• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Help. New KYB front shocks shorter than old KYB front shocks (picture added)
#1
EDIT: I originally typo'd the part number. I had written kg4505 and should have written kg4504. I have corrected it in this original post.


I purchased a set of kyb front shocks. Part number kg4504. I noticed they were shorter than my existing kyb shocks part number 343156.

With the tires sitting on the ground there is only about 1/2" of 'down' travel available. The old shocks provided about 2" of 'down' travel.

To be clear. When I put the shock mount on the new shocks there is about 1/2 inches between the shock mount and the shock tower before I tighten it down. . The shock will only be allow to extend about 1/2".

Has anyone run into this? I didn't purchase them from summitracing but both part numbers show as 'compatible' with my car. One shows up as 'mono-tube' the other as 'twin-tube'.

It seems that 1/2" of extenstion is not right. This will cause some weird handling for sure.

I appreciate any thoughts and input.

I did find a chart on the web: http://www.kyb.com/knowledge-center/shoc...imensions/

343516 extends to 13.9 and compresses to 8.9
KG4505 extends to 13.5 and compresses to 9.09 << I looked up the wrong shock!

This doesn't match what I have. I even tried installing it and using a pry bar to extend the shock and it would not budge. I wonder if I got a bad set. I will contact the vendor but any input is appreciated.

'Mike'
73 Convertible - 351C/4V CC heads/4bolt/forged flat tops/comp 270/rhodes/mallory unilite/tri-power/hookers/glasspacks/c6/3.50 limited slip/Gear Vendors/Global West sub frames, strut rods and shelby style traction bars/ Rear sway bar/tilt steering (not original)

Pics of modifications included in:
  Reply
#2
Weird. The KYB's ordered were KYB4504 (gas-a-just) with extended length of 12.32 and compressed of 8.5 for a 3.82 stroke and they fit perfect.

'73 Grandé H Code. Headman long tube headers, T-5 Transmission, 3.70 Traclok, Lowered 1" all around, Aussie 2v heads w/ 2.19 intake, 1.71 exhaust, screw in studs, full roller cam 608/612 lift 280/281 duration LSA 112, Quick Fuel 750 CFM double pumper, AirGap intake.

'73 F code convertible. Bright red. Needs total restore. (IE HOT MESS)

- Jason
  Reply
#3
73pony;285521 Wrote:Weird. The KYB's ordered were KYB4504 (gas-a-just) with extended length of 12.32 and compressed of 8.5 for a 3.82 stroke and they fit perfect.
I said it before and say it again. Today replacement shocks are shorter when fully extended than what was OEM. That is why our rubber shock bushing are crushed when lifted.......... To much downward spring load left over......
  Reply
#4
This was discussed in length not too long ago. A member was crushing rubber bushings. The problem in my case was not enough crush with KYB KG4504 shocks. Briefly, I needed to ADD a thick 3/8" washer top and bottom inside the steel caps to take up the extra length of the piston shaft. Once done, my rubbers no longer move around and have not cracked or deteriorated in any way. Pictures were posted before. KG4504 are the correct KYB shock for the Mach1 with a 351 C engine.
So why the difference?
  Reply
#5
Stanglover;285533 Wrote:This was discussed in length not too long ago. A member was crushing rubber bushings. The problem in my case was not enough crush with KYB KG4504 shocks. Briefly, I needed to ADD a thick 3/8" washer top and bottom inside the steel caps to take up the extra length of the piston shaft. Once done, my rubbers no longer move around and have not cracked or deteriorated in any way. Pictures were posted before. KG4504 are the correct KYB shock for the Mach1 with a 351 C engine.
So why the difference?
Glad that worked you. I tried using washers hoping so the top bushing wasn't pulled down thru the top mounting hole. They would just split instead of being pulled thru. I even tried larger diameter bushings . Made some homemade shock extensions for KYB's whatever number they were.... after measuring OEM's I had from my parts cars. Problem was solved. Shocks would bottom out just as upper control started making contact with bump stop
  Reply
#6
red351;285534 Wrote:
Stanglover;285533 Wrote:This was discussed in length not too long ago. A member was crushing rubber bushings. The problem in my case was not enough crush with KYB KG4504 shocks. Briefly, I needed to ADD a thick 3/8" washer top and bottom inside the steel caps to take up the extra length of the piston shaft. Once done, my rubbers no longer move around and have not cracked or deteriorated in any way. Pictures were posted before. KG4504 are the correct KYB shock for the Mach1 with a 351 C engine.
So why the difference?
Glad that worked you. I tried using washers hoping so the top bushing wasn't pulled down thru the top mounting hole. They would just split instead of being pulled thru. I even tried larger diameter bushings . Made some homemade shock extensions for KYB's whatever number they were.... after measuring OEM's I had from my parts cars. Problem was solved. Shocks would bottom out just as upper control started making contact with bump stop

We may as usual, be getting off the original posters question.
I have not researched the shock number he quotes, but I had none of these problems with KG4504 shocks other than as I described above. I think he has a, the wrong shocks, or b, the wrong height springs. Again from my own experience, when I replaced my front suspension , the "kit" from Scott Drake came with front springs that were way too tall and when installed, sat the ride height nearly 2" up and it was all but impossible to get the shocks in. Realizing this fact, I researched the correct spring height for my car with Eaton Detroit Springs (OEM supplier) and ended up reinstalling my original and still good springs. Problem solved, well almost, I needed to add compression to the rubber bushings by installing washers as described earlier. That was in June and so far absolutely no problems.
Job done!

