Savvy and Accutune no longer tune Fox 2.0 IFP Shocks

[WSS]

How much F/R up/down travel do you have? I will have the 11" front / 12" rear setup once shocks are in and MrBlaine can fit me into his very busy schedule.

Chris's LSC reservoir shocks rode absolutely amazing (truly awesome) when he took me for a spin, so I'm going a similar route (but with DSC adjusters).

It’s balanced near perfect now. I had to lighten the rear about 100lbs plus the whatever the hardtop to soft top swap netted. I get 50/50 on the front and 45/55 on the rear. The travel is a about 10.25 front and 11 back. The front anti rock changed the “real travel” some. If you want to call it that. Last four trips the front rubber puck on the shock never touched the bottom on either side. Probably 1.5” from bottom. It works great so I’m not going to adjust the anti rock.

I should add that if you do high speed, the DSC’s are probably a good choice. If it’s all low speed, the LSC’s will do the job. My TJ is a trailer queen that tops out at about 60 so I’m all low speed.

 

[MikeE024]

It’s balanced near perfect now. I had to lighten the rear about 100lbs plus the whatever the hardtop to soft top swap netted. I get 50/50 on the front and 45/55 on the rear. The travel is a about 10.25 front and 11 back. The front anti rock changed the “real travel” some. If you want to call it that. Last four trips the front rubber puck on the shock never touched the bottom on either side. Probably 1.5” from bottom. It works great so I’m not going to adjust the anti rock.

Your travel specs sound great!

I should add that if you do high speed, the DSC’s are probably a good choice. If it’s all low speed, the LSC’s will do the job. My TJ is a trailer queen that tops out at about 60 so I’m all low speed.

FWIW, I'm not an expert, but my understanding (after talking to Wayne and another experienced forum member) is that Fox's LSC design is not ideal (compared to non-adjustable or DSC reservoirs) due to the LSC set-up having too small of an orifice, thus causing extra harshness by restricting fluid transfer. This is avoided by going with a non-adjustable or DSC reservoir. I made the call to pay up and go DSC because I wanted adjustability for error when variables change (and bc I'm game for the fun experiment).

With that said, I don't mean to sound critical. Just figured I'd share my reasoning for choosing the DSC. Feel free to speak with Wayne at Alltech about this since he is an expert on the subject.

Also, Chris is very happy with his LSC set-up, and I thought his rig rode flat-out amazing when he showed me how great it was. I'll be super happy if my rig rides anywhere near the quality of his ride (and he's running 35x17's with E load-rated tires ). I'll be running 35x15s (C load-rated).

Lastly, I'll be game to compare how our rides feel if I end up back in your neck of the woods.

 

[WSS]

How much F/R up/down travel do you have? I will have the 11" front / 12" rear setup once shocks are in and MrBlaine can fit me into his very busy schedule.

Chris's LSC reservoir shocks rode absolutely amazing (truly awesome) when he took me for a spin, so I'm going a similar route (but with DSC adjusters).

Your travel specs sound great!


FWIW, I'm not an expert, but my understanding (after talking to Wayne and another experienced forum member) is that Fox's LSC design is not ideal (compared to non-adjustable or DSC reservoirs) due to the LSC set-up having too small of an orifice, thus causing extra harshness by restricting fluid transfer. This is avoided by going with a non-adjustable or DSC reservoir. I made the call to pay up and go DSC because I wanted adjustability for error when variables change (and bc I'm game for the fun experiment).

With that said, I don't mean to sound critical. Just figured I'd share my reasoning for choosing the DSC. Feel free to speak with Wayne at Alltech about this since he is an expert on the subject.

Also, Chris is very happy with his LSC set-up, and I thought his rig rode flat-out amazing when he showed me how great it was. I'll be super happy if my rig rides anywhere near the quality of his ride (and he's running 35x17's with E load-rated tires ). I'll be running 35x15s (C load-rated).

Lastly, I'll be game to compare how our rides feel if I end up back in your neck of the woods.

The LSC version I have is at least version 2 or the latest, not sure if there was any further versions. I had heard the 1st version had the issues you mentioned.

You are always welcome to give it a whirl. Any time on the trail is always a good day!!

 

[rubicube]

What does your steering damper not pulling your steering to the left have anything to do with Fox 2.0’s?

I got it to match the shocks and everyone said it is gas charged an makes it go left

 

[Mike_H]

Your travel specs sound great!


FWIW, I'm not an expert, but my understanding (after talking to Wayne and another experienced forum member) is that Fox's LSC design is not ideal (compared to non-adjustable or DSC reservoirs) due to the LSC set-up having too small of an orifice, thus causing extra harshness by restricting fluid transfer. This is avoided by going with a non-adjustable or DSC reservoir. I made the call to pay up and go DSC because I wanted adjustability for error when variables change (and bc I'm game for the fun experiment).

With that said, I don't mean to sound critical. Just figured I'd share my reasoning for choosing the DSC. Feel free to speak with Wayne at Alltech about this since he is an expert on the subject.

Also, Chris is very happy with his LSC set-up, and I thought his rig rode flat-out amazing when he showed me how great it was. I'll be super happy if my rig rides anywhere near the quality of his ride (and he's running 35x17's with E load-rated tires ). I'll be running 35x15s (C load-rated).

Lastly, I'll be game to compare how our rides feel if I end up back in your neck of the woods.

I didn't think the DSC adjusters were available in the 2.0 shocks? Not on the fox pages anyway. Maybe Wayne can do something special?

