Adding Reservoirs to Bumpstops

[SHOP WERX]

95 bronco, stock width Cut n Turned beams, 12x2.5 coilovers, 2.0 bumps 3" stroke, 4 link out back. Long story short the bronco works decent at the moment. But after ditching leafs for links the front is now the limiting factor. I didn't want to pony up the $$$ for 3.0 shocks up front, nor do i want to rebuild the front to add bypasses. I purchased a set of 2.5x4" pintop bypass bumps from carbon at a screamin deal. I'm hoping that this can be a crutch for not having a bypass. And helps the front get over the bigger bumps that the 4 link gobbles up.

Here's my current concerns
1) emulsion shock with bypass tube???
2) with 4" stroke ill be into them fairly often, heat build up, frothing, shock fade?
3) trying to over utilize bumps as a secondary shock vs a fail safe

Me being me, I have to tinker with everything and take the long way around. So wouldn't adding a reservoir solve most of these concerns. That being said the more I think on adding a reservoir, the more I think it's a dumb idea. For starters if i drilled and tapped the stem of the pintop for an ORB to JIC fitting, a -6 (3/8" hole) would be the largest i could possibly go. Seems small, considering these bumpstops displace the same volume as an 8" shock with a 7/8's shaft. Second drawback is that it would essentially be a bypass shock with a top mounted reservoir, which is less than ideal. I would also assume that if I went through with this I would want the oil level to be maxed out in regards to the position of the ifp. This is based off the assumption that the valving in the piston won't be enough and I'll still need the "effective spring" of the nitrogen like a traditional bumpstop has. I'll stop my rambling adhd thoughts. Does anyone have some input?

 

[84Prerunner]

I generally agree with your concerns.
Resi out the bottom doesn’t really work either because the -10 port would cause a massive “dead spot” unless you shortened the bump.

Could run a custom long bump stop body with an internal IFP set at the to be determined perfect location….maybe?

 

[SHOP WERX]

Welding a -10 onto the bottom and shortening up the bump to 3.25" or so is probably the best option. The down side would be a really short bypass zone. Still better than nothing.

 

[Oh4Tahoe]

Why not try them before you dig your way too far down a rabbit hole?

 

[SHOP WERX]

That would be logical! I mostly want to mess with them now because I've developed a bad habit lately of everything being "good enough for now". Then never going back and doing it the way I wanted it.

 

[Oh4Tahoe]

I myself do the same thing, but sometimes worries I have don’t end up being things I didn’t need to even worry about. In for the outcome!

 

[FENDERFAB]

Honestly doesnt seem like it would be worth the time/effort or money.

I think it would be better to figure out a solution to add a bypass to the front of the truck, sell your 2.5 and upgrade to a 3.0 shock. Or work on additional shock tuning on your existing shocks.

 

[SHOP WERX]

Honestly doesnt seem like it would be worth the time/effort or money.

I think it would be better to figure out a solution to add a bypass to the front of the truck, sell your 2.5 and upgrade to a 3.0 shock. Or work on additional shock tuning on your existing shocks.

I agree the better solution would be to add bypass shocks or upgrade to 3.0 c/o. Adding a bypass is something I don't have the time for currently. Upgrading to a 3.0 coilover is going to cost money I would rather spend elsewhere on the truck. Dissassembling the bumps, drilling a hole, tig weld/braze on some fittings, and reassembly is something I can do when I'm bored on a Sunday. A pair of reservoirs from FOA is $90. Figured it's worth a try. I want to go about doing it the best way I can so I asked for some input.

 

[FENDERFAB]

interested to see what you come up with!

 

[84projectFORD]

I think you ought to just run the bumps as is and see how it does. Fill the bump completely with it completely compressed and then take 10cc out. Maybe 15 if you think you will be hitting that much to cause heat expansion. Then start with 60-70pdi and see how it does. Up it from there. That will progressive the bump and it works extremely well. I was told this for my shit box and made a big difference.

 

[Turboyota]

^^^same story here. My front bumps have 10cc removed after a complete fill at full compression, and I run 145psi in them.

I’ve done this same thing on at least 6 trucks now, and it’s pretty fucking good.

 

[SHOP WERX]

That's how I ran my 2.0 when it was leaf sprung. After the 4 link I kept bumping up the pressure. My pressures were getting to high, so I had to go back to full oil volume. I'm definitely not opposed to trying them out as they are. But i've pretty much talked myself into the challenge of adding reservoirs at this point. I've ordered the parts already haha.

