same valving should produce the same force. Bilsteins are EXCELLENT at this, almost (almost!) to the point where you don't need to dyno them after assembly (*almost!* - I have caught my own assembly errors by religiously dynoing everything after assembly) Anything with an adjuster is going to struggle a little bit here, based on tolerances within the adjuster. Penskes can usually be set this way by matching and clocking the adjuster. Koni Yellows have to be bought in batches and then matched - and YES, there IS enough variation in off-the-shelf Yellows to make this necessary.

Shocks where the force curves will vary wildly shock-to-shock with the same part number == crap.

6) The shocks should be fade resistant enough to survive AT LEAST my dyno sweep. My dyno program (SPA BTP-2000 Dyno 6.1) ran 10 cycles at 3in/sec peak speed (I could go faster, but rarely did, as the interesting stuff is sub-3in/sec) and then averaged the runs. Looking at the individual runs, they should be mostly on top of each other and with reasonable hysteresis. Each run getting progressively softer is a sure sign of fade. If I do a full rebound sweep and go back to the start as a confirmation, that value should be identical as when I started, within a couple of percent. Koni==good. Bilstein==good. Penske==good. Japanese==crap.

Note that NONE of these criteria talk about the *shape* or the *amount* of the force curve - that I consider as a "configuration" issue and is up to the engineer. Any given off the shelf force curve may or may not match a given instance of a car, but matching or not matching off the shelf is NOT an indication of quality or crap.

I actually like Konis Yellows quite a bit - well enough to sell them, when that's what I was doing. They have their foibles, but they are really very good for the price, and there are workarounds for the foibles. If you absolutely MUST have a ****, and you cannot afford Penskes, then they are really the only choice.

The biggest downside - not user serviceable, meaning that you are not Master of your Own Domain when it comes to revalves. This is a big enough PITA that I think you're better off forgoing the **** and going with a Bilstein, where you *can* field-revalve in minutes.

But again, if you *must* have the ****.....

As far as Yellows exploding - hell yeah they do. I saw this all the time on custom-valved Yellows, particularly (but not limited to) Mustangs. I don't necessarily consider this Koni's fault though, as most of these exploded shocks I ran across were making INSANE rebound forces. One set in particular was around 1000lbs at 3in/sec - no freakin' wonder it blew up! This ties into "people wanting way too much rebound" more than anything else.

There's nothing "false and unfair" going on here; I'm out of the sport entirely, and I'm telling the truth as I personally observed it. I have *no* axe to grid here, none whatsoever. Yes, it is true that I tried to get myself set up as a Koni rebuilder. Yes, it is true that Koni turned me down, and for the record I understand *completely* why they did. It's entirely possible that, were the positions reveresed, *I* might have turned me down too.

It was a serious pissoff, in that I had people *begging* me to work on their Konis (because for whatever reason, they didn't like the other rebuilders) and I hated turning people away because I wasn't allowed to help them... but there's no animosity there.

And for the record, I don't feel attacked. There is always some pushback when light is shone on sacred cows... and lord t'underin', there be a lot of sacred cows in this space... the howls of protest over depressurizing shocks, ferinstance....

One final point - the more I learned about all this stuff, the more I learned how much I *didn't* know - almost to the point that I knew less when I finished than when I started. There are levels and levels and levels and levels to this stuff, and you can get increasingly speciallized to the point of intellectual masturbation. I thought I had a good handle on tires until I got an Avon engineer drunk and got him to start spilling his guts....

The trick, I've found, is to know when you know *enough* to get the job done, and then stop. For example, I *know* that off-the-shelf Koni Yellows display shock-to-shock variability - I ran enough of them on my dyno to get a decent statistical sample size. I *suspect* that this has to do with tolerances within the adjuster mechanism - but it doesn't really matter if that really is the case or not, because all you have to do is find a pair that match well enough on the dyno, and given that you can't get into the bloody thing to revalve it, you're done.

