Are these the standard springs?
Dobinson about to compete with the bp51??? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Jgunner
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Threads
- 63
- Messages
- 1,185
- Location
- Jacksonville Beach, Florida
- Website
- exitoffroad.com
No ETA yet on the release date. End of the year is what I'm figuring
I gotta say, IKON Stage 4 Slinky is looking more attractive all the time. I rode and drove a cruiser with BP51's this weekend, not that impressed for the $. My latest build is looking like it will go the IKON Stage 4 route.
Box Rocket
SILVER Star
Slinky Stage4 is not the same as the Icon Stage4, different coils and different shock specs. Slinky is a brand not a coil type. Will be interesting to see these new ones from Dobinson. If it's a similar design to the BP51 (as in internal bypasses) the 2.5 or 2.6" body that they have isn't exactly a true 2.5 since the internal bypasses take up internal space so they have a lower oil capacity than a true 2.5 and are closer to a 2.0. The BP51s are better than many other options out there for the 80, but I still prefer the Slinky shocks. The biggest issue with the OME shocks IMO is the length. They are the same length as the L shocks which end up limiting available droop (especially if you have dual rate tapered coils that have lots of flex) Kinda negates the benefit of the high flex coils when you can't get all the flex because the shocks are too short.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,233
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
How, why, would spring selection (within reason) effect droop travel? It's largely suspension design and shock length, springs have little, if anything to do with it.
Box Rocket
SILVER Star
You're not wrong (within reason). However, comparing my old OME coils to the Slinky coils I have now, with shocks removed so that they aren't a limiting factor and letting the axle droop as far as the links etc will allow, the OME coils drop out of the coil bucket (so as you you describe wouldn't theoretically have any limit on droop). But because the Slinky coils stay captured in the coil bucket, doing the same test would net another couple inches of droop because the droop wasn't only from the weight of the axle pulling the drooped tire down. The longer coil still applied downward pressure and made for more droop. Granted, not a huge difference (couple inches) but a difference nonetheless. This would likely hold true for any of the tapered dual rate coils, but I've only tested with my own coils.
alia176
SILVER Star
This is a great explanation Adam, thanks!
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,233
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
Kinda like saying, run the heaviest rim possible, so the drooped tire has more traction? There is a grain of truth, data, that is pretty much irrelavant on the trail. The weighted side will lever the other side down, even with an unseated spring, will get full allowed flex. The traction difference between the two tires is going to be huge, even with the few pounds of pressure from a seated spring, going to need lockers. May make a few inches further on the flex ramp, not likely to make a significant difference in the real world.
Box Rocket
SILVER Star
Speaking from experience, I can tell you there is a real world difference, small as it may be. Places where I have lost traction on a drooped tire can now maintain traction without needing to engage a locker. I really don't care about or use ramps except for getting measurements for things like shocks, bumpstops and finding where I need to cut sheetmetal.
So you're comment isn't exactly false, the difference may not be "significant" and remove the necessity for lockers on the trail but in both of my comments I've explained actual real world differences and I think answered your original question about how coils can affect travel.
- Thread starter
- #30
- Thread starter
- #31
I would, i was on the fence and waiting for release, but think i am going king shocks all the way around with compression adjusters. Front will not be stock, tired of the boat feeling.
I agree completely - the difference is substantial to have your shock travel fully within the sweet spot of the spring travel (this is fully the point of multi-stage coils for a crawler IMO), to the point I have refused to just add a bunch of shock travel to the rear (when the front can’t use it) and will forever run eye adapters with a 10” travel shock for a 4” lift (the 4” Flexi coils). The BP51 would be perfect length spec, except the upper pin mount means the travel is in the wrong position. It’s not too short - it’s mounted in the wrong position.
@crikeymike let’s get a 26” extended 16” compressed eye to eye mount shock with pin to eye adapters on the market. 5” up travel, 5” down travel without unbalancing front to rear. Properly spacing travel > just adding travel. And a lot cheaper.
