Would you install an old duff lift today?

[ba123]

Well, not with any authority anyway!
I've toyed with the idea of trying front-mounted rear shocks to see if that helps. Just haven't gotten there yet.
I have a bare housing so can put my lower mounts on in any location I need for clearance, but have waited until it's all done to see what's needed.
I believe I have heard here, that some have tried front mounting them and found some other clearance issues. But not sure that's a real memory, or made up.

I believe that as far a performance goes, the Bronco cares very little whether the shock is mounted forward or rearward of the axle. Not sure why Ford made the running change during the '66 model year (earliest Broncos had a forward mounted shock) but it could have been for any one of, or many reasons.
The big thing back then was to mount the shocks of solid axles in staggered formation. One facing forward and one to the rear. For whatever reason, Ford chose not to do that on the rear of our trucks. While just a little later, they did just that on the front of some of the seventies trucks. Including some of the '78 and '79 Broncos.
If I'm not mistaken, for the '80 and later models when dual shocks became an option, if you got a single shock model, they were opposite mounted too. Not "staggered" as we think of them, in a laying-down slightly angle, but still straight up and down. Just for and aft of the front axles. So they did experiment with some.
I'm just not sure what they found.

You can also mount some shocks with the shaft down ("upside down" to some) which will often give you the clearance you need without moving the lower mount at all.
Some shocks, such as Rancho 9000's and large off-road shock counterparts, have very large main bodies which make clearance an even bigger issue.

So the only thing for it is to keep doing what you've been doing with the other aspects of your build. Test fit, re-test fit, then re-re-test fit stuff until it fits and works to your satisfaction.
That's what I'm going to do.

Paul

Yeah, I have both front and rear but pretty sure I welded whichever one wasn’t there before as part of that Duff kit way back when, so two currently, one rear facing and one front and I actually did have them mounted upside down…but I never got to drive it

Contrary, the Duff MS2020, that’s actually the right way up it seems…although I haven’t receive mine yet, but all the pics show it that way.

Thanks for all the good info!

 

[Yeller]

@DirtDonk from what I have read the staggered, 1 front, 1 rear facing rear shocks was to combat wheel hop. How effective or how much stock to put in that I’m not sure.

 

[bmc69]

The big thing back then was to mount the shocks of solid axles in staggered formation. One facing forward and one to the rear. For whatever reason, Ford chose not to do that on the rear of our trucks. While just a little later, they did just that on the front of some of the seventies trucks. Including some of the '78 and '79 Broncos.


Paul

Quick clarification ..the 78/79 Broncos had the quad shock option. If only delivered with two shocks, they were staggered. I never understood why they were staggered because that creates unequal damping side to side...

 

[Yeller]

Quick clarification ..the 78/79 Broncos had the quad shock option. If only delivered with two shocks, they were staggered. I never understood why they were staggered because that creates unequal damping side to side...

I agree with that, however I thing it’s less relevant with fairly flat, stock leaf springs. That’s my theory anyway

 

[sprdv1]

I agree with that, however I thing it’s less relevant with fairly flat, stock leaf springs. That’s my theory anyway

theories count sir

 

[jamesroney]

Just stumbled on this thread…not the latest thread, but this is kinda the kit I bought (got the one with the full HD leaf springs) way back when and it sat and hasn't been driven.

Not sure what you ended up doing, but I know shocks have come a long way since then, I took off the hoops that I did mount and ordered their new shock towers and am going single new shock from them. Not planning on using these new old shocks from them so might get around to trying to sell the hoops and shocks, but sitting for now.

Also planning on going single shock in rear with their MS2020 shock as well instead of the two rear I’m set up for.

I’m waiting on the rear disk portion of my WH Moab kit and it says the rear shock might interfere anyway…off question, anyone know if it matter which rear shock I leave on? I’d assume if one interferes that it would be the most rear one. Paul, (@DirtDonk ) I’m sure you could answer that one…?

Since I'm going to see @DirtDonk tomorrow at the Round-Up, I'm going to throw this out there.

"Staggered" - adjective. Arranged in a way that is not uniform. @Yeller has it exactly correct. Staggered Shocks. Arranged such that one is facing front, and one facing rear. My first staggered shock was in my 1969 Mustang 428 Cobra Jet 4 speed. The purpose of installing staggered shocks was to provide a level of dampening to prevent rotation of the 9 inch axle housing. Uncontrolled rotation of the housing and pinion jacking results in wheel hop. In 1969-70, the 4 speed Boss and Cobra Jet Mustangs got staggered shocks. The automatics did not. Before Marti reports, one way to tell if you had a 4 speed Cobra Jet was to look for staggered shocks.

