Fox Shox 2.0 post your valving and weight.
- Thread starter Rwhat
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Ok went back into the shocks to try and get them a bit better on the washboard. Basically went to a 30 compression and a 75 rebound on all 4. Removed the flutter stacks. Old setup worked OK but it was still pretty harsh on small, fast hits. Did well for most other stuff though. Initial impression is that the 30 compression stack paired with the OME heavies is pretty good. Taking a short trip this weekend so will have more to report then.
OLD Front Comp and Rebound
OLD Rear Comp/Rebound
NEW Front Comp and Rebound
NEW Rear Comp/Rebound
OLD Front Comp and Rebound
Code:
.010 ----------1.600---------
.010 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.008 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.012 ---------1.425--------
.012 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.015 --0.800--OLD Rear Comp/Rebound
Code:
.010 ----------1.600---------
.010 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.008 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.012 ---------1.425--------
.012 ------- 1.350------
.015 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.015 --0.800--NEW Front Comp and Rebound
Code:
.008 ----------1.600---------
.008 ---------1.425--------
.008 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.012 ---------1.425--------
.012 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.015 --0.800--NEW Rear Comp/Rebound
Code:
.008 ----------1.600---------
.008 ---------1.425--------
.008 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.012 ---------1.425--------
.012 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.015 --0.800--
Curious to hear your feedback on the #30 rebound. I just went the other way...from #60 to #80 rebound on my front 2.0 Fox w/remotes (~7500lb rig). Of course SA vs IFS is a totally different beast...with little if any correlation in shock tune.
And so far, after 4k miles of use, I'm liking my compression side with flutter on the front's. I get very good compliance for small hits and washboard...and ramped up damping for bigger/faster shock movement.
Current compression stack:
.010 x 1.60
.010 x 1.60
.008 x .95
.015 x 1.60
.015 x 1.425
.015 x 1.35
.015 x 1.10
.015 x .95
.020 x .80
.125 x 1.6
And so far, after 4k miles of use, I'm liking my compression side with flutter on the front's. I get very good compliance for small hits and washboard...and ramped up damping for bigger/faster shock movement.
Current compression stack:
.010 x 1.60
.010 x 1.60
.008 x .95
.015 x 1.60
.015 x 1.425
.015 x 1.35
.015 x 1.10
.015 x .95
.020 x .80
.125 x 1.6
Last edited:
Cool thanks for posting up your valving. I'm actually running a #30 compression and a 75 on the rebound, so we are super close on the rebound stacks. The 30 compression is pretty decent though still feels harsh on my cruiser over the smaller, faster bumps. Thats great feedback on your flutter stack, I'm surprised that it does so well with washboard, seems like it would be super stiff/harsh, but I think you are correct, the IFS vs. SFA geometries make for apples to oranges comparison. I'd be stoked if I could get my shocks to where yours are at with good small hit compliance but ramping up for larger hits.
I've often wondered if OME used a lower quality batch of steel in my springs. Even when loaded up fully with low damping on the compression the spring rate still seems too high on small bumps but not high enough on larger bumps. Maybe thats just because its a linear rate spring instead of progressive. Oh well, fun to mess with at any rate.
All, need a bit of help/advice on the rebound side. I'm still trying to get these things to work well on washboard, and I've got a few ideas for the compression side but need some info on the rebound. I want to slightly quicken the rebound, but need to know which shims to target to make thinner.
Is the rebound action of the shock after a washboard hit/small pothole/etc considered a high, medium, or low speed shaft velocity? I know on compression the shaft moves at quite a high velocity, but on rebound, since the spring only moved an bit and is returning to around normal ride height, is this low speed? Or maybe mid speed since the bump has essentially dropped out and left the wheel un-supported?
I don't want to make the whole rebound stack lighter since its a heavy vehicle and a lighter stack would make slower 4wheeling a bit too wallow-y.
So, any thoughts on which shims to target on rebound for quicker return?
Corey
Is the rebound action of the shock after a washboard hit/small pothole/etc considered a high, medium, or low speed shaft velocity? I know on compression the shaft moves at quite a high velocity, but on rebound, since the spring only moved an bit and is returning to around normal ride height, is this low speed? Or maybe mid speed since the bump has essentially dropped out and left the wheel un-supported?