I developed a reasonable amount of understanding on how shock valvestacks work, and I'm sure that a Koni or Bilstein or Penske engineer would run circles around me when it comes to matching a stack to a given force curve. If they were better at providing this data up front, I never would have gotten involved in doing it myself.

This website I'm working on - and bear in mind that it is a work in progress, warts and all - represents (or will represent) the limits of my understanding at the time I summed up. I had a *lot* of success with this, such that I think it is worthwhile passing it along. But I categorically DO NOT expect it to be (or remain) the ne plus ultra reference on race car setup. I fully expect people to learn more on top of this stuff, and some of that new knowledge will refute stuff that I have claimed.

That's *science*. Einstein didn't make Newton into a moron.

DG

ShaunRR

This is probably the most interesting thread I've seen in the Suspension forum.

TPB

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This is probably the most interesting thread I've seen in the Suspension forum.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Without a doubt the most informative. Thanks to those that have taken an enormous amount of time to share their knowledge

shane(showtime)

iTrader: (1)

Ya very good info. What about the ground control Advance Design shocks any good or bad info on those. I have been running a set for a little over a year and im very happy with them. I just took them apart to give them some new seals and oil. I like having that option.

Justin Jones

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This is probably the most interesting thread I've seen in the Suspension forum.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Tyson

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by shane(showtime) &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> What about the ground control Advance Design shocks </TD></TR></TABLE>

hey man, "if its not on this list, its almost certainly crap."

slammed_93_hatch

Also why do you make the jump from Koni sport to a Really really really expensive race shock like the penske????

What about the 3011, and the 2812?

Maybe its just the way you wrote the article but you really make it sound like those are the ONLY options available.

I think its rather ridiculous to be comparing a set of koni sports to Penske's. 4 koni yellows sell for less then the cost of ONE penske. The shocks are really intended for different markets. But i must say it is impressive how closely you think they preform to a set of penskes.

I would much rather have a damper that has an adjuster one it, that i might not be able to get EXACTLY right from left to right, rather then having to; take off the dampers, take them apart and re-valve them. Thats a whole lot of work and wasted time that i could be spending driving out on the track.

When we test cars, it is very easy to stand on pit lane and just have the driver come in every few laps, Discuss with him what the car is doing he likes and diss-likes, then open the hood and the rear doors and simply make some changes.

well at least that is my opinion, from my limited experience.

DG-FNR

If you're setting shocks by talking to the driver, you're going about it the wrong way. There is a way to set shocks via feedback through the data system that is the way to go.

The website doesn't discuss it yet, but it will.

There's a reason why my car had suspension position sensors on it....

Why jump from a Koni to a Penke? ***** that work - much more adjustment range, much more linearity in the adjustment range, better repeatability, better granularity. Plus you get user-serviceability (the ***** only adjust certain aspects of the curve; you need to be able to revalve to make wholesale changes to the curve shape)

My budget choice is Bilstein - they are effectively Penskes without the *****. You can get compression adjustment on them (if you feel you really need it) by yanking the separator pistons and adding canisters (doesn't really matter whose) and they are cheap enough that you can keep several sets with different valvings for test days - and unlike the ****, swapping a different Bilstein valving on means you know *exactly* what happened when you made the change - vice whatever happened when you twisted the **** on a Koni.

But some folks absolutely MUST have that ****... and if you MUST, then a Koni is a decent choice; far better than anything else out there with a **** on it, at the price point they have.

So much heat and light is expended over shocks, when it is really very simple. Set your spring rates, get your natural frequency, valve the shocks to produce 65% critical damping until you hit high speed, then digress as close to flat as the shock will let you. Do that, right there, and the shocks are right in the ballpark.

If that still isn't good enough, mount the suspension position sensors and use suspension velocity histograms to fine tune the shocks (this is where Penske-quality adjusters become useful) And on my car at least, 65% critical valving on the shocks produced velocity histograms that were near perfect.