It is worth pointing out that Ford Chassis engineers knew and demonstrated the value of staggered shocks since 1969. If you watch the classic Steve McQueen movie "Bullett" you will see video of leaf spring wheel hop in his 1968 390 4 speed Fastback. But in the world of cost savings and cost/benefit analysis...the staggered shock was not applied to trucks until the F150 in 2021. GM has been using staggered shocks since I think 1973. I want to say Dodge has had them since 1994. Staggered shocks in the rear are helpful, but not certain to control wheel hop. In the absence of other control mechanisms, they are "good" and essentially "free." in an EB, given the steep angle of the rear shocks. Having 2 properly valved shocks at each wheel is VASTLY SUPERIOR to having a single shock. This is a FACT! But having two properly valved shocks at each wheel is almost impossible to achieve given today shock technology. The shocks are far too stiff, and nobody is engineering shocks with compression and rebound numbers that are needed to do it right. So you are stuck. Superior geometry, with inadequate valving, or superior valving with inferior geometry. As you can see from this thread...the community has voted for lower cost, better valving, piss poor geometry, and ignore wheel hop. (so we are all basically caught up to the Chassis Engineers in 1970)

Now for the front end. There is no such thing as a staggered shock configuration in the front. Ford introduced the Quad Shock on their radius arm suspension as mentioned above. But it is not "staggered." It would only be staggered if someone removed one front and one rear shock from opposite radius arms. Way back in the Stroppe days, enthusiasts realized that they could get the maximum axle control by increasing the leverage of the shock on the radius arm. So the "shock mounted to the radius arm cap" was born. Keep in mind that shock absorbers basically came in one style, and you ran the shocks that Gabriel or Monroe would give you. It would be nearly 2 decades before Rancho would give you a 9 way adjustable shock. So if you wanted a stiffer shock, you would mount it vertically. If you wanted it softer, just mount it at an angle. For a given tilt, if you want more stiff, move the shock away from the radius arm pivot.

Fast forward, and long travel suspension came into Vogue. Well, the long travel and the increased leverage work against each other. So shocks got relegated back to their original locations. BUT...the aftermarket came to the rescue with a wide variety of longer body shocks. Longer body gives you longer available travel. And the world continues to evolve. Modern gas charged inertial dampening technology has made some really good shocks available.

Hope that helps.

 

[ba123]

Since I'm going to see @DirtDonk tomorrow at the Round-Up, I'm going to throw this out there.

"Staggered" - adjective. Arranged in a way that is not uniform. @Yeller has it exactly correct. Staggered Shocks. Arranged such that one is facing front, and one facing rear. My first staggered shock was in my 1969 Mustang 428 Cobra Jet 4 speed. The purpose of installing staggered shocks was to provide a level of dampening to prevent rotation of the 9 inch axle housing. Uncontrolled rotation of the housing and pinion jacking results in wheel hop. In 1969-70, the 4 speed Boss and Cobra Jet Mustangs got staggered shocks. The automatics did not. Before Marti reports, one way to tell if you had a 4 speed Cobra Jet was to look for staggered shocks.

It is worth pointing out that Ford Chassis engineers knew and demonstrated the value of staggered shocks since 1969. If you watch the classic Steve McQueen movie "Bullett" you will see video of leaf spring wheel hop in his 1968 390 4 speed Fastback. But in the world of cost savings and cost/benefit analysis...the staggered shock was not applied to trucks until the F150 in 2021. GM has been using staggered shocks since I think 1973. I want to say Dodge has had them since 1994. Staggered shocks in the rear are helpful, but not certain to control wheel hop. In the absence of other control mechanisms, they are "good" and essentially "free." in an EB, given the steep angle of the rear shocks. Having 2 properly valved shocks at each wheel is VASTLY SUPERIOR to having a single shock. This is a FACT! But having two properly valved shocks at each wheel is almost impossible to achieve given today shock technology. The shocks are far too stiff, and nobody is engineering shocks with compression and rebound numbers that are needed to do it right. So you are stuck. Superior geometry, with inadequate valving, or superior valving with inferior geometry. As you can see from this thread...the community has voted for lower cost, better valving, piss poor geometry, and ignore wheel hop. (so we are all basically caught up to the Chassis Engineers in 1970)

Now for the front end. There is no such thing as a staggered shock configuration in the front. Ford introduced the Quad Shock on their radius arm suspension as mentioned above. But it is not "staggered." It would only be staggered if someone removed one front and one rear shock from opposite radius arms. Way back in the Stroppe days, enthusiasts realized that they could get the maximum axle control by increasing the leverage of the shock on the radius arm. So the "shock mounted to the radius arm cap" was born. Keep in mind that shock absorbers basically came in one style, and you ran the shocks that Gabriel or Monroe would give you. It would be nearly 2 decades before Rancho would give you a 9 way adjustable shock. So if you wanted a stiffer shock, you would mount it vertically. If you wanted it softer, just mount it at an angle. For a given tilt, if you want more stiff, move the shock away from the radius arm pivot.

