As you can tell. 36 point adjustment is pointless. All dampening is adjusted in the first 1/4 turn or so. Extreme low speed dampening also leaves much to be desired.


Both fronts side by side




Front 82016




Front 82025




Both rears




Rear 92131




Rear 92137

 

That's pretty standard for the "32-way adjustable, y0" type stuff.

Good info

 

for the noob in me, how does this read? cos im lost.

 

thanks for the post!!!! you should PM mike c and have him add it to the shock dyno thread.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by owace &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">for the noob in me, how does this read? cos im lost.


</TD></TR></TABLE>

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by owace &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">for the noob in me, how does this read? cos im lost.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=1104049
http://www.koni-na.com/presentations/civic

Good info

 

On these graphs, force (measured in Newtons) is plotted along the y-axis. The force measured is the amount of force being applied on the damper by the shock dyno machine. When equipped on a car, this would be the force applied due to things like body roll, potholes, etc.
Along the x-axis is piston speed, the speed at which the piston inside the damper is moving up and down. Low piston speeds, up to ~35mm/sec I think, translates into body roll, pitch, and dive on the road. High piston speeds are bumps and road irregularities.
Depending on the machine, rebound and compression can be plotted on either side on the x-axis, although in this case it looks like rebound is on the top, which is more common. Typically, what you want to look for in the dyno curve is a digressive shape, another way of saving convex. What most people want is a quick pick-up in low speed damping, which means more low-speed damping. Up on the high-speed end, less damping is typical, because this means a less harsh ride over bumps and potholes and what not. The bend you see in each line is the transition from low speed to high speed damping, roughly. On mono-tube type coilovers, it seems very difficult to produce a very dramatic bend, or complex curve. All those different colored lines are different levels (not ways) of adjustment.
Of course, graphs and needs will differ depending on application and driver preference. The easiest way to understand a graph like this is the same for any other graph, IMO; pick a point on the graph, and read out what its saying. Eg. "It takes 2400 newtons to move the piston 50mm/second." And so on.

 

Ick, if I'm reading these charts right it leaves a TON to be desired in low speed dampening. I wouldn't be suprised if these shocks felt very under dampened just driving in a straight line. Not much range in adjustment either considering that the "1 step back" [of max I'm assuming] kills off more than 3/4 of the adjustment range. To me these look like "3 click" dampers being generous... I guess they're good for the money (what spring rate were these paired with?) considering they're only ~$650 but I'd go with something else personally for $200 more.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by TimeRacer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ick, if I'm reading these charts right it leaves a TON to be desired in low speed dampening. I wouldn't be suprised if these shocks felt very under dampened just driving in a straight line. Not much range in adjustment either considering that the "1 step back" [of max I'm assuming] kills off more than 3/4 of the adjustment range. To me these look like "3 click" dampers being generous... I guess they're good for the money (what spring rate were these paired with?) considering they're only ~$650 but I'd go with something else personally for $200 more. </TD></TR></TABLE>

for example?

 

Koni/GC comes to mind as a first choice... But if you want cheaper you can always use Tokico or KYB as the damper as well. They're low speed isn't quite as nice as the Koni shocks but they'll get the job done better than these althought you'll probably run a lower spring rate (Tokico up to around 350lb/in and KYB's around 400 lb/in). If you notice MOST of the settings are craptastic as in they're a linear line from 0 up to the highest point. I could design a shock that had a 100% linear dampening rate. Drill a few oil orifices into the reservoir and tada you have a 100% linear shock. To tell the truth I wouldn't be suprised if that's all the internals of the shock were with a shim or two for the slight adjustment, though if that is the design was the durability of these shocks wouldn't be all too great either. But I can only HOPE that the internal design is better than what I just described. I just can't believe how linear these are... Take a look at the "shock dynos" sticky and you'll see what I mean in comparison.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">If you notice MOST of the settings are craptastic as in they're a linear line from 0 up to the highest point. I could design a shock that had a 100% linear dampening rate. Drill a few oil orifices into the reservoir and tada you have a 100% linear shock. To tell the truth I wouldn't be suprised if that's all the internals of the shock were with a shim or two for the slight adjustment, though if that is the design was the durability of these shocks wouldn't be all too great either. But I can only HOPE that the internal design is better than what I just described. I just can't believe how linear these are... Take a look at the "shock dynos" sticky and you'll see what I mean in comparison. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Like I said before, its very difficult to produce the dramatic knee you are looking for with mono-tube dampers, as well as complex curves. It is also difficult to produce many clearly defined levels of seperation for damping adjustable shocks, and the lower settings will often be linear, or even progressive, in shape.
The nice looking curves you are probably referring to in the shock dyno thread are produced with twin-tube shocks, which are capable of finer adjustability and more complex damping characteristics. Each design has its pros and cons.

