Hey guys ok this might be a dumb question but my falcon has air shocks in the rear and they have a line that runs to under the bumper to give them air to lift the rear of the car, so my question is would it be possible if i was to put a huge drop in the back to where it wouldnt be "comfortably driveable" then if i wanted to ride higher for long trips couldnt i just put air in the shocks to raise it back to close to stock hieght, then when i want it low again just release the air, kinda like using the air shocks as a ghetto airbag setup?? Anyone ever done this before?
Sounds like it COULD work. But it seems you're going to cut the coils or remove some leafs and let the shocks take the weight of the rear of the car. Air shocks were made to supplement the springs, not replace them. Then again, we used to use 'em to jack the back of our cars WAY the hell up for tire clearence. the springs were out of the equation then, too. Blow an air line and the fender lip was sitting on your L60's!
Well funny you should mention this Im doing it in reverse kinda,on my 56 street freak I was using the air shocks to give the car the rear lift it needed to hold it up off the tires.remember the air shocks gotta have at least 25psi in them and depending on the shock can hold up to 200 psi,stay away from Monroe airshocks I found a guy on ebay that still has GRABIEL HIJACKERS (200psi) with out a doubt use them also set up right and left air lines this will help wiith body roll/air transfer.and they should work good for what your tryin to do
Do it, works well we left a few leafs out and used blocks to get the ride height when low, air it up when full of kids and gas cruize it low when being cool is the order.
Here's what Monroe.com has to say: "A pair of Max-Air shock absorbers can maintain ride height when up to 1,200 lbs of additional weight is loaded." Another quote from Gabriel.com: "Up to 1,100 pounds per pair of extra lifting capacity" It seems to me that you could take the springs completely out of any car and only use the air-shocks to hold it up (unless the springs are used to locate the rear suspension, such as with leaf springs). So long as the rear of the car weighed less than 1,100 pounds, the shocks are designed to easily lift that amount of weight. Your shock mounts may not have been designed to lift that much. I've heard of people airing their air-shocks up to rock solid and then going over extreme bumps or the metal fatiguing over time. Sometimes the shock mounts would give out. If you beef up the shock mounts and use a good quality bolt, I just don't see how this wouldn't work. However, just to be extra safe, if you used weaker-than-stock springs, so that the rear of your car drooped, the springs would still be supporting some of the weight. If the air-shocks assisted them to bring the rear of your car back up to ride height, I can't see how it wouldn't work. If you decide to cut your coil springs instead of swap them for weaker ones, you'll be in for a very bumpy ride. I don't think you'd be very satisfied. Shortening the spring makes them stiffer and bumpier. Adding more "spring" by pumping up the shock would only add to that hardness. I think weaker springs, not shorter, stiffer springs, is the way to go. Any time you do anything different than what someone else has done, they will tell you it can't or shouldn't be done. Many times it's only because they think it makes them look bad, somehow. Different suggests there is the possibility of better. We don't care because we just want a rear suspension to work, but it seems to threaten their standing in the world. I'm not saying don't ever listen to advice. That would be foolish - especially if they've had some experience. But sometimes there's just not a "lion in the street" and you really can go outside. I have not had any experience with air shocks so this is all theory on my part. Experience trumps theory. I'm going to try this idea on the rear of my F150 pick up truck because it would be easy to try there. I can take some leafs out and easily replace them if it doesn't work. Also, the mounting brackets are easy to beef up. If it does work, I'll try it on my hot rod. If you decide to do it, let us know how it turns out, please. Good luck.
Well im deffinatly going to have to give it a try, kinda funny they even make electronic air control kits for air shocks for under 100 bux you can mount a gauge and switch under your dash to adjust the shocks while driving sounds pretty cool
Four of us were taking this Merc to the Merc Deuce Reunion in Holland, Mi, we were loaded for a long weekend trip. First we had to get out of the car to get it out of the driveway, went and filled up the gas and the air shocks. We were on the road all of 15 minutes before the line blew out of the shocks dumping the exhaust right on the ground. This was a classic example of what not to depend on the air shocks to do !
i had a 50 Chevy that was set up that way when i bought it. it rode like a buck board and the first time i had a passenger in the back seat it busted the shock mounts... i had always held the belief that airshocks were garbage anyway, that experience just reinforced it... drop me a line. you might be surprised just how inexpensively i can get you into a quality air ride set up.