I don't want to make the whole rebound stack lighter since its a heavy vehicle and a lighter stack would make slower 4wheeling a bit too wallow-y.
So, any thoughts on which shims to target on rebound for quicker return?
Corey
Start at the medium to larger diameter shim(s) side...thinner.
Yea thats what I'm thinking. Was recomended to me by someone else to maybe replace the two largest shims on rebound with .010's instead of 12's and see if that works. If the shop has them I'll give that a go.
I was able to get a bit of shop time in Santiago on Monday and got the shocks valved as follows. Its a bit of a process to get things done with car tools compared to having a nitrogen tank at home
Rebound:
1.425" x 0.010
1.350" x 0.010
1.100" x 0.012
.950" x 0.015
.800" x 0.015
.750" x 0.2
Compression:
1.600" x 0.010
1.425" x 0.010
0.80 x 0.010 (flutter)
1.350" x 0.008
1.100" x 0.008
.950" - removed
.800" x 0.02 (standoff washer)
Rate Plate
~ 200psi of pressure in each shock.
-I forgot to check how many bleed holes are in each piston. I suspect only one. If I need to go with 2 hole pistons I'll need to order them from Fox or a vendor in the states.Thats 80 bucks in pistons so will probably want to check to see what I've got before I order more.
Impression: Much better than before but still not great. Low speed wallow is gone which is really nice. Mid range is too light still. Not a huge deal as I'm not hitting crazy stuff at speed a fully loaded car, but do have to slow down more than I should (blows through travel too quickly). Washboard is much improved over old setup but not great. Rebound still seems ok though has a bit of trouble controlling side-to-side movement if I hit some dips cross/axle too quickly.
I got some feedback on some other forums on what other valving I might be able to try and why my last setup wasn't working well. It makes sense and if I get a chance I may try to revalve again but I doubt I'll be able to find the nitrogen charging ability any time soon.
Corey
Rebound:
1.425" x 0.010
1.350" x 0.010
1.100" x 0.012
.950" x 0.015
.800" x 0.015
.750" x 0.2
Compression:
1.600" x 0.010
1.425" x 0.010
0.80 x 0.010 (flutter)
1.350" x 0.008
1.100" x 0.008
.950" - removed
.800" x 0.02 (standoff washer)
Rate Plate
~ 200psi of pressure in each shock.
-I forgot to check how many bleed holes are in each piston. I suspect only one. If I need to go with 2 hole pistons I'll need to order them from Fox or a vendor in the states.Thats 80 bucks in pistons so will probably want to check to see what I've got before I order more.
Impression: Much better than before but still not great. Low speed wallow is gone which is really nice. Mid range is too light still. Not a huge deal as I'm not hitting crazy stuff at speed a fully loaded car, but do have to slow down more than I should (blows through travel too quickly). Washboard is much improved over old setup but not great. Rebound still seems ok though has a bit of trouble controlling side-to-side movement if I hit some dips cross/axle too quickly.
I got some feedback on some other forums on what other valving I might be able to try and why my last setup wasn't working well. It makes sense and if I get a chance I may try to revalve again but I doubt I'll be able to find the nitrogen charging ability any time soon.
Corey
Strangely, our valving is almost the exact opposite. Just toss the flutter washer into your rebound stack and it's nearly my compression(and your compression, minus the flutter is my rebound).
I've not eliminated any bleed holes.
I've not eliminated any bleed holes.
Crazy, but good to know. Are you pretty happy with the way it rides? Good on washboard? IIRC you've done a ton of work to the suspension on your truck, imagine that changed the needs for shock valving.
I'm still not happy with the way my truck rides...it should ride really well considering its not lifted much with all the weight in it, and has appropriate springs for the weight.
Maybe return to one of the typical Fox stack arrangements for compression and rebound...to reset your benchmark? My Fox 2.0 with remotes came presumably set up for a rig with several thousand pounds less GVW. The current arrangements are at or near the top range of the Fox chart for these shocks (reference point only). Of course for my rig I should have 2.50" shocks...which IMO make tuning easier on the 100 fronts especially.
Although I am far from calling myself a shock tune expert over the years of experimenting with the tune on these shocks I have learned a couple things including when you adjust either stack it will, to a lesser degree, effect the other. The problem I had with the rebound side was it was, like the compression side, about 50% too light in valve damping for my ~8klb rig and driving style.