As a driver, it took a little getting used to, as the car was nowhere near as "tied down" or "planted" as it had been with the previous valving (which had been ~120% critical in places) It moved more, it rolled and pitched. But it was also a great deal FASTER, and it was nearly impossible to upset it. I could drive through the Peru "ditches" at full throttle and the car wouldn't bound, hop, crash, jump - and it picked up turn-in and peak grip too. And most of all - again, once I got used to it - it was way easier to drive the car; it lost a lot of bad habits.

And I never had to touch the shocks again.

It took a few valving iterations to get there, but the destination made the journey worthwhile.

DG

hybridmoments

if i had known everyone was PMS'n this week i wouldn't have posted a link to this guys site.


again it's someones opinion, though he does back it up with arguments. i've seen koni yellow dynos before, but i can't say i've seen 4 of the same model all dyno'ed together.
definitely interesting and something i would definitely love to see tested. just posting a dyno plot in Shock Dyno section here, is only showing a sample of a single damper. now if everyone started posting their dyno (for stock dampers) then it would be interesting to see any differences between the same model dampers especially amongst the many popular manufacturers.

mainly what i gather from this site is that he is talking about how accurate shock valving is and how accurate "adjustment" controls were.
the koni was brought up because it's a popular adjustable rebound damper. so along that subject he then brought up that if you have to have adjustment, that penske had the most accurate adjustments out of anything he tested.

I think the main theme is that he says that adjustments are not needed especially if the valving is setup properly and matched between dampers

bilsteins are inexpensive compared to Penske. seems like he was saying they were the best bet. and field serviceable on top of that.
i believe the Penske 8100's go for about $3000 for a set of 4 at most places. and i think the Moton Club Sports are like $3200 or something like that
i'd love to see a test of the two. i know the Penskes are alot easier to find (especially parts and valving) when searching online. but of course they aren't platform specific and order in stroke length
UMM. how about some Moton 4 way adjustables for Type R's $9500. ouch. Can get your girlfriend a Boob job for that much!

Tyson

who is "pmsing"?

seems like a fine discussion to me.

hybridmoments

that is just how it is now adays
everyone expects absolute Info, but most don't do anything about getting info. they expect others to divulge it.

i understand everyone having fun with the "not on the list, almost certainly crap comment" is the guy joking, or is he serious? again i pulled this off a website another Auto'xer pointed me too. it's not in a published book as Fact or anything. it's a guys websites with his opinions and his data that he acquired. but who has dyno'ed every shock manufacturers offerings? at least that would share there info. I would, if i won the lottery and spent $7,000 or so on a shock dyno, and bought a few pairs of all the most popular and "exotic" dampers. and just cause i was nice i'd share my results with everyone.

i'm just like alot of people. i want the best for the least. and if i can get data saying that this one is more accurate and reliable then this one, well that just helps me spend $2000 more wisely. though yeah, i'd probalby look into running motons if i had $10k to spend
and last time i checked a 2005 (east coast) Honda challenge 1st place winner, and 2006 ITA 2nd place champion had Teins on his Integra. so go figure.

nonsense

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DG-FNR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why jump from a Koni to a Penke? ***** that work - much more adjustment range, much more linearity in the adjustment range, better repeatability, better granularity. Plus you get user-serviceability (the ***** only adjust certain aspects of the curve; you need to be able to revalve to make wholesale changes to the curve shape)</TD></TR></TABLE>

I think the question wasn't why upgrade from a Koni to a Penske, but more of why are you only comparing Koni's low cost shocks to the Penske's? I would have thought that you would test Koni Yellows as well as their 3011 or 2812 shocks as well? Do you have any data or opinions on these as compared to the Penske's?

Welcome to H-T and thanks for the input. I don't think anyone here is trying to discount your article, but we're always inquisitive about these sorts of things (check the Dyno thread at the top of the Suspension forum to see how much discussion goes on about these types of things here.)