Add Shock Towers to Stock front beam

[padooa]

Hello All,

I am fininshing a build of a project new to me.
I purchased a good used frond beam set up ready to go.
Only problem, no top shock mount.
How do I add a top shock mount?
Any help and possible pics would be great.
I have found these, How do they go on?
http://www.mooreparts.com/front-axle-be ... nk-pin-vw/
Thank you in advance,

IrnBear

[Marc]

Those are extended shock towers for use on a long-travel king & link (pre`66) beam. They slip over the beam tubes after removing the trailing arms and are then welded in place. `66-up balljoint beams use shock absorbers with a stud-style upper mount, but fabricated through-bolt style shock towers can be grafted onto them if eye-mounted shocks are used.

What year is your chassis (or is it a buggy), is the beam correct for it (distance between the tubes is greater on the balljoint beam), and what's the usage going to be for the vehicle? Shock towers are often removed for sandrails or for inner fenderwell clearance to the stock body when a beam is narrowed more than a couple of inches - has this one been narrowed or is it still stock-width?

Pictures often help.

[Ol'fogasaurus]

The URL you posted is replacement for K&L beam shock towers using a 10" longer shock absorber/dampener. I seem to remember a passing comment being made at one time that they are designed for use of stock length rear "Bus" shocks... or something like that.

Notice that it also has travel limiting stop with the proper trailing arm angle added which is a good deal as it protects your shock absorber/dampener as well as the suspension itself. Once the stock, un-modified shock mount is gone so are the stock suspension stops.

You also can get longer/taller shock towers that allow you to change your suspension to coil over shocks like Fox or King shocks (not the coilover helper shock style that seems to be so popular. Not a good idea as torsion bars and coil style of torsion bars work differently and the coils take away some of the work of the torsion bars; that way, neither will work at their best capacity. The shock absorbers in them usually are not what I would call the best valved for most any job). Converting to coil-overs requires you remove the torsion spring stacks and replace them with through rods and the accompanying ends which then holds the trailing arms in place.

You should check your steering geometry with the longer travel towers as the short side arm has a limiting arc to it (bump steer). I'm not sure if it is an issue with this conversion but it should be checked out anyway.

Ball-joint suspension is limited in travel by the slot in the ball-joints themselves. You can get a beam now that will fit into the BJ framehead but but uses K&L style of suspension components.

Updated the post and added the word "Bus" to shock in the first paragraph. Lee

[JUSSUMGUY]

Does your build have a roll cage? Upper shock mount can also be fabricated off the cage.
The link you posted is for a 10 inch travel shock. The towers are also made for 8 inch shocks. Are your trailing arms stock length? The rest of your front suspension stockish? If so, the towers for 8 inch shocks would be all you need. My comments pertain to king and link frt. Suspenion. Ball joint is entirely different.
Can you post a pic of your beam?

[Ol'fogasaurus]

To add to JUSSUMGUY's post: there is a 60% to 90% travel distance, front to rear, that seems to be generally accepted with the longer travel being in the rear. I don't think "they" want the rear suspension to be on the rebound phase if the front end is still traveling on the opposite (compression) direction.

Pictures would be good but it would be nice to know just what you are working on as advice could change given what you project is.

[bikesndbugs]

couldn't you also make a tubular shock mount off the beam? one tube clamped/welded to the lower one to the upper with a shock mount up top. would let you change the shock angle without having rollcage up front. might need a third tube to go toward the center of the beam

[Ol'fogasaurus]

If I understand what you are saying Travis then my answer would be an I don't think you would want to do that using tubes on the beam. Tubes flex easily (which is both good and bad depending...) so you probably would need a cross-tube between towers or a diagonal tube to the beam plus a way to triangulate for fore and aft movement.

The "plate" towers have a combination "strong back" and triangulation for the plate going to the upper beam which I guess you could duplicate with a tube. Some rails, with tubes formed into a "U" shape for the shock mount, also do the cross-tube between towers. The idea is to make the beam as easily removable w/o any more than removing the shocks and disconnecting the steering.

[padooa]

I will take pics this weekend and post.
Thank you for the responses so far

IrnBear