I have seen some jeeps that have the pressurized tube on the top with the shaft running down to the axle. On mine i have the pressurized tube on the axel side and the shaft runs to the upper shock mount. Is one way better than the other? Probably a stupid questions as it seems its probably the same, but i am curious now.

 

It is the design based on who manufactures the shock. My Rancho's had the tube on the bottom, my Fox 2.0's have the tube at the top.

 

But it doesn't make much difference in performance im assuming correct? I definitely like the way the look with the tube mounted on the top.

 

I don't know of any and have never heard that one is better or worse than the other. I like my Fox shocks better than the Rancho's but I doubt that it is because of the orientation of the tube.

 

Shafts are easier/ cheaper to replace than a shock body... given the choice, if one is to be at risk, I'd prefer it to be the shaft. Not much of an issue up front, but could be a factor in back for sure.

 

I *think* that shocks are designed to be ran in whichever form the manufacturer suggests. That being said, I don't think the shocks on my buggy are designed to be ran upside down, but I do it, simply because of the clearance issues I have, and I haven't had any problems.

 

all good to know. i appreciate the insight lol at first i though i might have installed them upside down then i realized how they mounted.

 

If your shocks have a double walled body then you should run the body side on the bottom. The reason is that this type of body is designed to take a beating without the dents impeading on the piston path. Versus a damaged shaft will kill the shock as soon as the shock is fully cycled.

For a mono tube shock that is rebuildable the oposite is true because the cost of repair is tpically less for the shaft than the body.