Outboard shock mounts - 6.5"-7" Rear drop

[CC69Rat]

Dad and I are changing my truck over to an outboard rear shock mount. My truck is pretty low, and I wanted to run a rear bar, so the original shock mounts had to move.

I got the idea from the No Limit setup. - do you guys think this will work OK?

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by CC69Rat

Dad and I are changing my truck over to an outboard rear shock mount. My truck is pretty low, and I wanted to run a rear bar, so the original shock mounts had to move.

I got the idea from the No Limit setup. - do you guys think this will work OK?

Only thing I don't care for is the lower mounting position. On a coil truck utilizing a Panhard bar to keep the axle centered, there is slight side to side movement of the rear end housing. If you mount things as pictured, the lower mount orientation will have some bind.

Not saying it would be an issue but it's possible vs positioning a single shock stud @ the back side that allows the lower shock bushing to pivot vs bind.

[CC69Rat]

You're absolutely right..

Like this you're saying? So that way the rear axle housing has the ability to shift laterally as necessary

[lolife99]

I like this kit from Tinworks Fabrication.
Great quality built products and fast shipping.
It keeps both shock eyes on the same plane.
Similar to the NoLimit kit.
https://tinworksfabrication.com/prod...tion-brackets/

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by lolife99

I like this kit from Tinworks Fabrication.
Great quality built products and fast shipping.
It keeps both shock eyes on the same plane.
Similar to the NoLimit kit.
https://tinworksfabrication.com/prod...tion-brackets/

I like it as well but it creates the same issue. If your spending the money to correct shock issues, why would you spend it to fix one issue but create another?

Coil/Bag/truck arm/4-bar set-ups w/o a Watts Link to locate the housing will have side to side shift. While slight, it's still enough to create bind. I don't understand why they don't just re-clock the mounting points so the shock can pivot slightly side to side.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by CC69Rat

You're absolutely right..

Like this you're saying? So that way the rear axle housing has the ability to shift laterally as necessary

Correct.

[LS short box]

So could make new lower mount like the top mount and then turn the bottom of the shock 90 degrees? Then it wouldn't bind if the rear end shifted a bit.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by LS short box

So could make new lower mount like the top mount and then turn the bottom of the shock 90 degrees? Then it wouldn't bind if the rear end shifted a bit.

A simple shock stud like used on the front upper would work or whatever dbl shear set-up for additional strength as long as the lower end can pivot w/o much bind side to side.

[HO455]

Originally Posted by LS short box

So could make new lower mount like the top mount and then turn the bottom of the shock 90 degrees? Then it wouldn't bind if the rear end shifted a bit.

Then the binding would occur as the axle moved up and down over bumps. The photo lolife99 posted shows the axle in the very upmost position of travel. The axle will drop at least 6 inches at a minimum at full droop. This relates to around 20 to 30 degrees of movement. The orientation of the shock mounts have been designed to induce the least amount of bind for that style of shock mounting.

I am assuming that lolife99 is planning on installing an adjustable long track bar and a rear sway bar. Both those items will reduce the amount of bind from the lower shocks mounts as they will actively reduce how much the axle articulates.

In suspension design every component's placement is a compromise between what helps, what hinders, and what is feasible under the design limitations.

[lolife99]

Originally Posted by HO455

Then the binding would occur as the axle moved up and down over bumps. The photo lolife99 posted shows the axle in the very upmost position of travel. The axle will drop at least 6 inches at a minimum at full droop. This relates to around 20 to 30 degrees of movement. The orientation of the shock mounts have been designed to induce the least amount of bind for that style of shock mounting.

I am assuming that lolife99 is planning on installing an adjustable long track bar and a rear sway bar. Both those items will reduce the amount of bind from the lower shocks mounts as they will actively reduce how much the axle articulates.

In suspension design every component's placement is a compromise between what helps, what hinders, and what is feasible under the design limitations.

Those pics are from Tinworks Fabrication’s website.
I always do the long track bar to the passenger side trailing arm and standard shock relocator.
Tinworks Fabrication is a great company that is developing a ton of new products for GM trucks of several generations.

[samert111]

Originally Posted by CC69Rat

Dad and I are changing my truck over to an outboard rear shock mount. My truck is pretty low, and I wanted to run a rear bar, so the original shock mounts had to move.

I got the idea from the No Limit setup. - do you guys think this will work OK?

Where did you get those upper shock mounts, or did you fab them yourself?

[CC69Rat]

The upper mounts are Ridetech. I got them from Summit. I think they were $20 or $25 each. They worked nicely. I'm going to give it a shot this way and just see how it goes. If it's binding in any way I'll rethink it.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by CC69Rat

The upper mounts are Ridetech. I got them from Summit. I think they were $20 or $25 each. They worked nicely. I'm going to give it a shot this way and just see how it goes. If it's binding in any way I'll rethink it.

I don't think the 'bind' (if any/much) will be an issue for you as long as when it's at the normal/average height w/full weight the set-up is bind free.

[samert111]

Originally Posted by CC69Rat

The upper mounts are Ridetech. I got them from Summit. I think they were $20 or $25 each. They worked nicely. I'm going to give it a shot this way and just see how it goes. If it's binding in any way I'll rethink it.

Are those a 2 pc mount? Can't seem to find a pic on the Summit site that looks like your photo unless it's a 2 pc mount like the photo below.

[starman13]

To me, it seems like lots of shock angle with that Tinworks setup.Not what we want is it?

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by starman13

To me, it seems like lots of shock angle with that Tinworks setup.Not what we want is it?

I thought the same. My assumption/guess w/o measuring it is the location was being dictated by the need for clearance vs. the bed/bed floor support/s location on the frame.