#1-I just tried a set of monroe airshocks they failed in less than 1 day,they are also about 3/4 the size of hijackers, #2 always carry extra airline in your tool box it easy to replace them and another reasin to run r/l lines,and yeah dont depend on them to always hold the car whre ya want it,never mind my last hijackers were on the car since 1975 and the new ones went on this week,along with custom made leaf springs.......air shocks will do what ya want but dont trust Monroe airshocks.....JMO
Man that must suck to spend a good 100 dollars on some shocks then they fuck up after a day, good to hear the gabriels last a good while, seems like i can pick up a set of the gabriel hijackers for around 130 bux from autozone, some mixed reviews on here so i guess ill have to try it out maybe with the gabriels and a diff. Leaf spring setup, thats what im planning on doing, i mean falcons are small light cars and i rarely drive the thing so hopefully it will be ok and if not...live and learn
the hijackers were just under $100 with shipping on ebay,heres what the are holding up,now with the help of longer/rearched (6 inch) springs
Never had a set of Gabriel Hi-Jackers fail on me. Been useing them since late 60's early 70's. More air means stiffer ride. Today's Air Ride tech beats the hell out of the old Air Shocks, extended shackles, knuckles in the coils, etc. we used to use back in my High School days, but it costs more too. For that authentic ass in the sky, teeth chattering ride, or a trunk lid you can use as a stand up bar, you can't beat Hi-Jackers!
Air Shocks were never designed to be a device to hold up the car. They were designed to supplement the load that the springs can handle, increasing the over all carrying ability on a temporary basis. Obviously many of us used them to jack up the rear for big tire clearance, but there is a big difference between adding some rate to the springs by having the air shock supplement the spring, vs using the air shock as a main source of spring rate. If you try and use them as the sole or main means of holding up the back of the car you will find out pretty quickly that they were not designed for that, and neither were the standard shock mounts - they will fail as well. Think about all the shock applications that have a 1/4" stud - do you really want that holding up your car? Not to mention many times the upper mount is only in sheet metal. If you want an air adjustable ride - get air bags, end of story
The mounts seem to be the week link for everyone. The other thing I hear about is the lines failing. Both can be replaced with beefier versions. Air brake lines on diesel trucks carry a lot of pressure and they don't often burst. Regular hydraulic brake lines on cars do too. Come on, there has to be some tube invented that a person could use that will stand up to a measly 150 pounds of air pressure, don't you think? About the mounting bolt failing: Someone mentioned that the shocks are held up using 1/4 inch bolts. The ones on my F150 truck are bigger than that but let's pretend the bolt sizes for all shock absorbers ever made stop at 1/4 inch and you can't buy bigger ones: Shoulder Screw, 1/4-20 Min Tensile Strength 140, 000 PSI, Shear Strength 84, 000 PSI I dunno. Is 84,000 PSI strong enough? Couldn't a person cut away SOME of the rubber bushing in order to install a larger bolt? Also, if you take away 500 pounds of spring stiffness by using weaker springs, then add 500 pounds back into the suspension using the air-shocks, what difference could that possibly make to the ride quality? The car doesn't "know" any difference. If you add that 500 pounds of lift back into your suspension using air bags, air-shocks, coil-over-shocks or factory original springs, why would the car care? I see no difference between air-shocks and coil-over-shocks. They push on the suspension exactly the same way and in the same place. Perhaps someone who is smarter than I am can explain it to me. Please don't be offended by my scepticism. It is brought on by other bad salesmen, not you. You may be a good one, I don't know. If so, please explain where I'm wrong. I'll try to thank you for the information and try not to cling to my bad idea just to "save face." Just because one salesman exaggerates fears about other products and minimizes problems with his own, doesn't mean you do. You might have some knowledge we all can use. I suspect the car in your example added air shocks without removing any spring tension. That seems to be what a lot of people do. What would happen if you added your air bags to the existing suspension without removing any spring tension? Wouldn't it also ride like a buck board? Can you sell your air bags for $120.00? Whether a person went with the air-shocks or the air bags, they would have to have new mounts to do it right. You can't mount it in sheet metal and expect it to hold up. Mounting them to the frame seems like the thing to do. Would the cost of beefing up the shock mounts and air lines for the air-shocks come close to an air bag system? I don't see any advantage to the airbags. Please school me.
I sold a lot of air shocks back in the 70's for folks who wanted the then new 10" wide wheels under cars that really should have gone another route, but when kool is kool, you know. We sold Gabriel then and rarely had a failure with the bag part, normally the lines route was the problem, as in wraping them around the exhaust pipes or just hanging down waiting for road debis to catch them etc. The big option was the dual line kit to keep the cars from leaning and the fender lip on thier '70 Chevelle cutting thier new N-50 tires hanging out in the breeze!
A pair of decent "naked" air bags are $150, so not far off of $120. Ride quality on an air system is directly related to the size of the air bladder. The smaller smaller the air bladder, the more pressure is required to lift the car to the same given height, and the more harsh the ride. You can beef-up the mounts six-ways-from-Sunday, and it will not get you around the ride quality issue. An average 8" air bag has something on the order of 18-20 times the total air volume than a Gabriel air shock. The same ride height found at 30 PSI with the air bag might take 150 PSI with the air shock, and you would not like the ride quality, and they would break. If running air shocks were a good idea, and a viable solution, you would see it out there, all over the place.
My Fleetline uses the Gabriels, lowered by removed leafs & 3.5"blocks in the last 4years. I got a compressor, pressureindicator, and electrical switches in dash. When no air in the car, it sits about 1" from the pavement, and got some bumpy ride, but if you look up for bigger bumps, no trouble driving without passengers in rear. If passengers in rear, i got some scratch i the lower fendershirts.......rear bumper. Raised, to some pressure, it rides comfortable,also with rear passengers, taking bumps as any other car. Fully pressured (about 3-3.5" max lift) it feels bumpy as hell.... but great than bigger bumps are needed to overcome......... Old school´lift! Function well, but main thing is to mock up separated lines to each side...and get it level pressured. Passengers on one side, gets air pressed over to the other side.......
Gimpyshotrods wrote, "Ride quality on an air system is directly related to the size of the air bladder. The smaller the air bladder, the more pressure is required to lift the car to the same given height, and the more harsh the ride. You ...will not get you around the ride quality issue." Well, that seems to make sense. More air pressure = a harsher ride. But wait... "My Fleetline uses the Gabriels, lowered by removed leafs & 3.5" blocks for the last 4years. ...When no air in the car, it sits about 1" from the pavement...If passengers in rear, i got some scratch... ...Raised, to some pressure, it rides comfortable...taking bumps as any other car... ...Fully pressured...it feels bumpy as hell... ...Old school´lift! Functions well..." How do we explain that? Let's think about this one together. The larger bladder does take less air pressure to hold up the same amount of weight as a skinny air shock would. When you spread the load out over a large area, it doesn't take a lot of air pressure to hold up a car. However, the smaller surface area of the piston inside the air shock allows the suspension to exert more pounds per square inch on the air inside it. That's how it is able to overcome the high air pressure. It puts all of its force in one small area. If you apply 1 pound per square inch of air pressure over a 10 inch area, it will have a total of 10 psi of force which you can use to suspend the car body over the axle. 1 psi X 10 inches = 10 psi If you apply 10 pounds of air pressure over a 1 inch area, you've still applied the exact same 10 pounds of force. 10 psi X 1 inch = 10 psi Here's an analogy: If you push a thumb tack down on the fat end, it doesn't hurt. The "load" is spread out over a large area. But if you turn it over so that the pointy end is on your finger, then apply the exact same downward force, it enters your finger. (Ouch!) You are applying the exact same amount of force as before, only now it hurts because the area of the pointy end is so much smaller. You have drastically increased the pounds per square inch at that one small point. You have focused all the force to a very small area. In the airshocks, the suspension is able to exert more pounds per square inch inside the skinny airshock so that it overcomes the higher air pressure easier. The ride quality stays is the same, even though a large bladder holds less air pressure. That's how hydraulic jacks work. We can put thousands of pounds of car on the large cylinder, yet we are able to lift them by merely pressing down on the skinny cylinder with one hand. The cylinder that is holding up the car has more area than the cylinder that is holding up the jack handle. Even though the airshock has more air pressure, it rides exactly the same as the low pressure bladder. It overcomes the high pressure by focusing its force in one small place instead of distributing it over a large area. Well, that's the theory, anyway. Mr. Leaded from Norway has had 4 years of success with his airshocks. I think the reason his works so well is because he took some leafs out of his springs. He is able to make his ride quality both too hard and too soft. It stands to reason that there is a place in the middle that is just right. He created a way to make fine adjustments instead of having it all-or-nothing as would be the case if he aired it up at a gas station. He probably didn't wrap his air hoses around his exhaust or let them hang down to catch road debris, either.
