Gabriel air shocks

[WileE]

I've ran them on several cars for decades and never had one single issue. people have problems because they pump 200 psi in them, load four fat chicks in the trunk then proceed to do 50 mph over speed bumps, destroying everything holding the car together out back

It's one of those myths that keeps getting parroted. I've had, and still have, them on my cars. We used to install them on many cars. And not once, never, never, did I have or see a car that was damaged by air shocks. We even put them on station wagons back in the day.

 

[Nate S]

It's one of those myths that keeps getting parroted. I've had, and still have, them on my cars. We used to install them on many cars. And not once, never, never, did I have or see a car that was damaged by air shocks. We even put them on station wagons back in the day.

Had a ‘69 roadrunner where the rear shock mount was completely destroyed by these. Cut the support out of a ‘69 charger R/T we were cutting up and welded it in as a replacement. No myth.

 

[WileE]

Had a ‘69 roadrunner where the rear shock mount was completely destroyed by these. Cut the support out of a ‘69 charger R/T we were cutting up and welded it in as a replacement. No myth.

You had one car where this happened. When ? What condition was the car ? How many cars have you installed these ? How long ago ? Was you car already rotted out ? I did these back in the 70's ad infinitum. On many cars. It's a myth.

 

[roadrunnerh]

I run them on my Road Runner - sensibly. If the car is clean, you wouldn't have a problem.

 

[Nate S]

You had one car where this happened. When ? What condition was the car ? How many cars have you installed these ? How long ago ? Was you car already rotted out ? I did these back in the 70's ad infinitum. On many cars. It's a myth.

No myth.
This was around ‘88. Pretty clean, no rot RR. 383-4sp. Air grabber. Some fool had put a sunroof into it! That took some work (and a patch from the roof of a charger that @chargervert was parting out). But no kidding the rear shock mount was destroyed. Based on your experiences maybe there was more going on? But this isn’t common mopar lore because it’s never happened before.

 

[WileE]

No myth.
This was around ‘88. Pretty clean, no rot RR. 383-4sp. Air grabber. Some fool had put a sunroof into it! That took some work (and a patch from the roof of a charger that @chargervert was parting out). But no kidding the rear shock mount was destroyed. Based on your experiences maybe there was more going on? But this isn’t common mopar lore because it’s never happened before.View attachment 1232316

Oh, I believe you, not to say it couldn't or didn't happen. But, on the number of cars I've had & still have, the number of cars we installed in the garage, and the cars around the area that many had them, not ever once did I see the shock mount torn. Not once. As a previous poster correctly noted, you don't pump 200 psi and drive the baja. Station wagons were actually a popular model for their use.

 

[Billymonster]

The shock mount crossmember in B bodies are junk no matter what shock you run.

 

[Stroked408]

I’ve read other threads about these air shocks and let me know if I need to start my own thread. I can’t release the air from my shocks via the schrader valve. I unscrewed the lines from the shocks but nothing, no air released. The back is jacked up too high.

 

[moparedtn]

I’ve read other threads about these air shocks and let me know if I need to start my own thread. I can’t release the air from my shocks via the schrader valve. I unscrewed the lines from the shocks but nothing, no air released. The back is jacked up too high.

What're the odds it's the springs themselves holding the car "jacked up"?

 

[Stroked408]

I forgot to mention that I had added some air after filling up with fuel in my 68 Satellite wagon. The back end seemed too low and I added only a little, so I thought.

 

[dual fours]

What're the odds it's the springs themselves holding the car "jacked up"?

I know very little about air shocks, never used or needed them so I do not know what I have missed if anything.
Can you add air?
Is there a check valve on each shock?
If you release air too fast, the check will closes too hold air in so your *** don't drop down too fast. Just a thought.
EDIT. ok I see you can add air. All bets are off.

 

[toolmanmike]

Don't like the altitude? let the air out. Still too high? it's the springs. Contact ESPO Springs and things and tell them what you want.

 

[dual fours]

There was a time around here when the cops would give you a ticket for having your car jacked up too high. Something they called a 'bumper height law'.

 

[moparedtn]

General reminder:
- In vehicles such as cars, springs are engineered to support the weight of the vehicle plus
any additional carrying loads anticipated/designed into it.
- The engineered purpose of shock absorbers in vehicles are to control movement of the
body of the chassis - never to support the weight of it.

This is why when folks use air shocks on our Mopars, oftentimes the shock mounts/cross-braces
fail; they are not designed to bear any weight of the car.

 

[Photon440]

I've said this before, but even without bearing weight the shock mounts still have to absorb upward and downward loads that in effect still look the same as weight to the carrying part. Putting a shock onto a shock dyno can show hundreds of pounds of force exerted on the ends while traveling over road bumps and uneven surfaces. It only takes a couple hundred pounds of push from an air shock to make a difference in ride height, (divided by two shocks) and this could easily be compared to the extra loads that you'd get by putting on a set of extra firm conventional shocks as an upgrade over factory stockers.