Fast forward, and long travel suspension came into Vogue. Well, the long travel and the increased leverage work against each other. So shocks got relegated back to their original locations. BUT...the aftermarket came to the rescue with a wide variety of longer body shocks. Longer body gives you longer available travel. And the world continues to evolve. Modern gas charged inertial dampening technology has made some really good shocks available.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for all that, Encyclopedia James. What about one single new Duff MS2020/Eibach shock in the rear and their "Long Link Traction Bars" (I think that's what they are that I have). And you have any opinion of whether with this setup would be better with a single front or rear facing shock or prob doesn't matter since the traction bar holds the 9 inch steady and keeps it from twisting.

 

[toddz69]

I’m waiting on the rear disk portion of my WH Moab kit and it says the rear shock might interfere anyway…off question, anyone know if it matter which rear shock I leave on? I’d assume if one interferes that it would be the most rear one. Paul, (@DirtDonk ) I’m sure you could answer that one…?

I was thinking of shock interference after we talked about your disc brake kit a week or two ago. As for shocks in the rear, from a practical standpoint, I don't think any of us could probably tell the difference between the angled forward/angled rearward mounting. So if you want to use the ones angled forward so you don't need to worry about brake caliper interference, I'd say go for it.

Todd Z.

 

[toddz69]

I believe that as far a performance goes, the Bronco cares very little whether the shock is mounted forward or rearward of the axle. Not sure why Ford made the running change during the '66 model year (earliest Broncos had a forward mounted shock) but it could have been for any one of, or many reasons.

I've never found an official reason but I've always assumed from an engineering standpoint that Ford changed the shock location to make the shocks progressive, rather than digressive, in action as the suspension compresses. As the suspension compresses, the leaf spring flattens out, making it "longer" and pushing the bottom of the shock back, which effectively makes the shock closer to vertical, increasing its damping effectiveness.

Todd Z.

 

[toddz69]

Since I'm going to see @DirtDonk tomorrow at the Round-Up, I'm going to throw this out there.

Now for the front end. There is no such thing as a staggered shock configuration in the front. Ford introduced the Quad Shock on their radius arm suspension as mentioned above. But it is not "staggered." It would only be staggered if someone removed one front and one rear shock from opposite radius arms.

But there was a "staggered" shock configuration on the front end, as @bmc69 notes above. For the 78-79 Broncos (and 78 pickups, and maybe the 79s), if you didn't get the quad shock option, you got staggered single shocks. On the passenger side, the shock was behind the coil spring and on the driver's side, the shock was in front of the spring. I've no idea why they did it.

Todd Z.

 

[toddz69]

If I'm not mistaken, for the '80 and later models when dual shocks became an option, if you got a single shock model, they were opposite mounted too. Not "staggered" as we think of them, in a laying-down slightly angle, but still straight up and down. Just for and aft of the front axles. So they did experiment with some.

THe '80-newer trucks had both shocks behind the front wheel if they were single-shocked because Ford went to a stamped piece that combined both the spring mount and the upper shock mount on the TTB trucks.

Todd Z.

 

[DirtDonk]

Ahh, so they did not continue the staggered after 79 then? That’s good to know and thanks for everybody for keeping me honest with the years.
It was a 78 or 79 that first caught me. Even the books had not caught up with reality at that point.
I remember when I was selling someone some shocks, the book listed the same shock left and right and then the customer came back saying one didn’t fit.
I went out with him and checked out the truck and was really shocked to see the arrangement. Sure enough, one fore and one aft of the spring.
Different lengths and all.
I knew about the dual option (was that 79 only? Or both 78 and 79?) but had not seen a single version up close and personal after the introduction.
Seems like it was a running change option somewhere during the 78 model year.
Quads were pretty popular. I wonder what percentage of Broncos came with them after that?

Not long after that incident some of the catalogs started reflecting the difference.

 

[toddz69]

Ahh, so they did not continue the staggered after 79 then? That’s good to know and thanks for everybody for keeping me honest with the years.
It was a 78 or 79 that first caught me. Even the books had not caught up with reality at that point.
I remember when I was selling someone some shocks, the book listed the same shock left and right and then the customer came back saying one didn’t fit.
I went out with him and checked out the truck and was really shocked to see the arrangement. Sure enough, one fore and one aft of the spring.
Different lengths and all.
I knew about the dual option (was that 79 only? Or both 78 and 79?) but had not seen a single version up close and personal after the introduction.
Seems like it was a running change option somewhere during the 78 model year.
Quads were pretty popular. I wonder what percentage of Broncos came with them after that?

