242 replies to this topic

[Martinracing98]

The pillow assemlby should not rotate seperate from the hat. The shock will since the mounting point is a bearing that is free to rotate

[Bench Racer]

Sphinx, here's a pair of videos By Ralph P./SMAC member. First video opening the 15/16 inch hole in top hat. Second video would be the assembly process.

First            https://www.facebook...58152164942488/

 

Second      https://www.facebook...58275331590636/

 

 

Thanks Ralph

[Sphinx]

If you were able to torque the lower "nut" to the upper "nut" and have all of the Belleville and shim spacer parts properly stacked over the lower nut and under the upper nut, then the "Monoball" bearing should be properly secured within the upper and lower "nuts" and in the top hat assembly.

 

If, given you achieved the specified torque, and you find the assembly loose in the top hat then, assuming proper parts stack, you have an issue with the thickness of the Top Hat in the area where the lower and upper nut assembly spacing sets the gap in which the shim spacer and three conical Belleville washers provide the preload limiting the amount of "play" of the upper/lower nut assembly within the Top Hat. 

 

If you find it loose, I would inspect the Top Hat,  as poor machining of the 15/16 clearance hole may have compromised the effective Top Hat thickness in the immediate area where the shim spacer and Belleville washers rest against the Top Hat surface.  I have heard reports of this happening when using a "step drill" to open the hole in the Top Hat.  On car symptoms of this are a clunking knocking sound heard at low speed driving around the pits or when pushing up and down hard on the car.

 

If you study the provided instruction sheet cross section view of this assembly, you will be able to see that there is nothing to prevent the rotation of the upper/lower nut assembly within the Top Hat. There has not been any specification provided as to what the torque to rotate tolerance for this joint should be. That said, if you find it to rotate effortlessly, I would change to another properly machined Top Hat. 

 

Rich Powers

 

It only rotated under the torque of an impact wrench putting on the top nut.  There was no looseness once it was assembled and torqued down.  My concern is if the impact wrench over-torqued the assembly.

[Sphinx]

Sphinx, here's a pair of videos By Ralph P./SMAC member. First video opening the 15/16 inch hole in top hat. Second video would be the assembly process.

First            https://www.facebook...58152164942488/

 

Second      https://www.facebook...58275331590636/

 

 

Thanks Ralph

 

Thanks.  I viewed the assembly video extensively.  I just noticed that if you look at the spot where he uses the impact on the top nut, you'll see the assembly rotate about 45 degrees.  I feel better.  I think it's time to assemble and not worry about it.

[Brandon]

So I'm wondering, would any of you guys "in the know", care to assure me that an expensive top hat "upgrade" isn't going to happen; before I invest in hats and FC isolators for my new build?

 

It's unclear what level (ST/Majors/Regionals) you're intending to race, and equally unclear in your experience/skill level, but I'd go ahead with new hats and the FC bumpstop kit to get your car together and get out on track. New hats specifically so they're a known-good item and can be reused with the Penske install.

 

Seat time is your biggest return and you won't have that if you're worrying about whether $300 in foam bits or $1100 in new shocks will change the results you get once you're finally in the car.

[Ron Alan]

So I'm wondering, would any of you guys "in the know", care to assure me that an expensive top hat "upgrade" isn't going to happen; before I invest in hats and FC isolators for my new build?

If you want the FC set up with tophats...send me a PM. I'll be happy to send/sell you the 2 year old stuff that just came off my car at a bargain rate! 

[davidb]

If you want the FC set up with tophats...send me a PM. I'll be happy to send/sell you the 2 year old stuff that just came off my car at a bargain rate! 

Those tophats will allow me to get the rear camber I want without wrecking my Penskes, yes?

[Ron Alan]

Those tophats will allow me to get the rear camber I want without wrecking my Penskes, yes?

If the Penske's can be used with the fatcat package there should be no issue. The Penske top mount package is sold separate(not mandatory/necessary) so my guess is you're good!

[ChrisA]

Those tophats will allow me to get the rear camber I want without wrecking my Penskes, yes?

The Penskes need to run with their tophat kit. The FatCat kit is inferior and will put stress on the shock shaft, this is one of the reasons it was developed. It also would not be legal in SM to mix the old and new kits.

[Steve Scheifler]

Reading David’s original question I’m thinking there may be some confusion about what he has and what he’s asking.

David, exactly what parts do you currently have, both on and off the car?

