Foosh

I don't think the implications of setting ride height lower than spec is unique to MSRC shocks. Moreover, there's nothing really all that different about MSRC and standard shocks. They are both fluid filled, but MSRC shocks have magnetic particles in the fluid, which are electro-magnetically charged to change fluid viscosity, and how you get stiff and soft in the same shock.

Lowering more than OEM ride height specs would also limit shock travel on standard shocks. However, I don't think that has anything to do with longevity in either case. You could actually make the opposite case that limiting travel would increase longevity.

Patman

Even though the price of magnetic shocks has come way down on the C7 compared to the C6 I know that conventional shocks will still cost less if they need replacing (and I realize I won't be covered under warranty if they happen to fail too) I couldn't believe how costly the C6 magnetic ride shocks were. When my C6's rear magnetic shocks failed, the dealer wanted $2400 to replace them! That's why I just went with Z51 shocks and had the magnetic ride tuned out.

Foosh

OK, fair enough, but I still don't understand your previous suggestion that you made your choice because you wanted to lower it. There's no reason to believe that lowering ride height has anything to do with shock longevity either standard or MSRC. They just don't function as well because of limited shock travel, but that hurts your body more than the shock.

BTW, MSRC shocks are covered by the GM extended warranty plans and a set of 4 now costs about the same as a set of OEM tires. Today's MSRC shocks must not fail very often because they'd most certainly be excluded otherwise.

2cnd Chance

I appreciate the heads up information. Thanks

Patman

Truth be told, the number one reason I didn't add MSRC was because I was trying to keep the costs very low on my order (hence the choice to go with a 1LT also), so that added $2000 for MSRC was something I had to seriously consider forgetting about. As much as I really love the benefits of the technology, I also know that for a major portion of my driving I wouldn't even utilize it to it's full potential. But I also did consider the possibility that I could be damaging the shocks with the low ride height that I want. Keep in mind, I'm aiming for about an inch and a half lower than stock so that's a pretty substantial change.

I wonder if anyone on here has MSRC and has lowered their car with aftermarket lowering bolts? Their input would be very interesting in this discussion!

I was quite shocked (haha) when my C6's rear shocks gave up the ghost so soon, with just 70,000 miles on them. The strangest thing to me was that they failed during winter storage. When I put the car away one fall it was fine, and part way through that winter I took the car out for a spin and noticed the rear end was bouncing all over the place, dangerously so actually.

Foosh

There's no question that many hundreds if not thousands of owners have lowered as far as the adjustment bolts allow w/ MSRC shocks, and they still get benefits from MSRC.

I'm thinking that maybe you missed the part of this discussion having to do with TPC Racing/DSC Sport recommendations to use OEM ride height for maximum performance of the DSC Sport MSRC Controller. That incredible device completely transforms the car's suspension and handling, as hundreds have attested to on this forum. The serious track folks are knocking multiple seconds off their lap times over the OEM MSRC controller.

You can choose looks, or you can choose max performance, but it's always an individual choice.

Patman

Since I have never taken any of my Corvettes to the track, I choose looks in this case. But I would certainly be doing things a lot differently if I was a regular visitor to the track!

Foosh

Oh yeah, I should have mentioned you can have max performance and greater comfort on the street as well with a simple turn of the console ****. That's a pretty unbeatable combination.

LIStingray

If you have a GS or Z06, the side skirts are about 3/4" lower than the bottom of the car and can scrape on things that will catch the front splitter - I don't have the splitter on my GS because it would scrape on my driveway, the side skirts scrape if I don't angle it just right.
My car is not lowered. My 2014 never scraped.

oldC5

I have stage 2 splitter with side skirts and side skirts never hit . I have extremely steep driveway. My front splitter does hit barely. I bought ramps for my steep drive way. I do not hit with normal driveways at all.

MikeyTX

I must have gotten lucky like foosh. My drop top sits just right. Rides smooth as can be. I would't lower it.

JerryU

Yep both stanadard shocks and mag shocks have fluid but unless the standard shock bottoms in either direction, compression or rebound, that fluid has the same viscosity passing through orifices that provide the restriction in movement. There may be several orifice controlled by Belleville springs or one that varies in size/shape controlled by springs, etc.

The Ferrofuild in a mag shock changes viscosity based on the magnetic field applied by coils surrounding the reservoir. The C7 has two coils that operate quicker than C6 and prior Vettes.

As I said, if the shock doesn't bottom or hit a bump stop on either end of the stroke, with a conventional shock should have no difference in compression or rebound control forces, wherever the shock is in it's stroke. On a track like Daytona can't see the shock hitting the bump stops (often rubber) in a Vette. Perhaps at Sebring or another rough track surface. If it does then yes ride height makes a difference.

With a mag shock, "guess" it's possible that the fluid viscosity "may" vary depending on the the proximity of the magnetic coils surronding fluid reservoir and therefore the position in the stroke "may" make a difference. Don't know.

I recall when ferrofluid was developed by NASA in the 1960's. It was going to be the next best thing to sliced bread! Similar to "heat pipes" developed on that same time period at Los Alomos Labs. Both used today but not nearly to the extent predicted! Yep the "Space Race," generated many mechanical innovations in addition to microchips!

Gearhead Jim

Someone once posted that the mag ride shocks sense their locations in the stroke as they move, to determine how fast they are moving and therefore apply whatever damping force is appropriate for that speed of movement in that location in the stroke.

There is a possibility that if a shock is closer to the end of its travel than "normal" because of lowering, the controller would allow it to be "softer" than desired because the controller thinks there is still a lot of stroke left before bottoming.

I'm not advocating that as fact, merely a possibility that someone else had posted.

JerryU

^^^
Thanks from another "gearhead!" That is logical! Much better than my speculation about different viscosity based on the location of the magnetic coils! The computer could adjust the fluid viscosity to whatever fits the situation "assuming" it is at a certain place in it's stroke based on designed ride height. Much better to do that versus letting it hit a rubber stop, which abruptly, adversely disrupts handling!

Right or wrong, always like to have at least a postulate about what is occurring to see if it fits other observations!