Ski-Doo Snowmobiles Forum banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm thinking of buying some rebuildables to replace my stock adrenaline suspension. What is the reason a piggyback shock is better than a rebuildable without the piggy? Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
REV NH said:
I'm thinking of buying some rebuildables to replace my stock adrenaline suspension. What is the reason a piggyback shock is better than a rebuildable without the piggy? Thanks.
[snapback]718337[/snapback]​
That can be up for argument but here is some food for thought. The piggyback shocks contain more volume of fluid. The Internal Floating Piston (IFP) is located away from the shock body. In the case of a HPG, the internal valves and the piston etc. are interchangable. So, in theory, they can be valved the same and should perform the same. In the case that you ride very hard or race, the extra fluid can provide more resistance to heat build up. Also keep in mind that in some applications, the piggyback resevoir may allow more travel since the shaft can move deper into the body of the shock if needed. In the Rev, both models allow maximum travel so it's not an issue. If you are an average rider, the piggybacks may only offer you a "cooler" look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,289 Posts
spudster said:
REV NH said:
I'm thinking of buying some rebuildables to replace my stock adrenaline suspension. What is the reason a piggyback shock is better than a rebuildable without the piggy? Thanks.
[snapback]718337[/snapback]​
That can be up for argument but here is some food for thought. The piggyback shocks contain more volume of fluid. The Internal Floating Piston (IFP) is located away from the shock body. In the case of a HPG, the internal valves and the piston etc. are interchangable. So, in theory, they can be valved the same and should perform the same. In the case that you ride very hard or race, the extra fluid can provide more resistance to heat build up. Also keep in mind that in some applications, the piggyback resevoir may allow more travel since the shaft can move deper into the body of the shock if needed. In the Rev, both models allow maximum travel so it's not an issue. If you are an average rider, the piggybacks may only offer you a "cooler" look.
[snapback]718365[/snapback]​
And more weighth... extra oil and extra reservoir spell weight...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,793 Posts
They also spell Performance and ride quality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,793 Posts
Yeah for the first couple of bumps and then the shock oil foams and they fade because they don't have an external oil supply.

There is no comparison between piggy backs and mono tubes.

I guess the mono tubes might be ok for some riding styles, but I ride rutted trails and huge moguls all the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,031 Posts
milrlite said:
You can still get the same ride quality and performance from a mono-tube HPG on the trails.

[snapback]718521[/snapback]​
Wrong!!! If that were the case EVERY Sno-X sled would have mono tube shocks. Reservoirs are required to keep oil from overheating... After running your sled down your favorite rough trail just stop and feel how hot the shock body is....Yes boys and girls the shock does get hot... Extra oil from having a reservoir means extra resistance to heat which means better and longer damping control
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,414 Posts
Deadman said:
Yeah for the first couple of bumps and then the shock oil foams and they fade because they don't have an external oil supply.

There is no comparison between piggy backs and mono tubes.

I guess the mono tubes might be ok for some riding styles, but I ride rutted trails and huge moguls all the time.

[snapback]718576[/snapback]​
I never measured how much more oil a piggy back has, but it isnt much. Remember the floating piston is all the way in the bottom of the piggyback. Unless your riding really really hard like snocross you dont need them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,793 Posts
We work our shocks harder than Snocross sleds.
Think about it......SnoX sleds take a Few HUGE jumps and are flying through the air the majority of the time.........when we ride we take smaller bumps, but it makes the shock travel through its stroke 20 times more than a SnoX sled. A snoX sled takes harder hits, but they are valved for that. We take a million smaller bumps just to travel a few miles, so the shock is working WAY harder. Also we run ours all day long and they never get a cool-down period, whereas a sno sled might only run a few laps and then shut down for a while.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Deadman said:
We work our shocks harder than Snocross sleds.
Think about it......SnoX sleds take a Few HUGE jumps and are flying through the air the majority of the time.........when we ride we take smaller bumps, but it makes the shock travel through its stroke 20 times more than a SnoX sled. A snoX sled takes harder hits, but they are valved for that. We take a million smaller bumps just to travel a few miles, so the shock is working WAY harder. Also we run ours all day long and they never get a cool-down period, whereas a sno sled might only run a few laps and then shut down for a while.
[snapback]718753[/snapback]​
I think this is all about riding style. I think a difference in opinion on who works them harder is of minimal value. I ride monotube shocks hard (bumps) and evertime I take them a part to revalve I check the pressure first, it is always right there as it was when it went in and as good as when I used piggybacks. The monotubes are quicker to change valving and get back on the sled. Also, if you can hold your hand on the shock it's not that hot. Of course the shock will perform differently after you are riding it compard to when you first fired it up and it's 0 degrees. The difference is the amount of fluid, otherwise the valves, piston, fluid, pressure and tube size (C-36) are exactly the same. For the Average Rider, they will perform the same. This is also about $$$, you can get a monotube pretty reasonable compared to a piggyback and the performance benefit of both, as a gas shock, is huge compared to hydraulic. The piggyback looks "cool" so people want them. They are way more expensive also, so naturally some people think they are better.
 

