May have a new shock option soon!

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Crazy, I'm lovin the Fox 2.0s..... OME rode very harsh for me, found myself avoiding potholes because I knew it would feel awful. The Fox are nice and soft and can actually absorb a pothole without it feeling like the suspension is going to break off.

I think weight issues should be addressed with different springs or airbags, not really the job of the shocks to deal with that.
 
ckkone and petrotk40, me and all my passengers hope I interpreted your reviews correctly! These will be replacing the OME's later today...

ForumRunner_20130802_130925.webp

ForumRunner_20130802_130925.webp
 
The Fox 2.0s are installed but I haven't driven anywhere yet as I decided to paint the wheels while I had the time. I can tell you that for the people looking for maximum articulation the standard Fox shocks are too short. They were an inch too short when I put them on and I didn't have the axle drooping all the way. I'm running OME 865 springs with a 10mm or something trim packer. For my purposes this won't be an issue anytime soon but for some, you will probably want to custom order your Fox shocks.

ForumRunner_20130803_101840.webp



ForumRunner_20130803_101902.webp

ForumRunner_20130803_101840.webp


ForumRunner_20130803_101902.webp
 
Are those Foxes in the picture the correct model for the 100? The length is one thing, but it's hard to believe there is enough dampening capacity in a package that small. Maybe good things do come in small packages after all... :-)

Edit: also, maybe it's just the pic, but it looks really short on the length of the top mount. Is there room in there for the OE washers or does Fox expect the rubber to not pull through?
 
OregonLC said:
Are those Foxes in the picture the correct model for the 100? The length is one thing, but it's hard to believe there is enough dampening capacity in a package that small. Maybe good things do come in small packages after all... :-)
Click to expand...

The Fox shocks are flipped relative to the others, i.e piston on right v left...
 
Bomar said:
How did the fox's and profender's do on the trips taken over the last month.
Click to expand...

Mine did great on the HWY from SLC to Ouray, I have 865 rear springs and was pretty weighted down I will probably add airbags before my next big trip. Offroad in the San Juans they did fine, still no regrets here. Haters gonna hate though, all I can say is they are good shocks for 99% of us; the other 1% will never be able to build their truck strong enough for the mall but they sure will look good.
 
re_guderian said:
The Fox shocks are flipped relative to the others, i.e piston on right v left...
Click to expand...

Thanks capt obvious! :-). Yes, they're inverted shocks, reducing unsprung weight (not that it probably matters for us). They just look smaller in both diameter and chamber length than the OME's .
 
OregonLC said:
Are those Foxes in the picture the correct model for the 100? The length is one thing, but it's hard to believe there is enough dampening capacity in a package that small. Maybe good things do come in small packages after all... :-)

Edit: also, maybe it's just the pic, but it looks really short on the length of the top mount. Is there room in there for the OE washers or does Fox expect the rubber to not pull through?
Click to expand...

The Fox 2.0's in the pictures are the part number shocks that was referenced earlier in this thread. The Foxes did not come with washers where they mount to the frame. I almost installed the factory washers but decided to see what happens without them. I think I could have installed them with the factory washers without any problem.
 
OregonLC said:
...Edit: also, maybe it's just the pic, but it looks really short on the length of the top mount. Is there room in there for the OE washers or does Fox expect the rubber to not pull through?
Click to expand...
they're poly, and I can't imagine what kind of force it'd take to extrude a poly bushing through the hole. At full droop, is there really that much pure downward force? Or just hanging weight? I didn't use the oem washers either. Will look later this weekend. Gonna swap the 865's back in...Regularly carrying 6 adults now...
 
It's not that there's necessarily a tremendous force, it's that the hole is quiet large compared to the bushing diameter. The Fox bushings aren't any bigger than OE but Mr. T thought they were needed. One guy did have a pair without the washers pull through, however I don't remember the brand and there may have been rust going on as well.

If they're poly vs rubber then it may be less of an issue. Rubber on the Radflo and I reused them.
 
IIRC, there is a lip on the poly bushings that fit inside the frame hole. I test fitted the washers, and they wouldn't sit flush on the Fox bushings - I.e. washer hole i.d. smaller than the Fox bushing lip o.d.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom