Coil-over tower kit?

[Luke]

Is there any interest in a front coil-over tower kit? The towers were drawn in CAD and I just received a quote from the water cutter for $160 a kit (2 towers) This would be a U-weld-it kit containing all the plates to weld 2 towers to fit a coil over shock. A lower shock mount would need to be fabricated on the upper a-arm but that is pretty simple. I will also provide part numbers for the bilstein shocks that work well with this these. I am currently using this same setup on the rally car with excellent results. The advantages of this setup are ease of adjustability, the ability to swap springs in 5 minutes and ability to get springs in any rate. I would need a pre-order of 4 sets to have them cut.


This is what they would look like.

[Geoff]

I've been thinking about doing this, but I've got some other ideas as to maybe a better way to do it. I'll need to draw it up in CAD to show you though, it won't be for a few days. It would involve less welding but would require bending.

[Luke]

Ok, would like to see your drawings too. Seth and I talked about that but I prefer welding to bending its much easier in my opinion.

[Hans]

To accommodate wider rims, I had been working on a coilover set-up for my 900, but have since abandoned it due to Solo2 rules dictating mounting points. (I instead have a 2.5-inch spring-only set-up awaiting installation/tweaking.) Meanwhile, I still have a photo of a Sweden-based set-up for the 99 w/Ohlins shocks:



Of course, this is a road car, so a rally car's suspension long travel may necessitate something like Luke's "box" design.

[Luke]

That car looks like it would bottom the shock out at much less than stock travel.

[SteveTheFolkie]

That car looks like it would bottom the shock out at much less than stock travel.

unless, of course, the shock in question was longer in travel than stock, in which case it'd be dandy ....

[SaabsBreakDown]

That car looks like it would bottom the shock out at much less than stock travel.

unless, of course, the shock in question was longer in travel than stock, in which case it'd be dandy ....

If the shock had longer travel it would bottom out sooner. You would have to have the whole assembly be longer.

[Luke]

Right, with shocks there's a direct coorelation between free length, compressed length and travel. So theres no free lunch. He could have used a really short shock and have similar bump travel to stock but then he would have virtually no droop travel at all and thats not good either.

[allessence]

That car looks like it would bottom the shock out at much less than stock travel.

What made you form that opinion by looking at the picture? Isn't yours setup almost the same way but you are using a box instead of trunnions?

I've been thinking of doing this to and like the idea of the exposed end assembly as this would allow for seperate Reservoirs. Or even an air suspension.

[Luke]

The setup I am using mounts the shock as far up as possible, it clears the hood by a 1/4". That setup the shock is mounted much lower.