·
Dootalk = college student's study time
Joined
·
4,213 Posts
spudster said:
The piggyback looks "cool" so people want them. They are way more expensive also, so naturally some people think they are better.
[snapback]718855[/snapback]​
I don't think that people buy piggy back shocks because they look cool. But I also have to say that I have a set of Penske shocks (Custom Axis), and they in my opinion they are the best shocks on the market...they don't have a piggy. But they also have a bigger body for it.

I think that they both have your pluses and minus. But it is hard to say that if they don't have a piggy, "they are not as good"...because I think that my Penske shocks will line up with any shocks on the market....ask anyone who has them.

Just my thoughts, not starting fights,
Ryan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,289 Posts
I have a couple of sets of both.... and yet, I run the mono tubes for the lighter weight.. I have never seen the advantage of the piggy backs for my riding style and I have run them both. But must confess, I seldom pound trails anymore.. but even when I did.. there was really no difference in performance.. just my two cents..

Just curious if anyone has run both shocks.. heck a better test would be to run oe of each on the same sled and thermocouple both of them to see how much cooler the piggy back runs..

I suspect that the guys that rebuild a lot of shocks.. could tell you the difference in the oil.. on the mono tubes on average versus the oil from piggy backs in general.. but the problem is the difference in time.. and the number of cycles put on them.. makes it tough to generalize...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,764 Posts
I actually PREFER th monotube shocks over the piggys..........

In real world tests (sno-cross, cross country, hill cross, trail riding) me and the guys i have test for me notice NO DIFFERENCE in ride quality between the two, even after 200 miles or more.........(when valved the same)

Upon tear down, to inspect the shocks, I often find the piggys to LEAK oil past the IFP........this NEVER happens on the monotube shocks......

You see, the piggy back resivoir is a CAST ALUMINUM peice.......then they bore a hole in in.......often times there are POROUS spots in the bore (holes) when the IFP oring passes by these spots, oil and nitrogen can change places, and it can tear your IFP too.....

Some piggy's have no porous spots in them, they are GOOD shocks......others have several.......i polish them as much as I can, but you can only do so much.......

Monotube shocks are made from an extrusion i beleive.......there are never porous spots..........these shocks last FOREVER! and in my humble opinion, are some of the best shocks made PERIOD....for overall quality of longevity.......you can take a ten year old monotube, and it still has nearly 300 PSI, and RARELY has oil leaked into the nitrogen

As far a fading goes.........i have never been able to fade a properly built HPG shock.......(excluding "VR" garbage)

If a guy is fading a monotube HPG on a sled, it means one of 3 things,

a) he is using "edit for bad language" poor oil
he didn't get all the air out of it when he put it together (HPG's are time consuming and hard to bleed)
c) the shock is valved incorrectly, and he is COOKING the oil....

By the way, I have a pair of piggys for sale........I like keeping the monotubes for myself! (i have a couple of them too, but are not for sale)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
Interesting information!