 

Uhm... no. Monotubes CAN be designed CORRECTLY to produce a very nice dampening curve. That entire spiel that you just said is a load. If you were correct absolutely NO ONE would want to buy a monotube for street driving ever. Unless you want a racing only shock and don't care much about low speed dampening. It's true that a twin-tube will yeild a better ride on a very low spring car. But I'm assuming that w/ the D2's we're talking about 5k/mm springs and up. A monotube should EASILY be able to dampen the rebound from that correctly which this shock dyno shows not to be the case. If you need some proof of this take a look at some of Bilsten's line, Koni 3011 series, Advance design shocks. All of which are far and away better and have low speed dampening....

Just a quick question then, what would be the point of a progressive dampening curve that starts out at nil, stays near nil and slowly works its way up? On anything other than a large bump (speed bump sized) you'll be bouncing everywhere.

Needless to say if you think these dyno graphs show for a nice monotube shock I can see our disagreement...


Modified by TimeRacer at 2:34 PM 6/4/2005

 

You should relax, and re-read what I wrote in my previous post. You don't seem to be understanding what I said.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Just a quick question then, what would be the point of a progressive dampening curve that starts out at nil, stays near nil and slowly works its way up? On anything other than a large bump (speed bump sized) you'll be bouncing everywhere. </TD></TR></TABLE>
That would be a digressive curve, not progressive, and not the type of curve you would want to design in the first place. I didn't say that mono-tube dampers could not produce progressive curves, what I said was that with fixed-damping mono-tube designs, the more complex curves that you see with twin-tube designs are difficult to reproduce, if not impossible. I am comparing mono to twin tube, the same thing you were doing in your previous post, and what I said about the mono-tube design was relative to twin-tube. So while mono-tube curves can be "nice", they are not as "nice" as twin-tube. Mono-tube dampers can be designed correctly and can be designed to properly handle the spring rates they are paired with, no doubt about that, so plenty of people do buy mono-tube dampers. I never said otherwise. When you start designing the adjustable dampers, you run into the problem of relatively poor lower settings, where again, like I said before, the curves are almost linear, if not progressive. A good amount of seperation between each setting is also difficult to achieve. Maybe I should have made this clear in my previous post: This is not to say that a mono-tube adjustable damper cannot produce digressive curves, or be made to properly handle damping a given spring rate, thats not what I'm saying. As I said before, both designs have their pros and cons, so buyers have reasons to go with either one.
The only comment I made about the D2 chart was what the different colored lines represented. Take some care in interpreting other peoples' posts next time.

 

But how are you applying any of that to this thread? I'm applying this DIRECTLY toward the D2 dyno. I can cut and paste the spiel that you just said from anything that describes shock design charachteristics. Bottom line is the D2 dampers seem to be very under dampened in the low speed and the adjustment that it gives is almost a quest in utter futility. Without the shock dyno a user can go anywhere from 36 clicks from full hard down to probably around 4 clicks from full hard w/o noticing a difference other than the placebo affect... That isn't what I call adjustability at all. There's MANY shocks that have a much better curve than this (twin or mono tube designs) that can be had for almost the same price. IF for some reason you HAVE to have the "real" coilover (which means absolutely nothing in terms of performance) then your choices are limited. however looking at the shock dynos page the Omipower will probably perform better as it's nonadjustable rate has a better curve. And short of spring quality and surface quality as I don't know those it's probably a better setup... In the future you should apply your answers to the post instead of just spewing out what a book said mono vs twin and then taking offence as this shock dyno isn't good at all considering the options in the near price range. Giving the excuse of it's a monotube is a cop out as there's plenty of monotubes (albit more expensive as they're usually more agressively valved) that outperform this set by a mile. Each do have their own attribues you're right in saying that (again and again and again) but the trade off is NO WHERE NEAR this severe normallly.

 

This thread is not the place for our discussion. You've got PM.
Lets try and keep this thread civil. your behavior is bordering on childish, and I'll attribute it to a misunderstanding for the moment.

 

Thank you for classifying behavior as well. As you seem to be full of book knowledge but don't know how to apply it into real world applications. Bottom line (and this will conclude my participation in this post) is that the D2 shocks are exactly what you pay for them. Sub par shocks, w/ more than likely sub par control on whatever spring rate they run. Noob4life can contiune to classify why twin-tubes attributes vary from mono's but bottom line is that if you want a quality setup w/ a good ride don't buy these.

 

the dyno results look similar to KYB AGX... do you guys concur?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Noob4life &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This thread is not the place for our discussion. </TD></TR></TABLE>


Oh come on, it was entertaining. Keep going!