[samert111]

I ended up doing something similar using a set of modified Summit rear shock locating brackets. I only have a 4" drop but my rear shocks were at about a 30
degree angle.

Just have to get everything painted up and pretty yet.

[Richard]

Kind of do not understand the thinking here. With a panhard bar the lateral (side to side) movement will be minimal. Especially with a longer panhard that is more parallel at ride height. Obviously, not a lot of articulation to worry about with the lowered suspension as suspension travel is limited. The change in shock angle even with standing them up more (as stock) will put more stress on the bushings more than lateral movement ever could. That is the reason GM put both of the shock mount bolts perpendicular to the frame. Put my rear shock mounts that way with 16" of wheel travel with leaf springs which will move side to side much more than a panhard setup. I will be able to bottom one rear wheel and have the other at full droop. Granted my shock eyes are a bit different with pivots in the ends. My case is extreme, I still hope I am getting the information stated correctly.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by Richard

Kind of do not understand the thinking here. With a panhard bar the lateral (side to side) movement will be minimal. Especially with a longer panhard that is more parallel at ride height. Obviously, not a lot of articulation to worry about with the lowered suspension as suspension travel is limited. The change in shock angle even with standing them up more (as stock) will put more stress on the bushings more than lateral movement ever could. That is the reason GM put both of the shock mount bolts perpendicular to the frame. Put my rear shock mounts that way with 16" of wheel travel with leaf springs which will move side to side much more than a panhard setup. I will be able to bottom one rear wheel and have the other at full droop. Granted my shock eyes are a bit different with pivots in the ends. My case is extreme, I still hope I am getting the information stated correctly.

I challenge the idea that the leafs allow more side shift of a rear-end housing vs. a Panhard bar.

Is it possible? Sure.
Is it a legit/correct statement across the board? Not w/o measuring.

Even w/measuring, the parameters would have to be determined before the info is applicable (stock leaf vs stock T/A; dropped vs dropped).

We know the T/A w/Panhard bar allows slight side shift by design. The shorter the bar, the more the shift. So if one is changing the stock shock location/positioning, it's not a bad idea to be aware. Monitoring for unusual wear & tear @ the shock mount bushings (oil change/maint intervals?) until they feel comfortable things are fine.

[CC69Rat]

I completely agree it is a little questionable how it will function, so I guess we'll see. This truck won't see a lot of daily driving, so I'm not real worried about it to be honest.

I have tubular trailing arms and QA1 rear bar, rear links, double adjustable hiem track bar, 315s etc. I'm not concerned about hauling stuff, pulling a camper etc. This truck will be for AutoX and / or spirited driving. I want it to be a touch more laterally stable than vertical anyway.. forward bite being important too, of course. But I guess we'll see what happens. If it's not what I'm thinking it will be I will bag it or change over to coilovers. It is what it is.. (for now)

[samert111]

Took the truck for a ride today to see how the changes affected the ride and handling.

The body roll is much improved with the front sway bar added and I think moving the rear shocks to outside the frame rails and behind the Diff also helps with the body roll.

Before my rear shocks were at around 35 degrees tilted forward with the 4 drop springs. Also, there was significant tire hop during hard acceleration. Now with them vertical to the travel of the rear diff travel there is ZERO tire hop but the ride is also firmer, not too bad for a truck but definitely not as mushy as it was.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by samert111

Took the truck for a ride today to see how the changes affected the ride and handling.

The body roll is much improved with the front sway bar added and I think moving the rear shocks to outside the frame rails and behind the Diff also helps with the body roll.

Before my rear shocks were at around 35 degrees tilted forward with the 4 drop springs. Also, there was significant tire hop during hard acceleration. Now with them vertical to the travel of the rear diff travel there is ZERO tire hop but the ride is also firmer, not too bad for a truck but definitely not as mushy as it was.

I would expect the firmer ride w/the change in the working angle of the shocks. I would also expect an improvement w/stability w/them being moved to outside of the rails & closer to the wheel vs. the stock T/A location.

Sounds like you're happy so far.

[samert111]

Originally Posted by SCOTI

I would expect the firmer ride w/the change in the working angle of the shocks. I would also expect an improvement w/stability w/them being moved to outside of the rails & closer to the wheel vs. the stock T/A location.

Sounds like you're happy so far.

I definitely am happy with the changes.

Next is to replace the rear trailing arms with some Summit tubular arms. Mine are twisted a bit and have a few holes rusted thru in them.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by SCOTI

I challenge the idea that the leafs allow more side shift of a rear-end housing vs. a Panhard bar.

Is it possible? Sure.
Is it a legit/correct statement across the board? Not w/o measuring.

Even w/measuring, the parameters would have to be determined before the info is applicable (stock leaf vs stock T/A; dropped vs dropped).

We know the T/A w/Panhard bar allows slight side shift by design. The shorter the bar, the more the shift. So if one is changing the stock shock location/positioning, it's not a bad idea to be aware. Monitoring for unusual wear & tear @ the shock mount bushings (oil change/maint intervals?) until they feel comfortable things are fine.

I know about shift from a panhard. My front axle with a 4 link and the longest panhard I could fit moves over 2" side to side with 14" of axle travel. I was careful to make panhard and draglink parallel and close in length to eliminate bump steer. Just wanted to point out that I believe (also GM) that the lateral movement is typically less than that on angled shock mounts. Pics in my thread show the change in shock angle of rear shocks on my truck. Almost vertical at full droop. Granted that is almost 16" of axle travel. To me reality is that shock mounting will not make any difference on the lowered vehicle as suspension movement is limited. The way I see leafs, the arch puts more strain on the bushings and will cause more side to side movement than a panhard. Yes a flat leaf may have more control of that motion.