But after altering, by increasing the rebound damping valve shim stack, several months ago, did feel a bump in the compression side even though I had not changed anything on the compression side. Kind of makes sense...
I did, upon purchasing shock parts for same earlier this year get some helpful tuning tips (flutter stacks to better control body roll on highway...) from Andrew at PolyPerformance...FWIW. It still is difficult to impossible to find any real and detailed shock tune info on the web...it's still a well guarded area of suspension tuning knowledge!
Although I am far from calling myself a shock tune expert over the years of experimenting with the tune on these shocks I have learned a couple things including when you adjust either stack it will, to a lesser degree, effect the other. The problem I had with the rebound side was it was, like the compression side, about 50% too light in valve damping for my ~8klb rig and driving style.
But after altering, by increasing the rebound damping valve shim stack, several months ago, did feel a bump in the compression side even though I had not changed anything on the compression side. Kind of makes sense...
I did, upon purchasing shock parts for same earlier this year get some helpful tuning tips (flutter stacks to better control body roll on highway...) from Andrew at PolyPerformance...FWIW. It still is difficult to impossible to find any real and detailed shock tune info on the web...it's still a well guarded area of suspension tuning knowledge!
alia176
SILVER Star
This is fun to watch.......
Yea I think we are somewhat on the same page....I tried to return to a normal fox stack with the 30/75 before I left, just to get a baseline. Ended up not being that great
I expect on the IFS with the ~2:1 or or so motion ratio you end up needing almost twice the compression numbers? Just a guess???
I wish I had more time to tune this stuff before I left for south america...I keep learning more but also have to unlearn things as I go
I too have had a very hard time finding detailed and math/science based valving info on the web. Most is just trying to infer from other people's suggestions. Hard to learn that way but I'm getting there! I did get some good feedback from the folks at dezert rangers. I have a few things to check next time I can get into the shock, but that might be a while. More updates when I have them!
Here's the new stacks I just revalved to. The last setup was incredibly horrible overall. Had to do a quasi-temporary fix in El Bolson, Argentina to try and rid myself of some of the dangerous wallow in the rear. 300 extra lbs of wine and beer will weigh down the cruiser a bit
Haven't done much testing yet but so far seems much improved. The smaller shims on the compression side area bit funky in terms of thickness cause I don't have much variety in that size of shims to use.
After a harsh learning curve I have realized that my initial rebound was much too slow for washboard, and the compression was much too light. With this new stack I want to watch for 3 things primarily:
I added extra shims in the low and mid range compression for the rear rather than option to go for the even thicker .15 shims (of which I have none and would have to order). I recall reading that the stiffness of a shim is proportional to the thickness cubed. So, even though running two shims in some spots on compression is still far less damping than bumping up to the next thicker shim. .012^3+.010^3<.015^3
More detailed report later.
OLD Front Comp and Rebound
OLD Rear Comp/Rebound
NEW Front Comp and Rebound
NEW Rear Comp/Rebound
Haven't done much testing yet but so far seems much improved. The smaller shims on the compression side area bit funky in terms of thickness cause I don't have much variety in that size of shims to use.
After a harsh learning curve I have realized that my initial rebound was much too slow for washboard, and the compression was much too light. With this new stack I want to watch for 3 things primarily:
- How good the washboard performance is. So far its much improved.
- If the substantially lighter rebound stack has too much of a detrimental effect on pavement/higher speed driving.
- If the mid-range compression is still too light.
I added extra shims in the low and mid range compression for the rear rather than option to go for the even thicker .15 shims (of which I have none and would have to order). I recall reading that the stiffness of a shim is proportional to the thickness cubed. So, even though running two shims in some spots on compression is still far less damping than bumping up to the next thicker shim. .012^3+.010^3<.015^3
More detailed report later.