EDIT: What I forgot to say and what I remembered at 3 am this morning, was that while the shock rods themselves were not too long, requiring the washers, it was that the threaded length was too short. This meant that the nuts bottomed out before the required compression on the rubbers was met. The washers effectively overcame this problem, allowing proper compression.
Also, our poster put this in the wrong category, but not to worry.
  Reply
#7
Here is a picture:


[Image: P1030461_zpsucrefepo.jpg]



The old KYB shock (343516) is on the left and the new shock (KG4505) is on the right. The new shock has the number 553314 stamped on it. The extension of the new shock (KG4505/55314) is 12”. I did try to extend the new shocks but was unable to get them to go past 12”. The new shocks otherwise seem fine. They extend automatically when off the car and do not appear to have any other issues.

'Mike'
73 Convertible - 351C/4V CC heads/4bolt/forged flat tops/comp 270/rhodes/mallory unilite/tri-power/hookers/glasspacks/c6/3.50 limited slip/Gear Vendors/Global West sub frames, strut rods and shelby style traction bars/ Rear sway bar/tilt steering (not original)

Pics of modifications included in:
  Reply
#8
will e;285584 Wrote:Here is a picture:


[Image: P1030461_zpsucrefepo.jpg]



The old KYB shock (343516) is on the left and the new shock (KG4505) is on the right. The new shock has the number 553314 stamped on it. The extension of the new shock (KG4505/55314) is 12”. I did try to extend the new shocks but was unable to get them to go past 12”. The new shocks otherwise seem fine. They extend automatically when off the car and do not appear to have any other issues.

Mike, the shocks I and 73pony are referring to are KYB KG4504, not 4505. I have not yet checked that number out, but you may have the wrong shocks. The ONLY issue I had fitting the shocks was for the need to use a jack under the lower ball joint to raise the shock rod through the tower. Other than what I describe above, I had no problems at all. I will look at the number you give as I'm curious as hell as to what the difference is.
Geoff.
Wait a minute!! I just enlarged your picture and the number on the box is 4504, NOT 4505. 4504's work so what's the problem?
OKaaay, 4505 does not come up for the 71-73 Mustang, only 4504. By the numbers, a 4505 looks to be a longer shock if I'm understanding the numbers at 13.5 X 9,09 X 4.41, from KYB's website. Hmmm!
  Reply
#9
Well at least I was consistent in my typo!

So yes, they are 4504 not 4505. I will correct my original post too. So they do extend the 'correct' amount:

KG4504 12.32"

But that is too short for my car. I wonder if the removal of the AC and aluminum intake caused the ride height to go up? They are not the original springs, I bought them years ago from Ford. I may have bougt 428 springs trying to get a stiffer ride at the time.

I will go measure at the fender and the distance from the top of the upper A arm to the shock mount. Perhaps my car is a bit to high in the front?

Here is a picture. I have just recently replaced the back spring which lifted the rear about an inch.

[Image: P1000673_zps16185f7c.jpg]

'Mike'
73 Convertible - 351C/4V CC heads/4bolt/forged flat tops/comp 270/rhodes/mallory unilite/tri-power/hookers/glasspacks/c6/3.50 limited slip/Gear Vendors/Global West sub frames, strut rods and shelby style traction bars/ Rear sway bar/tilt steering (not original)

Pics of modifications included in:
  Reply
#10
will e;285591 Wrote:Well at least I was consistent in my typo!

So yes, they are 4504 not 4505. I will correct my original post too. So they do extend the 'correct' amount:

KG4504 12.32"

But that is too short for my car. I wonder if the removal of the AC and aluminum intake caused the ride height to go up? They are not the original springs, I bought them years ago from Ford. I may have bougt 428 springs trying to get a stiffer ride at the time.

I will go measure at the fender and the distance from the top of the upper A arm to the shock mount. Perhaps my car is a bit to high in the front?

Here is a picture. I have just recently replaced the back spring which lifted the rear about an inch.

[Image: P1000673_zps16185f7c.jpg]

Yep, that explains it, lol!
Perhaps either go on Eaton Springs website or look in the NPD catalog for the correct spring info for your car and its equipment. Springs I bought in a kit were totally wrong, so I called Eaton and was given the correct dimensions required for MY car which was 15" tall, free standing. There is a chart on their website. (This has been posted before in Suspension section.) I reinstalled my original springs as they still met the criteria and as I said, no problem with shock install other than the thread length.
Looking at your picture, the front does look a bit on the high side, but a picture can be deceiving. Hope all this helps solve the issue. Let us know what you come up with.
Geoff.
  Reply
Share Thread:  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Stang Is the metal shield necessary on front disc brakes Ballaratcastle 14 530 12-05-2018, 07:08 PM
Last Post: Ballaratcastle
  Shocks Bondobax 3 225 11-27-2018, 04:38 PM
Last Post: Stanglover
  Ebay front disc conversion kit jowens1126 18 499 11-21-2018, 09:20 AM
Last Post: Stanglover
  Front Suspension Rebuild on my 71 jowens1126 23 778 11-09-2018, 10:51 PM
Last Post: Mjordan
  Front suspension Rustystang 21 930 11-01-2018, 11:04 AM
Last Post: Tnfastbk
  What do staggered rear shocks mean? scgamecock 35 1,191 10-07-2018, 05:25 PM
Last Post: secluff
  Jacking car up by front cross member Omie01 20 1,186 09-17-2018, 08:23 AM
Last Post: Hemikiller
  new shocks advice Vinnie 52 3,416 07-11-2018, 02:53 PM
Last Post: Don C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)