I hammered on my car as a kid (I didn't install the air shocks, they came with the car) and there was nary a trace of cracking or fatigue when I took it apart year later.

 

[dadsbee]

I hammered on my car as a kid (I didn't install the air shocks, they came with the car) and there was nary a trace of cracking or fatigue when I took it apart year later.

Only original steel part on the underside of my Bee, other than the left front rail, is the rear upper shock mount and the car has had air shocks on it since 1978.

 

[WileE]

I've said this before, but even without bearing weight the shock mounts still have to absorb upward and downward loads that in effect still look the same as weight to the carrying part. Putting a shock onto a shock dyno can show hundreds of pounds of force exerted on the ends while traveling over road bumps and uneven surfaces. It only takes a couple hundred pounds of push from an air shock to make a difference in ride height, (divided by two shocks) and this could easily be compared to the extra loads that you'd get by putting on a set of extra firm conventional shocks as an upgrade over factory stockers.

I hammered on my car as a kid (I didn't install the air shocks, they came with the car) and there was nary a trace of cracking or fatigue when I took it apart year later.

 

[WileE]

This is why when folks use air shocks on our Mopars, oftentimes the shock mounts/cross-braces
fail; they are not designed to bear any weight of the car.

I've been working & modifying these cars for 50 years. "oftentimes" the crossbraces fail ??? I'd like to know how many you've had that did so, and how many you've seen. I'll give you my answer = Zero. Yes, you're right, the shocks are controlling the load forces,and those load forces are directly on the shock mounts on the body and axle.

 

[moparedtn]

I've been working & modifying these cars for 50 years. "oftentimes" the crossbraces fail ??? I'd like to know how many you've had that did so, and how many you've seen. I'll give you my answer = Zero. Yes, you're right, the shocks are controlling the load forces,and those load forces are directly on the shock mounts on the body and axle.

I'm surprised you'd post this; you've no doubt been in the hobby for a similar timeframe as myself -
which means you've been exposed to reports of rear shock crossmembers failing (heck, there's even a post
in this very thread of one doing so); a quick search of this site will bring up other instances reported.

I've read/seen past reports on this site and others of failures of this part of the cars; typically from rust, but
other times I recall reading of factory omissions of welds, defective alignments, weak metal...
and yes, I've witnessed one such crossmember literally fall out of a car while on the lift at a shop I worked
at while going to college 40+ years ago, the victim of air shocks and some corrosion.
Once the mechanic started unbolting the shocks for removal, here came the crossmember down on his noggin.

Regardless, shocks control movement and dampen shocks to the chassis - within the design limits of travel of the
springs on said car.
They are not intended to perform the same work as the springs on the car - the construction of structural
components would indicate that even to the untrained eye, after all - which is why spring mounting points and
hardware on a given car are so much beefier by comparison.

I like the SAE "simple" definition of the purpose of shocks ("dampers"):
Shock absorbers damp out the (otherwise simple harmonic) motions of a vehicle up and down on its springs.
They must also damp out much of the wheel bounce when the unsprung weight of a wheel, hub, axle, and
sometimes brakes and the differential bounces up and down on the springiness of a tire.

 

[Photon440]

I'm surprised you'd post this; you've no doubt been in the hobby for a similar timeframe as myself -
which means you've been exposed to reports of rear shock crossmembers failing (heck, there's even a post
in this very thread of one doing so); a quick search of this site will bring up other instances reported.

I've read/seen past reports on this site and others of failures of this part of the cars; typically from rust, but
other times I recall reading of factory omissions of welds, defective alignments, weak metal...
and yes, I've witnessed one such crossmember literally fall out of a car while on the lift at a shop I worked
at while going to college 40+ years ago, the victim of air shocks and some corrosion.
Once the mechanic started unbolting the shocks for removal, here came the crossmember down on his noggin.

Regardless, shocks control movement and dampen shocks to the chassis - within the design limits of travel of the
springs on said car.
They are not intended to perform the same work as the springs on the car - the construction of structural
components would indicate that even to the untrained eye, after all - which is why spring mounting points and
hardware on a given car are so much beefier by comparison.

I like the SAE "simple" definition of the purpose of shocks ("dampers"):
Shock absorbers damp out the (otherwise simple harmonic) motions of a vehicle up and down on its springs.
They must also damp out much of the wheel bounce when the unsprung weight of a wheel, hub, axle, and
sometimes brakes and the differential bounces up and down on the springiness of a tire.

I agree with the SAE definition, which follows that by doing their job, shock absorbers are transferring a lot of stress to the mounting brackets. The additional bit of load of an air shock, all of it being a positive upward push, isn't going to overly stress the car.

As you point out, rust or omissions of welds can cause problems, but they weren't designed in. If you've seen failures due to "the victim of air shocks and some corrosion", I'm willing to bet that regular shocks and some corrosion could have caused the same failure.