Rear shock mounts

Andy Jones · Post by **Andy Jones** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 2:23 pm

arse_sidewards wrote:
Andy Jones wrote:Stick a 14" stroke shock under your rig, and see how much Bump travel there is !.
About 14 minus the down travel from ride height... give or take a little since it's probably not 1:1 stroke:travel.

You could stuff it outboard so it's almost parallel to the ground on full compression and keep full bump travel. Not saying that would be a smart idea, but you could do it. The kind of valving you'd use at that orientation would probably cure any axle wrap issues.

A Threat Motorsports, and or Solo Motorsports, shock mount. will not work with a 14" stroke shock on a Bronco..

A Truck.. Yes..

Andy Jones · Post by **Andy Jones** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 2:26 pm

Not even on a Truck, is what I meant to type.. You would need a different style shock mount..

ChaseTruck754 · Post by **ChaseTruck754** » Mon Jun 29, 2015 8:48 am

correct Andy. Fitting a 14" UNDER THE BED (which is what is being discussed here) would take some MAJOR gangsta lean to fit at all, let alone have any bump travel. The bodies are way too long.

If a 10" stoke body was limiting my up travel I have no clue how you think a 14" stroke would fit let alone work.

Rmc · Post by **Rmc** » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:11 am

I think what Andy was trying to say is from ride height the up travel would be pretty short due to the massive length of the shock body on a 14 positioned this way. It's not that a 14 won't fit it's the fact that the uptravel would only be a few inches. With a 10" shock the body is shorter so you get more uptravel, a near 40/60 split up travel to down travel. With a 14 it would be around 20/80 up to down travel usable stroke lengths. So you would bottom out a few inches into compression

Rmc · Post by **Rmc** » Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:13 am

I've installed 12's and same deal, reduction in uptravel vs down due to body length restrictions not usable travel. It's all usable it's just not equal up travel vs down travel like the shorter body provides

VintageIronFab · Post by **VintageIronFab** » Sun Jul 05, 2015 11:58 am

Why is lowering the lower shock mounts so taboo? Seems like if a beefed up lowered lower mount would be a great compromise for mounting/shock options. Many of the other oe lower mounts do sit lower. I thought I saw a total chaos mount sit lower as well. I'm talking maybe 1 1/2" max

Rmc · Post by **Rmc** » Sun Jul 05, 2015 2:15 pm

I agree. But ground clearance is the reason it's taboo. You could always go to 39's and it's less of an issue

ChaseTruck754 · Post by **ChaseTruck754** » Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:21 pm

ground clearance & the fact that the shafts are way more exposed to rocks, etc. the lower they go.

As I said, my experience on an F series is a 10" shock body limited up travel. Not sure how a 12" would go without a major lean. A 14" would be about useless for uptravel, and I'm not even sure how it would physically fit. Keep in mind this is under the bed in a truck, not a bronco.

Rmc · Post by **Rmc** » Mon Jul 06, 2015 11:42 pm

I totally agree with Steve. I've had the same experiences. A 12 it pushing it under the bed.

yikes · Post by **yikes** » Tue Jul 07, 2015 6:05 am

Here's a picture of my 12's. Note how far below the axle tube they are. The tops are within thousandths of contacting the bed too. Getting ready to add shorty shafts, but they're still really low.

cs_drums · Post by **cs_drums** » Tue Jul 07, 2015 4:46 pm

cs_drums · Post by **cs_drums** » Tue Jul 07, 2015 4:51 pm

Didn't mean to post that pic was just trying to ding a pick of the weld on uniball ends like on mine.

What I was gonna say was that I don't understand why one would go through all the trouble of redoing the lowers to fit 2" longer shocks when many guys on here are pulling 18" of great working travel with the standard set up.

At some point you have to draw a line in the sand. At a certain point the performance per dollar get exponentially less lucrative.

Under the bed 12s or just bit the bullet and cut some holes in your cab for 18s.

ChaseTruck754 · Post by **ChaseTruck754** » Tue Jul 07, 2015 9:03 pm

Due to how the truck bed sits they actually can't fit as long of a shock as the broncos as the broncos have that kick up in the rear floor that allows the shock head to tuck nicely up under it. Still I'm getting almost 16" of travel out of my 8" stroke shocks on what is really meant to be a camping/tow rig, so I'm all good with it.
When I was looking at the 10's under my crew the bottom mount would have been sitting about an inch or more LOWER than what Brian/Yikes shows on his bronco above. That was just too low to be worth the extra down travel to me. The 8's were just the easy answer since it isn't a major go fast rig needing as much travel as possible. Had it been something I wanted to spend real time or $$ on I would have done a short body 10" stroke shock with the weld on ends and gotten the extra few inches of travel on either end of the cycle.

jkrell · Post by **jkrell** » Thu Jul 09, 2015 8:02 am

I fit 12" shocks under the bed, just had to trim a bed support rib to make it work, and also remove or shorten front fuel tank. The axle shock mount is stock so shock isn't hanging any lower than factory. Wheel travel is 18", shock is in the same relative position as in the broncos. I've got a bunch of pics in my build thread. I could also cut you a set of the frame plates if you are interested.

jkrell · Post by **jkrell** » Fri Jul 10, 2015 4:16 pm

Thought I would put up a few pics for clarification. I measured shock position/height/angle from an autofab and solo bronco shock mount and my shocks on my f series are in the same relative position and achieve the same wheel travel numbers. 12" stroke shock. I know there is a bump out on the bronco's that makes it look like there is more room to put shocks higher but its actually not the case. I notched the tank, and then only a small bed support rib to clear the top of shock and piggyback reservoir.

ChaseTruck754 · Post by **ChaseTruck754** » Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:36 am

That makes sense & clarifies - thanks. My shocks are on the rear side of that bed support, since I didn't want to mess with cutting anything on the bed. The extra lean & length is how the 12's worked obviously.

Madmaxwell87 · Post by **Madmaxwell87** » Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:56 am

Bringing this back instead of starting a new thread.

Researching rear mounts and theres lots of options with very different price points- Solo, Desolate, Threat. Solo doesn't offer overlay plates (1/4" plate for side plates) and the other two do. Other than that they look basically the same. So is it worth the extra $25-75 for the Solo or Desolate?
Also anyone I'm missing? Autofab?

ThrustMaster · Post by **ThrustMaster** » Fri Sep 11, 2020 8:14 am

I have the threat one and like it so far. Running gen 1 raptor shocks and stock axle mounts and they are limiting droop travel at the moment. i have lots of work to do though.

Madmaxwell87 · Post by **Madmaxwell87** » Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:27 am

ThrustMaster wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 11, 2020 8:14 am
I have the threat one and like it so far. Running gen 1 raptor shocks and stock axle mounts and they are limiting droop travel at the moment. i have lots of work to do though.

What rear springs are you running?

biggiek · Post by **biggiek** » Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:55 pm

Inhave the older solo one, raptor shocks with revised mounts on the axle and j40 springs. Shocks could use some tweaking but rides nice.