 

[JMT]

I got it to match the shocks and everyone said it is gas charged an makes it go left

Gotcha. That's strange since the steering damper isa a 50:50 shock. Shouldn't pull one way or the other unless there is some kind of defect. @jjvw noted some good characteristics of the Fox steering damper over the typical Monroe, RE dampers IIRC.

 

[jjvw]

Gotcha. That's strange since the steering damper isa a 50:50 shock. Shouldn't pull one way or the other unless there is some kind of defect. @jjvw noted some good characteristics of the Fox steering damper over the typical Monroe, RE dampers IIRC.

The Fox damper is a slightly nicer damper than the $35 Monroe that is recommended most often. The Monroe is significantly better than Old Man Emu, which is a ridiculous waste of money. The Fox might make a slight pull to the left. But a year later, I'm no longer sure of that.

At the end of the day, I believe that a stiffer steering damper is a good thing. But I can't recommend Fox when the Monroe is significantly less expensive.

 

[MikeE024]

The Fox damper is a slightly nicer damper than the $35 Monroe that is recommended most often. The Monroe is significantly better than Old Man Emu, which is a ridiculous waste of money. The Fox might make a slight pull to the left. But a year later, I'm no longer sure of that.

At the end of the day, I believe that a stiffer steering damper is a good thing. But I can't recommend Fox when the Monroe is significantly less expensive.

I went with the Rancho (when changing the pitman arm and going with the RJ steering kit), and it seems to do the job well.

I assume the Rancho is similar to the Monroe, but I haven't personally compared.

 

[MikeE024]

Maybe Wayne can do something special?

Correct!

Wayne will attach the DSC kit during the tuning process.

 

[psrivats]

I didn't think the DSC adjusters were available in the 2.0 shocks? Not on the fox pages anyway. Maybe Wayne can do something special?

That was my understanding too. Unless you can buy 2.5s with DSCs and transfer than over to a set of 2.0s if that is even possible physically.

 

[Apparition]

That was my understanding too. Unless you can buy 2.5s with DSCs and transfer than over to a set of 2.0s if that is even possible physically.

Go CO

 

[MikeE024]

That was my understanding too.

The DSC kit is purchased separately and then Wayne installs it.

 

[mrblaine]

That was my understanding too. Unless you can buy 2.5s with DSCs and transfer than over to a set of 2.0s if that is even possible physically.

The standard 2.0 shaft is too small to make the DSC's work. They need the 7/8" shaft commonly used in coil overs to displace the oil faster. To do that correctly, the only part of the 2.0 shock you would retain is the body and maybe the piston and lower eye. Top cap is different, shaft is different, lower cap is different, lower eye might still work, and IIRC from Wayne, the piston for the larger shaft is also different.

 

[MikeE024]

The standard 2.0 shaft is too small to make the DSC's work. They need the 7/8" shaft commonly used in coil overs to displace the oil faster. To do that correctly, the only part of the 2.0 shock you would retain is the body and maybe the piston and lower eye. Top cap is different, shaft is different, lower cap is different, lower eye might still work, and IIRC from Wayne, the piston for the larger shaft is also different.

Thanks for this helpful info Blaine.

 

[psrivats]

The standard 2.0 shaft is too small to make the DSC's work. They need the 7/8" shaft commonly used in coil overs to displace the oil faster. To do that correctly, the only part of the 2.0 shock you would retain is the body and maybe the piston and lower eye. Top cap is different, shaft is different, lower cap is different, lower eye might still work, and IIRC from Wayne, the piston for the larger shaft is also different.

For that much custom work .. wouldn't it be easier to use the coilovers as "shock only"? Or the overall size (or cost and/or mounting scheme) makes it not a viable idea?

 

[MikeE024]

For that much custom work .. wouldn't it be easier to use the coilovers as "shock only"? Or the overall size (or cost and/or mounting scheme) makes it not a viable idea?

My guess (and nothing more) is that I wouldn't be able to have the outboard work done with coilovers unless I ran extremely low BS and/or wheel spacers. Even so, I wouldn't want a super-wide track width.

 

[psrivats]

My guess (and nothing more) is that I wouldn't be able to have the outboard work done with coilovers unless I ran extremely low BS and/or wheel spacers. Even so, I wouldn't want a super-wide track width.

I did not mean coilovers with springs .. well aware that it is not possible to package coilovers (w/ springs) for standard width axles.

My question might be a very stupid one.

 

[Trevlaw]

I did not mean coilovers with springs .. well aware that it is not possible to package coilovers (w/ springs) for standard width axles.

My question might be a very stupid one.

If it's easier to get the 2.0 CO's with DSC's than it is to retrofit a smooth body, there's no reason you can't run it just like a smooth body. Not sure if you remember, but the 2.5s I run in the back are coilovers with no hardware.

The threads on the body make the rub marks from my tires blend in a bit better... Lol

 

[MikeE024]

I did not mean coilovers with springs .. well aware that it is not possible to package coilovers (w/ springs) for standard width axles.

My question might be a very stupid one.

Sorry for my poor reading comprehension man. SMH

 

[psrivats]

If it's easier to get the 2.0 CO's with DSC's than it is to retrofit a smooth body, there's no reason you can't run it just like a smooth body. Not sure if you remember, but the 2.5s I run in the back are coilovers with no hardware.

The threads on the body make the rub marks from my tires blend in a bit better... Lol

That is right - I just recalled your rear setup. That answered my question