Favorite shock on a TJ

Favorite shock... Doesn't mean you're currently using

  • Fox 2.0

    Votes: 11 10.5%
  • Fox 2.0 with reservoir

    Votes: 15 14.3%
  • Rancho 7000

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Skyjacker Black max

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Skyjacker Nitro

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Skyjacker Hydro

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Bilstein Any

    Votes: 7 6.7%
  • Rancho 5000x

    Votes: 40 38.1%
  • Skyjacker M95 mono

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Rancho 9000 adjustable

    Votes: 3 2.9%
  • KYB any

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Rough Country any

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Pro Comp any

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Terraflex any

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Old Man Emu

    Votes: 12 11.4%
  • OEM Mopar

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Napa any

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Monroe any

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • King any

    Votes: 2 1.9%
  • Other...please list if you chose other

    Votes: 8 7.6%

  • Total voters
    105
I'm running ranchos up front and remote resi's in the rear. The resi's are a touch stiff, I'd like to get them retuned. Having said that, they still absorb bumps incredibly well
 
I have Metal cloaks’s “rocksport” shocks about $280 front and rear only because it was on the mechanics shelf ready to go. I can’t really say it’s my favorite shock as I only had bilstein and MC but the ride is way smoother than bilstein Shocks that’s Forsure. I’m satisfied so far.
Do you know what the PSI is of the rocksport vs. the Bilstein? I'm assuming you're talking about the 5100 series Bilstein?.?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jamison C
What are you talking about. Chris said the ifp and the 2.0 without reservoir were different shocks. They aren't. The 2.0 without reservoir is an ifp shock.

In the list above I was only including the performance series (without noting mind you) as IMO that is the most used of the Fox shock among the TJ world. With and without reservoir.

Lastly...I disagree with you on the ifp being on all performance series 2.0
You do understand what an emulsion shock is, right?
 
Love the condescension....

Cheers.


P.s.
You insist the performance 2.0 with reservoir is an IFP shock.
I'm not too proud if I'm mistaken on that so by all means post the information up.
Any shock with a remote resi has an IFP. That's what divides the oil and nitrogen. I already have said that. Just trust me that they do.
 
Not a shock expert but interested in the conversation regarding Fox Shocks and the internal floating piston (IFP). On a reservoir shock, isn't the divider between the nitrogen and oil in the reservoir?
 
Not a shock expert but interested in the conversation regarding Fox Shocks and the internal floating piston (IFP). On a reservoir shock, isn't the divider between the nitrogen and oil in the reservoir?

Yes but it is still an IFP
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris
Yes but it is still an IFP
That is absolutely true. Fox labels it as such on the exploded drawing of their 2.0 remote reservoir shock. Thinking outside the box, the only time there wouldn't be something similar to an IFP in a gas and oil shock would be if the gas is contained in a bladder.

Correction: emulsion shocks do not have a bladder. The gas and oil is allowed to mix. (Thanks Mr. Blaine)
 
Last edited:
Not a shock expert but interested in the conversation regarding Fox Shocks and the internal floating piston (IFP). On a reservoir shock, isn't the divider between the nitrogen and oil in the reservoir?
Yes, as stated by a couple of folks. If you don't separate the compressed gas charge from the shock oil, then it is an emulsion shock. Emulsion is sort of a misnomer since the typical definition means the mixing of two liquids that really don't want to be mixed like an oil and vinegar salad dressing. You can shake it up and it will mix short term but will eventually settle back out into the two separate liquids. The same thing happens in an emulsion shock. The oil gets gas entrainment which changes oil viscosity and the properties of the oil which then changes the shock response.

Before Fox and maybe others started putting a floating piston inside the shock body on top of the oil with a gas charge over that to stop emulsion, the piston in a reservoir was just called a piston. Since the advent of the IFP terminology, now both are referred to as IFP's even though the reservoir piston has been around since shocks have had reservoirs practically.

It also helps to understand why there has to be a compressible space in addition to the oil volume in a shock. As the shock shaft moves into the body of the shock from full extension, it displaces the oil. Without the compressible space, the shock would hydro-lock and stop the shaft from going in any further or if the force were high enough, blow out the seals or some other damage to release the pressure.

So, there has to be a space equivalent to the volume of the shaft that will fully occupy space inside the shock at full compression. You can deal with that space with a piston, without, or with a reservoir.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EzPeezy
That is absolutely true. Fox labels it as such on the exploded drawing of their 2.0 remote reservoir shock. Thinking outside the box, the only time there wouldn't be something similar to an IFP in a gas and oil shock would be if the gas is contained in a bladder.
What is an emulsion shock?
 
What is an emulsion shock?
Please keep me on the right path. 😁

An emulsion shock is a shock that allows the air and oil to mix; it does not utilize an internal rubber bladder. Silicone oil doesn't compress well without the help of some air to displace the space taken up by the piston when it's moving within the shock body.