1.02" shafts and 1.32" bodies on World's rear shocks?

[SteveK]

I'm reading the World's Car manual, the car I'm piecing together will basically be a World's car in layout, and I came to the section on rear shocks. I understand why they limit travel in the rear, and that they used the 1.02 shafts and 1.32 bodies, but why use the 1.32 bodies at all? You still put travel limiters inside the shocks, so even the 1.02 shafts are a bit too long, for the stock setup. They designed a new shock tower for the rear anyway, so why not just use the entire 1.02" shock and save weight?

[RC10resto]

Oil volume = better dampening = better handling

[scr8p]

if you used shorter shock bodies than the 1.32, you'd have to add a bunch of uptravel limiters to the shock shaft on the outside to keep the dogbones/cvds from binding.

[SteveK]

if you used shorter shock bodies than the 1.32, you'd have to add a bunch of uptravel limiters to the shock shaft on the outside to keep the dogbones/cvds from binding.

Well I was assuming them could have designed a new, shorter, shock tower to accommodate them. Not sure how it changed before that, but they designed a new one for the World's Car anyway. The overall stroke of the shock would be the same, but the upper mount would be slightly lower. Always just seemed odd to me, the 1.32" shocks had to be limited since day 1, but they never went with anything shorter for all those years.

[rc10johnny]

Thanks Guys now I gotta go through all the shocks I built when snowed in to make shore I put 1.02 shafts in them,O well I do have plenty a time.Johnny

[SteveK]

Sorry Did you put like 500 of those 0.125" spacers on them before installing them? If you did, then they are 1.32" shafts.