If building from scratch then an NB will already have the only top hats currently allowed, the stock NB parts. If you install Penske’s then you need to modify those. If building an NA then you need to purchase the stock NB top hats new or from a salvage yard. You also need the black isolators from the fat cat kit which go between the top of the spring and the hat. With those and the Penske monoball top mounts you are up to date. In the event that something changes in the new kit it likely won’t be soon and will only be for the rears. So IF they adopt a new taller hat for the rears, at worst you will toss two inexpensive hats and two isolators, which someone else can surely put to use on a build, and perhaps the rear pair of monoball mounts you have anyway. I’ll be pretty surprised if that hapoens at all let alone soon so I certainly would not delay assembling the car.

If your car already has the old Bilstein/fat cat setup then you have the NB hats and isolators so you can just leave it as-is for now or switch. It sounds like you already bought the Penske’s so I would use them.

[Ron Alan]

The Penskes need to run with their tophat kit. The FatCat kit is inferior and will put stress on the shock shaft, this is one of the reasons it was developed. It also would not be legal in SM to mix the old and new kits.

I guess I never paid close attention that there was no mixing...made an assumption since you order the new top hat kit separate. 

[Bench Racer]

The Penskes need to run with their tophat kit. The FatCat kit is inferior and will put stress on the shock shaft, this is one of the reasons it was developed. It also would not be legal in SM to mix the old and new kits.

Chris, saying the FatCat is inferior for my 2 cent's is a misnomer (I get the mono ball versus the FatCat). How many years have we run with FatCat and who has all the failed shock because of the FatCat? Now, my 1.6 is inferior to the 1.8.

[ChrisA]

Had to jump to parity didn't you?   A mono-ball is obviously a superior design to the bushing based OE design for a shock. The FatCat use of the stiffer polyurethane was actually worse than the Mazda rubber design, because it allowed less flex and thus put more load on the shock shaft. The stiffness did impart a little more "feel" of the car to the driver, but at the cost of shaft loading. Now, Bilstein makes good shocks, thus low failure rates. The mono-ball is a good design for the shock and "feel" for the driver likely also increased a bit. However, it's trade-off may be a shorter life, but we'll have to wait to see on that. Even better would be if the topmast themselves had freedom of movement via a spherical bearing...

 

My Penskes are still sitting in the box, as my AiM system install is taking me longer than expected.  

[Bench Racer]

My intent was not parity, just torque difference at less than 5,000 - 5,500 rpm of the 1.6 to the 99 plus. Dem uder guys can talk parity. 

[Sphinx]

[nevermind]

[OrangeCrush86]

For those ordering online. I think this should be correct:

 

2x 0000-04-5275 @ SHOCK, FRONT (PENSKE) S

2x 0000-04-5276 @ SHOCK, REAR (PENSKE) SM

1x 0000-04-5277 @ KIT, TOP MOUNT/BUMP STO

 

However I don't know what these are for:

0000-04-5278 @ NUT, UPPER - SM PENSKE  Notes: 1 1/16" (27mm) flats

0000-04-5279@ NUT, LOWER - SM PENSKE  Notes: 1 1/4" (32mm) tORQUE 50ft

 

 

[ChrisA]

Has anybody else had one or more spring sleeves have a smaller I.D. than the others? I had one that was rather tighter than the other 3, almost a 1mm smaller. It went on with some grease... and a hammer. 

[Bench Racer]

Has anybody else had one or more spring sleves have a smaller I.D. than the others? I had one that was rather tighter than the other 3, almost a 1mm smaller. It went on with some grease... and a hammer. 

Ralph's video showed the sleeve a tight fit over the o-rings. Maybe if others have issues they should measure. The sleeves not manufactured by Penske may have had a different tolerance for whatever reason. Alum tube I.D. or machining and not specifically for o-ring???   

[ChrisA]

Ralph's video showed the sleeve a tight fit over the o-rings. Maybe if others have issues they should measure. The sleeves not manufactured by Penske may have had a different tolerance for whatever reason. Alum tube I.D. or machining and not specifically for o-ring???   

 

This was not an issue with the 0-rings, those stayed in place for me. Where the Bilstiens used a snap-ring as perch for the sleeves the Penske's perch is machined into the body. This particular sleeve did not have allowance to pass the perch without force. I don't think the O.D. of the sleeve was smaller than the other, although I did not measure it, because I have not noticed any looseness in the spring perch. It seems to thread the same as the others. If I remember, I may use the calipers to check the O.D. of the sleeves, before the wheel go back on.

[FTodaro]

Has anybody else had one or more spring sleeves have a smaller I.D. than the others? I had one that was rather tighter than the other 3, almost a 1mm smaller. It went on with some grease... and a hammer. 

Mine were loose, I think over the years there have been several suppliers and they are not all the same. I had one that was tight but it was damaged.