Box Rocket
SILVER Star
BP51s would not be ideal unless eye adapters or other means of changing the mount location. They will limit droop plain and simple (speaking specifically of the front). Factory radius arm setup has more travel available than the OME shocks provide. I gained a minimum of 2” of droop after getting rid up f the OME shocks. It’s entirely possible to use the full range of of a 12” travel shock with unmodified shock mounts and with the stock radius arms.
Yea, we’re agreeing that the pin style mount of the BP51 makes them too short for a 4” lift, but then OME always thinks you are running fast at high load with small tires so they bias to up travel.
I’d like to see a pic of a fully flexed 12” suspension on the stock radius arms. I can use about 4” up and down and then the bushings just won’t go any further with nothing else is bound by contact (like arm binding against axle mount).
But again, I think that having the shock travel in the sweet spot of the spring travel keeps the rig much better balanced, so I’m fully agreeing with you there that it is a substantial difference compared to having more or more corners unloaded (lockers notwithstanding).
I would like to see a greater focus on this - excessive droop on a corner does nothing to keep a rig more balanced, and it drives other costs that have no real benefit that correlates to the spend.
These shock threads are all meaningless to me, because the shock design is always pin mount. Not spending a penny on that, much less a fortune.
Last edited:
Box Rocket
SILVER Star
100% with you on the front to rear balance. I know you've beat that drum for a long time.
Here's a few pics of the travel, compression and droop with the 12" travel shocks and 3" lift (stage4 Slinky). 100% stock, unmodified radius arms, Slee Caster plates. Unmodified shock mounts with pin style front shocks. Stock bumpstops in the front. These are also with stock swaybar attached. This has been the most balance setup I've had on either of my 80s.
IMG_0630 by Adam Tolman, on Flickr
IMG_0632 by Adam Tolman, on Flickr
IMG_0627 by Adam Tolman, on FlickrCompressed side is 37" off the ground in this pic.
IMG_7863 by Adam Tolman, on Flickr
Untitled by Adam Tolman, on Flickr
Untitled by Adam Tolman, on Flickr
Untitled by Adam Tolman, on FlickrNot at the limit of droop in this one.
Untitled by Adam Tolman, on FlickrFull compression on 3" lift, 37's with 1" taller bumpstop. Able to keep flares in place.
Untitled by Adam Tolman, on Flickr100% with you on the front to rear balance. I know you've beat that drum for a long time.
Here's a few pics of the travel, compression and droop with the 12" travel shocks and 3" lift (stage4 Slinky). 100% stock, unmodified radius arms, Slee Caster plates. Unmodified shock mounts with pin style front shocks. Stock bumpstops in the front. These are also with stock swaybar attached. This has been the most balance setup I've had on either of my 80s.
IMG_0630 by Adam Tolman, on Flickr
Compressed side is 37" off the ground in this pic.
Not at the limit of droop in this one.
Full compression on 3" lift, 37's with 1" taller bumpstop. Able to keep flares in place.
Some other thoughts mostly for posterity sake for future readers. The tapered coil was originally developed by Darren because he couldn’t keep his dual stage coils from collapsing at the transition point. There was some heated debate as Frankie at FOR had released the Gen II dual stage kit around whether or not those coils would also fail. We know how this turned out with dual rate coils in general.
So for me, tapered coils are a solution looking for a problem at a higher cost, unless you have a weight issue that suggests needing that design. I’ve never been entirely sure why people add a ton of weight and think they need a super long travel suspension given weight and clearance are already the big issue with these rigs, but the original problem being addressed was one of quality and now we have slinky lore.
That’s not to say that tapered coils are snake oil, just that there is not going to be a discernible benefit to the average user over a dual rate, especially if you are building a technical trail rig. The logical end game is to tune the dynamics without introducing additional variables or cost.
If I was designing around a 12” travel shock, it sure as hell would not be for a 3” lift, especially at some of these price points - frame dragging is frame dragging at any price point. I would be going for 6” to optimize 40’s with travel spaced down and balanced to reduce metal trimming to the extent possible and ensure I had the proper dynamics to benefit from that extra travel.