OLD Front Comp and Rebound
Code:
.010 ----------1.600---------
.010 ---------1.425--------
.010 ---0.800---
.008 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
none ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.010 ---------1.425--------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--OLD Rear Comp/Rebound
Code:
.012 ----------1.600---------
.012 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.012 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.010 ---------1.425--------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950--- (other side had 2 shims .008 because I had run out 15's on my trip)
.020 --0.800--NEW Front Comp and Rebound
Code:
.012 ----------1.600---------
.012 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.012 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.008 ---------1.425--------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.010 --0.800--NEW Rear Comp/Rebound
Code:
.012 ----------1.600---------
.012 ---------1.425--------
.010 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.012 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.008 ---------1.425--------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.010 --0.800--
Last edited:
Just a quick update for my records on my new Rear comp stack. The old one still wallowed too much in the corners and slow bumps so got some thicker shims for the slow speed bumps. Also replaced the highest speed shim with a much thinner one to hopefully be less harsh on washboard. Haven't had much time to test but the street performance is much better and no noticable wallow from the rear. Washboard/pothole performance is still pretty good but not great. Will revalve the fronts if I get another warm day sometime.
I think this stack is now 80% good. I'm pretty happy with it and will continue to tune but for now it's very driveable.
OLD Rear Comp/Rebound
NEW Rear Comp/Rebound
I think this stack is now 80% good. I'm pretty happy with it and will continue to tune but for now it's very driveable.
OLD Rear Comp/Rebound
Code:
.012 ----------1.600---------
.012 ---------1.425--------
.010 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.012 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.015 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.008 ---------1.425--------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.010 --0.800--NEW Rear Comp/Rebound
Code:
.015 ----------1.600---------
.015 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.012 ------- 1.350------
.012 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.010 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.008 ---------1.425--------
.010 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.010 --0.800--Another update for my records and a long term checkin. Finally did a full rebuild on the front. They still had original oil and original seals. Probably ran them for 6 years longer than I should have. No leaks, but oil looked pretty dark. Takes a bit longer to rebuild than to just do the revalve's but still pretty easy. Started to notice some rust on the lower hardware. Also some of teh lockrings on the resi's had started to rust a bit but nothing that a little fine sandpaper didn't clean up.
Tried to stiffen up low speed dive when cornering in the front and also improve washboard performance. So put an extra large shim in on compression as well as moving some of the smaller comp shims to thinner sizes. I think I'm in the area of diminishing returns but does seem to be a small improvement so far.
Overall still quite pleased on these. Purchased in 2011 and still going strong after about 70k miles and a trip through south america. Don't look quite as pretty as new but can't complain on the longevity.
NEW Front Comp/Rebound
Tried to stiffen up low speed dive when cornering in the front and also improve washboard performance. So put an extra large shim in on compression as well as moving some of the smaller comp shims to thinner sizes. I think I'm in the area of diminishing returns but does seem to be a small improvement so far.
Overall still quite pleased on these. Purchased in 2011 and still going strong after about 70k miles and a trip through south america. Don't look quite as pretty as new but can't complain on the longevity.
NEW Front Comp/Rebound
Code:
.012 ----------1.600---------
.012 ----------1.600---------
.012 ---------1.425--------
.008 ---0.800---
.012 -------1.350------
.008 ------1.100-----
.008 ---0.950---
.020 --0.800--
.008 ---------1.425--------
.008 ------- 1.350------
.010 ------1.100-----
.010 ---0.950---
.010 --0.800--
No weight change. Still fairly heavy. Dual batteries, front/rear bumpers, tranny skid plate, winch, rear drawers filled up, fridge. I'd suspect i'm in the high 5k or low 6k range. Still running OME heavies. I too have been considering moving to slee springs, not for more lift but maybe a higher quality spring. Washboard still isn't as good as I think it should be, but my expectations exceed my skill at shock valving 
So, to revive this 6-7 year old thread... you folks that had 12” Fox built. How the heck are you mounting them? Fox put the wrong ends on my fronts, so I need to have those fixed, but I just mounted my rears and only have 4” of up travel (3 1/2” if you count the rubber bumper washer) and I have Slinky HD rear springs and a very light truck at the moment with nothing mounted on it.
Seems Fox is a little more liberal with their measurements than I was expecting. 32” center to center on the mounts, but they say 30.18”. They measure from top of the can, to top of the eyelet hole inside of mounting centers.
Seems Fox is a little more liberal with their measurements than I was expecting. 32” center to center on the mounts, but they say 30.18”. They measure from top of the can, to top of the eyelet hole inside of mounting centers.
Last edited:
