Har lurt på å skifta til "komfort-kuler".
http://cx-basis.de/eshop/product_info.p ... cts_id=270
Nokon som har prøvd desse?
"Komfort-kuler"
Moderator: moderator
Hadde vært grit å vite hva som utgjør "comforten". Er det større volum, større hull i ventilen, slappere ventilplater eller hva?
Vet at det har vært solgt CX kuler til XM som comfortkuler.
Mvh
Vet at det har vært solgt CX kuler til XM som comfortkuler.
Mvh
Jon
Eier av 12 CXer og 5 C5.
http://cx.zapto.org/gallery/Jons-CX-samling
http://citroencx.vpweb.no
http://www.citroencx.no/
Eier av 12 CXer og 5 C5.
http://cx.zapto.org/gallery/Jons-CX-samling
http://citroencx.vpweb.no
http://www.citroencx.no/
Re: "Komfort-kuler"
Hvorfor?hl wrote:Har lurt på å skifta til "komfort-kuler".
Lurer på om ikke 85/86 har "gammelkomforten" mener jeg leste noe om det en gang... at de forandret kulene med Turbo II modellene men mulig jeg tar feil.hl wrote:Enno meir komfort, naturlegvis...hl wrote:
Har lurt på å skifta til "komfort-kuler".
Hvorfor?
Saknar den forrige, som var mjukare enn den eg har no. (Skal ein bli lukkeleg som CX-eigar, bør ein nok ha både serie 1 og serie 2 :wink: )
Gjett hva jeg har
Myk er hun ihvertfall.
mer confort i cx, tja, vet ikke helt, folk som aldri har vært passasjer i min cx klager på at de føler en viss "sjøsjuke" etter en tur over fartshumpene i trondheim by. Vet ikke om det riktig å sammenligne DS og CX fjæring, det er jo forskjellige biler som hører til hver sin epoke. jeg har mer tro på fyllbare kuler for å oppretteholde den vanvittige gode konforten som er fra før. En annen ting jeg lurer på med confortkuler, er om bilen blir vesentlig mye mykere, og at den derfor lettere tar ned i farsthmupene, hadde dette problemet på en 88 RD break en gang, men vet ikke om den hadde confortkuler.
Ja. :D Og så både TRS, Pallas, Prestige, GTi, Gti turbo, Break, T2 osv osv osv synes nå jeg da.(Skal ein bli lukkeleg som CX-eigar, bør ein nok ha både serie 1 og serie 2
:wink: :D Men har enda ikke fått noe svar på hva som er forskjellen på de originale kulene og de såkalte "comfort" kulene. Altså rent teknisk.
Mvh
Jon
Eier av 12 CXer og 5 C5.
http://cx.zapto.org/gallery/Jons-CX-samling
http://citroencx.vpweb.no
http://www.citroencx.no/
Eier av 12 CXer og 5 C5.
http://cx.zapto.org/gallery/Jons-CX-samling
http://citroencx.vpweb.no
http://www.citroencx.no/
Klippet fra CX-L
"Hi everyone.
Recent postings suggest that it is time for a seminar on hydro-pneumatic
suspension a la Citroen. (Puts on school-master hat.)
Points to remember:-
A) the shock-absorbers (or their equivalent) are a major (THE major???)
transmission route for road shock from wheel to chassis. By drilling the holes
out
this source of 'bumps' is reduced. (There is a spring-loaded valve in the
damper section too but it is too complicated to fiddle with this.) But there is
a limit - very weak S-As allow the chassis to see-saw sickeningly. I have
seen mention of 2.5mm on the front end - this must be the absolute limit. I
have 1.9mm in mine and intend to keep it that way when new spheres are fitted.
Some folk who enjoy driving their CXs enthusiastically do not like this idea,
but when you reach the age where the country is paying you to keep you alive
comfort matters more. Too little S-A action allows bounce at the tyre/road
interface, see below.
B) Unsprung weight is a source of a two sorts of transmitted shock:-
1) If the S-As are not stiff enough to dampen motion of the suspension the
wheel/suspension assembly may bounce at the tyre/road contact and cause horrible
vibrations, hence keep the unsprung weight low to allow low S-A rates. And -
2) the point of contact between tyre and big bump is not at the bottom of the
tyre, it is a few/several centimeters in front of the bottom of the tyre.
This means (draw a picture to see it) that the impact on the tyre/wheel is not
just upwards but also towards the rear. If the unsprung weight is high the
force needed to move the wheel up is high and the rearward element is high.
This
is transmitted via the suspension as a different kind of discomfort. Some
cars go to great lengths to reduce this effect by allowing horizontal movement
of the suspension under control of more shock-absorbers and/or spring
components. Another way to reduce the effect is to fit bigger diameter tyres -
again,
draw a picture.
C) One reason for the Citroen suspension feeling so good is that the "spring
rate" is low. This is the amount that the spring pressure increases with
increasing deflection upwards. In a "normal" car this allows the car to carry
big
loads/more passengers without the suspension hitting the stops. Citroens
allow for this by increasing the gas pressure by pumping more oil in to fill the
sphere. This does increase the spring rate but from a small starting value to
a slightly higher value.
D) Another way to reduce this rate is to fit larger volume spheres. DS
spheres and CX estate rear spheres are 700ccs, most others are 500ccs, including
normal CX spheres, with 400ccs on some BX/GS/XM applications. If the full
advantage of this effect is to be achieved the gas pressure and the damping hole
size must be right. For CX fronts with DS spheres the starting pressure should
be about 90-100bar compared with the "normal" CX pressure of 75bar and the
"normal" DS pressure of 59bar in the front. (Fitting bigger spheres at the back
is mechanically difficult.) Running with lower pressure spheres does NOT
give softer suspension because the working pressure (with the car "pumped up"
and
ready to go) is the same regardless of what spheres are fitted, and a lower
pressure sphere has less gas volume to absorb the variations transmitted by the
piston, hence it gets harder sooner on upward deflections. (Remember that
the quoted sphere pressure is the gas pressure before the suspension system has
filled the sphere with oil to raise the car.) Going too far the other way
means that the suspension may do the opposite of "bottom" (What's that called?)
as
the sphere empties completely on downward suspension movement. I am told it
makes a ghastly noise as the diaphragm cap hits the inside of the sphere.
That should start a few discussions/arguments, if anybody has read this far.
Regards from Alan D. (Removes schoolmaster hat.)"
"Hi everyone.
Recent postings suggest that it is time for a seminar on hydro-pneumatic
suspension a la Citroen. (Puts on school-master hat.)
Points to remember:-
A) the shock-absorbers (or their equivalent) are a major (THE major???)
transmission route for road shock from wheel to chassis. By drilling the holes
out
this source of 'bumps' is reduced. (There is a spring-loaded valve in the
damper section too but it is too complicated to fiddle with this.) But there is
a limit - very weak S-As allow the chassis to see-saw sickeningly. I have
seen mention of 2.5mm on the front end - this must be the absolute limit. I
have 1.9mm in mine and intend to keep it that way when new spheres are fitted.
Some folk who enjoy driving their CXs enthusiastically do not like this idea,
but when you reach the age where the country is paying you to keep you alive
comfort matters more. Too little S-A action allows bounce at the tyre/road
interface, see below.
B) Unsprung weight is a source of a two sorts of transmitted shock:-
1) If the S-As are not stiff enough to dampen motion of the suspension the
wheel/suspension assembly may bounce at the tyre/road contact and cause horrible
vibrations, hence keep the unsprung weight low to allow low S-A rates. And -
2) the point of contact between tyre and big bump is not at the bottom of the
tyre, it is a few/several centimeters in front of the bottom of the tyre.
This means (draw a picture to see it) that the impact on the tyre/wheel is not
just upwards but also towards the rear. If the unsprung weight is high the
force needed to move the wheel up is high and the rearward element is high.
This
is transmitted via the suspension as a different kind of discomfort. Some
cars go to great lengths to reduce this effect by allowing horizontal movement
of the suspension under control of more shock-absorbers and/or spring
components. Another way to reduce the effect is to fit bigger diameter tyres -
again,
draw a picture.
C) One reason for the Citroen suspension feeling so good is that the "spring
rate" is low. This is the amount that the spring pressure increases with
increasing deflection upwards. In a "normal" car this allows the car to carry
big
loads/more passengers without the suspension hitting the stops. Citroens
allow for this by increasing the gas pressure by pumping more oil in to fill the
sphere. This does increase the spring rate but from a small starting value to
a slightly higher value.
D) Another way to reduce this rate is to fit larger volume spheres. DS
spheres and CX estate rear spheres are 700ccs, most others are 500ccs, including
normal CX spheres, with 400ccs on some BX/GS/XM applications. If the full
advantage of this effect is to be achieved the gas pressure and the damping hole
size must be right. For CX fronts with DS spheres the starting pressure should
be about 90-100bar compared with the "normal" CX pressure of 75bar and the
"normal" DS pressure of 59bar in the front. (Fitting bigger spheres at the back
is mechanically difficult.) Running with lower pressure spheres does NOT
give softer suspension because the working pressure (with the car "pumped up"
and
ready to go) is the same regardless of what spheres are fitted, and a lower
pressure sphere has less gas volume to absorb the variations transmitted by the
piston, hence it gets harder sooner on upward deflections. (Remember that
the quoted sphere pressure is the gas pressure before the suspension system has
filled the sphere with oil to raise the car.) Going too far the other way
means that the suspension may do the opposite of "bottom" (What's that called?)
as
the sphere empties completely on downward suspension movement. I am told it
makes a ghastly noise as the diaphragm cap hits the inside of the sphere.
That should start a few discussions/arguments, if anybody has read this far.
Regards from Alan D. (Removes schoolmaster hat.)"
mer...
"the TRX tires are quite soft when new (but they get old quite soon,
mine are 4 years old now and noticably becoming harder).
It really makes a difference to have new tires; but it is only for the
very small bumps like on a cobblestone road.
I assume your spheres (all 6 of them) are ok? If so, do you have the
front suspension spheres with the "W" or with "X"? The "X" ones have a
smaller hole in the middle of the damping unit, and you can drill this
hole bigger to 1.9mm or 2.0mm. 2.0mm is much easier to get and it is
the size CX had in 1983. Anyway a bit too soft for speeds over 100mph.
As you have your front apart: check the bearings! The movement should
be smooth and easy when you move the upper swingarm (alone and without
all those things connected). If they are stuck, you have a very harsh
ride.
wilhelm"
"the TRX tires are quite soft when new (but they get old quite soon,
mine are 4 years old now and noticably becoming harder).
It really makes a difference to have new tires; but it is only for the
very small bumps like on a cobblestone road.
I assume your spheres (all 6 of them) are ok? If so, do you have the
front suspension spheres with the "W" or with "X"? The "X" ones have a
smaller hole in the middle of the damping unit, and you can drill this
hole bigger to 1.9mm or 2.0mm. 2.0mm is much easier to get and it is
the size CX had in 1983. Anyway a bit too soft for speeds over 100mph.
As you have your front apart: check the bearings! The movement should
be smooth and easy when you move the upper swingarm (alone and without
all those things connected). If they are stuck, you have a very harsh
ride.
wilhelm"
>
>GTI's very sporty (hard) drive, and purchased a set of "Comfort
>Spheres" from Andre Pol (Citroen Andre). My understanding from him
>was that both the pressure and the valves are different than on the
>regular spheres. I may be wrong but do also believe that the Turbo
>spheres are with less pressure (harder drive) than other CXs.
>
>A very good choice for me, but I now need some wheels with "larger
>tires" (higher/softer sidewalls) to absorb the annoying little bumps
>in the road (like on my old D). What's wrong with the 14" wheels
>(other than looks)?
>
>Preben
>
>GTI's very sporty (hard) drive, and purchased a set of "Comfort
>Spheres" from Andre Pol (Citroen Andre). My understanding from him
>was that both the pressure and the valves are different than on the
>regular spheres. I may be wrong but do also believe that the Turbo
>spheres are with less pressure (harder drive) than other CXs.
>
>A very good choice for me, but I now need some wheels with "larger
>tires" (higher/softer sidewalls) to absorb the annoying little bumps
>in the road (like on my old D). What's wrong with the 14" wheels
>(other than looks)?
>
>Preben
>
Joda.dagmatti wrote:Hei,
Jeg fikk tips (fra klubben) om å bruke kuler foran fra gti turbo bak på min stasjonsvogn (med 40 bar trykk) istedet for å bruke bak-kulene fra personbil. De original kulene bak på break er jo mye større enn på personbilen. Noen som har testet dette? Jeg tenkte å teste det da men... :D
-mattis
Han her....
"Harry,
I have moved spheres front to rear as you suggest. The damper holes are
bigger than normal so the rear end tends to be softly damped, but if you drill
the
new front spheres too the ride is very relaxing. I took mine out to 2.1mm.
I measured the sphere pressure before doing it. If you want to try it just to
see, it is a pain renewing the rears if the effect is not right.
Regards from Alan D. in Somerset, England."