I’ve mostly been able to resist ripping things apart to prove a point, though, and plan to keep it that way. To which I finally bought a Poly Performance nitrogen shock charge kit to keep my Fox remote res shocks at proper PSI regularly. Nothing makes your kit go to s*** like low PSI, and this fill kit was the cost of a a single shock these days.
Sorry to hijack the thread but does anybody have any experience with Slees shock? I'm at the point that I am ready to swap out my OMEs that were installed as part of my Slee 4" kit due to ride quality. I have Slee mediums in the rear and the arse is starting to drag from all of the extra weight so I want to upgrade to a heavy but also upgrade to a remote for better ride quality. I am not super excited about adjustables shocks because I don't want to be spending time playing around with the correct ride set up all of the time. I would rather have a shock that is pretty much set up for the weight and ready to roll but yet still provide on and off-road comfort.
Box Rocket
SILVER Star
I see it somewhat differently I guess.
As for lift height, I've been at 6" in the past. We all know that 80s are heavy right out of the box and a lot of that weight is in the body/roof. We see how performance improves on truck that have chopped the roof. So regardless of the suspension design, the 80 is just top heavy and the higher you put that weight the more problematic it becomes. So having been at 6" of lift height and now being at 3", I'll take the shorter lift height every day of the week. Does it mean more frame dragging? yeah, probably. I'll take that part of the compromise and address it best I can with well designed skids/sliders/bumpers. To me the pros outweigh the cons of a smaller lift height. We see this same philosophy all over the place with low slung Ultra4's, and even side by sides with less ground clearance under the frame than I have under my axles. Yet they are still incredibly capable and slide over obstacles easily with good skids. (I'm aware that the lightweight aspects of a SxS is also part of their capability). The point being that keeping a lower center of gravity is always going to net better performance and stability, whether on the road or on the trail. Yes, it can introduce clearance issues but that's the lesser of the two evils, so to speak, in my opinion. I'm also in favor of the lower lift height even if it means some sheetmetal trimming. I think I've shown on my own truck that it can be minimal enough to run 37's and still have factory flares in place. The frame dragging issue is also only an issue for those that spend most of their time crawling in large rocks. While I still do that from time to time, it's not where my truck spends the majority of its trail time anymore. So if you are building an 80 for serious rock crawling, then maybe a bit more lift height is a good move. For many it's not.
One of the benefits of the tapered dual rate coil that I think is often overlooked is the ability to keep the coil captured. Non-tapered springs don't collapse at ride height in the smaller diameter part of the coil. So a non-tapered coil that doesn't collapse at the same 3" lift height will likely drop out of coil bucket when the same amount of travel is available from the links/shocks. Thats not ideal to have the coil drop free of the bucket. Worst case the coil falls out completely (we've all seen those pics). Even if the bottom of the spring is held in place with a retainer so it won't fall out on the ground, it's possible to have binding when the top of the coil tries to reseat itself when the suspension compresses. It's not a serious issue, but an issue nonetheless.
Additionally, if the top of the coil drops free, the drooped tire only has the traction available from the weight of the tire and part of the axle on that side. With the tapered coil you add some additional pressure at the tire to the ground from the coil. How much that helps can be debated in a separate coversation. And often times the counter-argument is "who cares? just have lockers" Personally, I like to use lockers more as a last resort when needed, rather than a regular step of tackling an obstacle. There are also times when I don't want to use a locker if possible (i.e. front end bound up and reversing uphill). In those instances whatever added traction I can get without needing to engage the locker is a good thing and a case for the tapered coil design.
With all that said, I'm not saying your view is "wrong". But I suppose I just approach it differently based on what works best for me.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Threads
- 63
- Messages
- 1,185
- Location
- Jacksonville Beach, Florida
- Website
- exitoffroad.com
Looking at February-ish for them to come in