Not long after that incident some of the catalogs started reflecting the difference.

Quad shocks were an option in 78-79 and yes, they were very popular. No idea on the take percentage of them, but I'd guess at least 75% of the trucks had them?

Todd Z.

 

[DirtDonk]

It sure seems like it! I always loved the 78/79, but never had the money, time or space to acquire one.
There were a couple of absolutely stunning ones at the round up Saturday.
Silly me took time check them out, but didn’t take pictures. Although I did spend some quality time a couple of rigs down, talking to the Hoss bronco crew, and their really cool race bronco.
Would like to have seen it run at Prairie city on Sunday, but couldn’t make that work.
That engine sounds really wicked!

 

[jamesroney]

Thanks for all that, Encyclopedia James. What about one single new Duff MS2020/Eibach shock in the rear and their "Long Link Traction Bars" (I think that's what they are that I have). And you have any opinion of whether with this setup would be better with a single front or rear facing shock or prob doesn't matter since the traction bar holds the 9 inch steady and keeps it from twisting.

As soon as you link the rear, then the wheel hop / housing rotation issue is controlled. At that point, you can select any single shock that you like. You just need one that suits your compression vs rebound parameters. If you are going to run soft and compliant rear leaf springs, you will want some kind of reaction link. Otherwise your driveshaft yoke will look like mine from this weekend. Here's a pic.

 

[bmc69]

But there was a "staggered" shock configuration on the front end, as @bmc69 notes above. For the 78-79 Broncos (and 78 pickups, and maybe the 79s), if you didn't get the quad shock option, you got staggered single shocks. On the passenger side, the shock was behind the coil spring and on the driver's side, the shock was in front of the spring. I've no idea why they did it.

Todd Z.

Exactly. And the why does remain a mystery to this here vehicle dynamics engineer. When I put the 60 in front of my '78, with Duff long arms, I was scrapping the D44 quad-shock setup. Went with Fox remote res shocks, one on each side and both behind the axle.

 

[jamesroney]

Quick clarification ..the 78/79 Broncos had the quad shock option. If only delivered with two shocks, they were staggered. I never understood why they were staggered because that creates unequal damping side to side...

@toddz69 Wait a minute. Now I've got three people that I trust telling me that I could buy a 78-79 Bronco, and it COULD be delivered from the factory with two different shocks mounted on the front radius arms? AND both of those shocks would be "eye-stud" configuration, but one is longer than the other? AND the dampening characteristics would be different from side to side?

Wow. Thank you. I learned something new today.

 

[bmc69]

@toddz69 Wait a minute. Now I've got three people that I trust telling me that I could buy a 78-79 Bronco, and it COULD be delivered from the factory with two different shocks mounted on the front radius arms? AND one of those shocks would be an "eye-eye" vs the other being an "eye-stud" configuration. AND the dampening characteristics would be different from side to side?

Wow. Thank you. I learned something new today.

The factory 78/79 Bronco shocks were eye (bottom) and stud (top) regardless. You got one short one and one long one with the 2-shock staggered setup and two short and two long with the quad shock setup. Drove many a counter man nuts, I'm sure. We (I, anyway) almost always converted the frame shock mounts to be the eye config on the top too.

 

[ba123]

It sure seems like it! I always loved the 78/79, but never had the money, time or space to acquire one.
There were a couple of absolutely stunning ones at the round up Saturday.
Silly me took time check them out, but didn’t take pictures. Although I did spend some quality time a couple of rigs down, talking to the Hoss bronco crew, and their really cool race bronco.
Would like to have seen it run at Prairie city on Sunday, but couldn’t make that work.
That engine sounds really wicked!

Sorry I missed the Roundup! Would’ve been good to meet you Paul and see some Broncos but I couldn’t make it work. Hopefully next year!

 

[ba123]

As soon as you link the rear, then the wheel hop / housing rotation issue is controlled. At that point, you can select any single shock that you like. You just need one that suits your compression vs rebound parameters. If you are going to run soft and compliant rear leaf springs, you will want some kind of reaction link. Otherwise your driveshaft yoke will look like mine from this weekend. Here's a pic.

Crappers!

Hopefully that was Sunday and your trailer was nearby?

That reminds me of the time I was on Highway 17 like 30 years ago, driving my ‘55 F-100 and that happened. I was on the flat LG part going south but was in the fast lane and for some reason my reaction was to take the left side off road. I’m sure you know it’s gravel and sloped…really not sure how I didn’t lose control but not only was that scary as hell going that fast but the bill for the tow truck to take me on the left side hurt even more.