 

[Carbon_Shocks]

That's how I ran my 2.0 when it was leaf sprung. After the 4 link I kept bumping up the pressure. My pressures were getting to high, so I had to go back to full oil volume. I'm definitely not opposed to trying them out as they are. But i've pretty much talked myself into the challenge of adding reservoirs at this point. I've ordered the parts already haha.

A Reservoir works but it all depends on the end goal and how strong you want the bump. In your case if I recall you were supplementing a front ifs setup to transition better. The bypass tube will soften the initial blow and ramp up fast. I think the goal was to allow a high pressure to be ran but not be as drastic initially. Reservoir off the bottom will create the strongest bump zone when using one. You will find the overall progression will be reduced with a reservoir IFP as the Gas is compressing at a lower rate. It will be a smoother hit that will run a higher pressure than a normal bump.

Typically I like to tune at 115 PSI on bumps. a Resi Bump however will be over 200
Feel Free to reach out for any help or support

 

[Carbon_Shocks]

A Reservoir works but it all depends on the end goal and how strong you want the bump. In your case if I recall you were supplementing a front ifs setup to transition better. The bypass tube will soften the initial blow and ramp up fast. I think the goal was to allow a high pressure to be ran but not be as drastic initially. Reservoir off the bottom will create the strongest bump zone when using one. You will find the overall progression will be reduced with a reservoir IFP as the Gas is compressing at a lower rate due to a higher initial volume. It will be a smoother hit that will run a higher pressure than a normal bump.

Typically I like to tune at 115 PSI on bumps. a Resi Bump however will be over 200
Feel Free to reach out for any help or support

 

[SHOP WERX]

A Reservoir works but it all depends on the end goal and how strong you want the bump. In your case if I recall you were supplementing a front ifs setup to transition better. The bypass tube will soften the initial blow and ramp up fast. I think the goal was to allow a high pressure to be ran but not be as drastic initially. Reservoir off the bottom will create the strongest bump zone when using one. You will find the overall progression will be reduced with a reservoir IFP as the Gas is compressing at a lower rate. It will be a smoother hit that will run a higher pressure than a normal bump.

Cool to see you guys on here! The main goal was to achieve more progression and bottom out control. I guess my biggest concern is that with a 4" stroke i will have 2.25" of up travel before it's into the bump. Needless to say I'll be hitting the bumps all the time. Would this not be an issue with an emulsion shock? I also assumed that with a bottom mounted reservoir the bypass would be more responsive to adjustments and the bump zone more agressive. As well as better heat resistance, for lack of a better term. I bought the bumps from you before the 4 link was done. I was initially hoping with these bumps I could drop some valving in the c/o and have a more plush ride near ride height but more progression for when I get after it. But the rear is now much more capable than the front and I just need more dampening all together on the ol whoop scissors. But altogether it's just a prerunner. not a race car. It rarely gets driven all out for more the 15-20min at a time.

Thanks!

P.S. is this Daniel or Keith?

 

[Fifty]

Daniels less evil twin… tweedy????!!!

But to be honest, I was planning on running a set of bypass bumps on my suburban.

I am debating DK or other relatively stock width arms that have a bump provision.

And then run a carbon bypass bump because the arm would be in the bump zone so soon. The GM 1500 is a 5 inch travel shock and carbon I think can squeeze a 5.3 in there,

But I’d like to have a soft initial bump zone and then ramp up. Something more than can just be done with oil fill and shims.

https://www.carbonshocks.com/product-page/2-5-shock-top-bump-stops-4-travel-compression-bypass-tube-reservor

 

[84Prerunner]

Daniels less evil twin… tweedy????!!!

But to be honest, I was planning on running a set of bypass bumps on my suburban.

I am debating DK or other relatively stock width arms that have a bump provision.

And then run a carbon bypass bump because the arm would be in the bump zone so soon. The GM 1500 is a 5 inch travel shock and carbon I think can squeeze a 5.3 in there,

But I’d like to have a soft initial bump zone and then ramp up. Something more than can just be done with oil fill and shims.

https://www.carbonshocks.com/product-page/2-5-shock-top-bump-stops-4-travel-compression-bypass-tube-reservor

Low psi and lots of oil will do exactly what you’re after without over complicating things with a bypass bump.