I was supprised to learn that "naked" air bags are only about $30.00 more than a complete and functional airshock system. That certainly puts them in the same ballpark. Jegs has them for $60.00 each, just as Gimpy said. Thanks for that bit of information. But, that price is for the long, narrow air spring which resembles an airshock. It needs 100psi to hold up 1000 pounds. That's not too far off the airshock's max 150psi. The fat ones Gimpy advocates are $146.99 each for a total of $290.00. That's almost three times the price of complete, working airshocks with all the hoses. 1962Falcon, I don't know if there's room under your Falcon for the fat bags. I don't see much difference between the skinny bags and air shocks. I'm going to try the airshocks. I think that with a little common sense and good craftmanship they will work just fine. I hope you try them too.
like I said,HI-JACKERS have worked under my 56 since the 70s.the ONLY reason I am upgrading is #1 the air shocks were installed in 74 and rubber was dried out #2 I had new springs made to keep tires off quater panel incase of failure,and yes I do have a crossmember in the frame for the shcoks to mount to,not sheet metal............just do it you should be just fine........
Yea works fine. Don't put more air in them than is recommended. A trick I learned a long time ago is to separate the lines. IE run a separate line to each shock. Then when you go around a corner the pressure on one shock isn't affected by the other.
I was going to spend $150 - $300 for an onboard compressor and tank to do the job of this air control kit you speak of. Do you have any more info, where to buy 'em, brand name, who sells 'em, etc. ?
hotroddon made a great point about 10 posts ago that no one seemed to listen to. That was the sheet metal that the shocks bolt into in a Falcon is not nearly thick enough to support the weight of the vehicle. I have seen a couple of Falcons over the years that have had too stiff shocks installed in the rear rip the bases out of the floor. I would personally rather see you go for a pair of the small "helper" type bags that Airlift and others make that have a bracket that bolts to the frame. This will spread out the load over some length of the subframe itself, and I believe it would be a much stronger option. Also, you talked about substantial drop in the back on this, one of my pet peeves is when lowering a ton, people pull so many spring leaves out that there is no control left of the pinion angle. Remember, that spring has a couple of functions to do beyond just letting the rear axle bounce up and down. Think about re-rolling the eyes of the spring, and de-arching them to get the vast majority of the drop you want.
I am wanting to pull a small camper or pop up with my truck. I run coil over shocks now. Could I also use air shocks when I want to hook to a trailer. I was thinking of quick release pins to install and remove the air shocks and use them as overload shocks. I don't want to mess with my ride height with the coil overs. Will this work?
That is what I am runnin in the back of my 62 falcon right this moment.Works like a charm.I have removed all but the main and third leaf spring.I also have a set of three inch blocks.If you want,I can sell you a used airride tech. air over leaf system.PM and we can talk.To be honest the air shocks work just fine,just do not plan on any autocross anytime soon.
if you make it 'super low' like you want i dont think air shocks are going to raise it up enought...sounds like a horrible idea to me. i had air shocks on the back of my lowerd blazer, fully aired up the truck didnt 'raise up' much. it just helped for towing since it was so low it kept it from draggin the hitch on the ground,...thats about all it did
The Jalopy Journal