Tweener adds an interesting debate?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
IMGP0940__Small_.JPG IMGP0941__Small_.JPG I agree with Tweener. Another point to make is the reason behind a piggyback is to keep the oil and the nitrogen away from the shock itself to better the cooling. Also from the unfortunate event that the nitrogen "does happen" to get pushed past the piston and the oil comes to the gas side of the shock and hydraulicly locks the IFP higher in the body, the shock shaft cannot bottom in the IFP and break it like is possible on a monotube, that has been driven "extremely" hard.
If you still need to argue this point, I have posted a pic of a broken IFP from a rear monotube that I rebuilt just this past week from jumping HWY#11 near North Bay.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
Oh yeah, and one more thing. The oil that comes in stock HPG's is total garbage, and wears out in about 200 miles. Really, all you need to do to your trail shocks is change to a better or a different weight of shock oil.
Some of the people on here that complain about bottoming and their ride quality don't need a revalve,..just an oil change cause their shock oil has worn out. But if you insist on revalving for a trail sled....I'd do that for ya in a heart beat!
Sorry Tweener, I don't mean to take away any shock business for ya.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Thanks for all the responses guys, it's helped me a lot. I've found a set of monotubes and bought them. I appreciate the help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,112 Posts
What do you guys recommend for replacing the Addrenaline shocks on an 06? I dont care about the ride hight issue. Would you say buy a new set of 03 HPG rebuildables and change the oil? I`m guessing that the 04 to 06 are not rebuildable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Sledslapper said:
What do you guys recommend for replacing the Addrenaline shocks on an 06? I dont care about the ride hight issue. Would you say buy a new set of 03 HPG rebuildables and change the oil? I`m guessing that the 04 to 06 are not rebuildable.
[snapback]720592[/snapback]​
Your in Ontario so you can call Peak Velocity in Claremont. He will build you a set of fox copy rebuildable shocks. He has a shock dyno chart for my stock adrenaline shocks and we installed a set of Fox Clicker resevoirs on the front of my SDI with a slightly stiffer shim stack. The clicker allows for almost a 30 % increase in compression damping. If anyone has ever compressed one of the "fart in a bag shocks" that come on an adrenaline sled and compressed a fox ifp shock, you will notice the nitrogen in the fox tube helps ot rebound the shock and assists the spring. I think his number is 905 649 8214, Dean. Tell him Redsled sent you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,031 Posts
tweener said:
I actually PREFER th monotube shocks over the piggys..........

In real world tests (sno-cross, cross country, hill cross, trail riding) me and the guys i have test for me notice NO DIFFERENCE in ride quality between the two, even after 200 miles or more.........(when valved the same)

Upon tear down, to inspect the shocks, I often find the piggys to LEAK oil past the IFP........this NEVER happens on the monotube shocks......

You see, the piggy back resivoir is a CAST ALUMINUM peice.......then they bore a hole in in.......often times there are POROUS spots in the bore (holes) when the IFP oring passes by these spots, oil and nitrogen can change places, and it can tear your IFP too.....

Some piggy's have no porous spots in them, they are GOOD shocks......others have several.......i polish them as much as I can, but you can only do so much.......

Monotube shocks are made from an extrusion i beleive.......there are never porous spots..........these shocks last FOREVER! and in my humble opinion, are some of the best shocks made PERIOD....for overall quality of longevity.......you can take a ten year old monotube, and it still has nearly 300 PSI, and RARELY has oil leaked into the nitrogen

As far a fading goes.........i have never been able to fade a properly built HPG shock.......(excluding "VR" garbage)

If a guy is fading a monotube HPG on a sled, it means one of 3 things,

a) he is using "edit for bad language" poor oil
he didn't get all the air out of it when he put it together (HPG's are time consuming and hard to bleed)
c) the shock is valved incorrectly, and he is COOKING the oil....

By the way, I have a pair of piggys for sale........I like keeping the monotubes for myself! (i have a couple of them too, but are not for sale)
[snapback]719001[/snapback]​
I will vehemently disagree with some of these statements. First, ONLY real way to measure difference in performance between a monotube and piggyback shock is with a dyno so you can see damping vs. load applied. Seat of the pants is not good enough. Also shaft speed plays a big part too. I agree HPG piggybacks are NOT the best shocks for exactly the reasons Tweener states..

Also, it is IMPOSSIBLE to prevent N2 gas from leaking past rubber or teflon o -ring or wiper and eventually contaminating shock oil. You CANNOT seal Nitrogen (or just about any gas for that matter) with rubber. This is a FACT. I work with N2 every day and we have done this experiment many times over... And no way will a monotube shock work as well as piggyback. It is also impossible as the piggyback (if rebuilt correctly) holds more oil and the oil is what provides damping.
To prove this run a monotube shock (valved any way you want with any oil you want) on a shock dyno for a few minutes and then measure body temp with infrared thermometer. Then do the same thing with a piggyback shock or one with a reservoir. The shock with reservoir will ALWAYS run for more minutes on dyno before body temp will get as high a temp as monotube shock... Piggybacks will always run at same load longer before getting as hot... We have also proved this many times. If monotube shocks were better than every factory Sno-X team would be using them as monotube shocks are way cheaper to build and would also be lighter!!! They (factory Sno-X) don't use monotube shocks because the oil in shock gets hot too soon and shock fade is the result.... And for the guy who praised the Penske or Custom Axis, right on, they are without a doubt some of the finest sledding shocks built today. Axis biggest problem is availability as they are hand built...I will put my HYGEAR tuned Custom Axis shocks against ANY monotube shock period...
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top