2022 CCD shocks ride like crap?

[Snakebitten]

Did you get an answer to your question from Helwig? What did you end up doing? I put an anti sway bar on my Dodge Dakota many years ago, and I'm not sure I ever noticed a difference. Do they make a noticeable difference on an F150?

Went with the Steeda.
Little thicker, according to HammaMan, and really nice endlinks.

But probably any of the 3 brands would have the same impact and YES, the truck should have just come with one. It's win-win for everything except rock crawling.

Next time it will be the first thing I do. I should have known that already.

Sponsored

 

[Snakebitten]

Please upload your file again. I try to download it and I'm told the file is corrupted.

You didn't try to open did you?
No software program can open that file, and it's not really a pdf.
It's an stg file that is proprietary to OBDLink and can only be imported.

Or am I misunderstanding?

 

[oneinch]

You didn't try to open did you?
No software program can open that file, and it's not really a pdf.
It's an stg file that is proprietary to OBDLink and can only be imported.

Or am I misunderstanding?

I thought it was a PDF file with PID details that I might be able to add to Torque Pro.

 

[Snakebitten]

I thought it was a PDF file with PID details that I might be able to add to Torque Pro.

Sorry.
If you change the file extension to stg, it can be imported into the OBDLink app.
But Torque Pro has most of the same PIDs, so you would probably only be missing OAR. Which isn't included in Obdlink either, but rather it's a user-defined PID that I manually built.

 

[PatchManager]

If you monitor the PIDs for the VDM module you will see the various values change when you switch modes.
I'm not saying I actually have sorted out what the values actually mean yet, but it's starting to make some basic sense.

There's too many pids to populate the gauge screen with so I just loaded the front left corner pids.
Here's what they look like:

Yea, ALL that is just for one damper.

But honestly, I think I could narrow it down to just the ones I have circled.

When you switch from say Normal mode to Sport Mode the most obvious value change is "damper current Amps". It switches from a static .6A to .7A
It appears that the circuitry that controls the damping valve(?) operates at very precise micro-voltage? (Afterall, it IS a common 5Volt computer module)
For example if you apply normal brake pressure, you may not see the amperage increase, but if you apply enough brake pressure to introduce nose dive, the amperage increases. Thus increasing the damping (resistance to compress)

The VDM_LF_D_PRLL_RES_G in mOhms pid is the one I really want to know more about. It's by far the most active, electronically speaking, and it's the one that varies the greatest between driver modes. It operates very fluidly within a range, and the range changes dramatically between say Normal VS Sport.
I've just gotten started with the AsBuilt edits to the VDM module, but I believe the correlation that I am looking for is the AsBuilt values relationship to VDM_LF_D_PRLL_RES_G

There's gotta be some fellas that understand this stuff way more than this old man just poking buttons to see what happens.
Although I admit to being hopelessly fascinated.

Oh, as far as the truck raising its own height if a load is put on it? It's not that kind of active suspension. I don't think it's possible to adjust height without an air suspension component. This is a very basic active damping approach. Basically it's only capable of variable "resistance" to compression/rebound.

Have you made any improvements and gained anymore insight into adjusting the CCD since you posted about it back in October? I'm planning to replicate what you have done with the VDM, RAS, and antisway bar additions.

You noted,

The problem, and MYSTERY, is that there's no entry in the VDM for the Rear Wheel Rate???

The link you included mentioned that rear ride frequency is generally 10 to 20% higher on the rear than the front. Do you think the rear wheel rate is some ratio of the front wheel rate, so there isn't an entry for the rear wheel rate? This doesn't seem likely since the front suspension is much different than the rear suspensions, but it would be one explanation.

You also mentioned that VDM_LF_D_PRLL_RES_G seems to be fairly active. Did you notice a change in that after you made the VDM parameter changes?

 

[Snakebitten]

I've settled right where I left off.
And I've been content enough to have ignored the VDM pids for the most part, so no further understanding of what they indicate.

I think my passion could be reignited if I started towing heavy or venturing off road. I'm certain either would have me addressing anything that needed improvement. But I'm enjoying the truck as is. There's nothing nagging at me.
It's so dang comfortable!
Plenty planted now for the yacht that it is.

 

[Snakebitten]

By the way, I'm looking forward to your feedback.

Some of this stuff is obviously objective. But I'm confident that you will find it MUCH improved over the OEM ride and handling. But I'm curious if you'll want to tighten the rear even more with RAS?
There's a lot more there with my mild preload on them.

 

[kishorejoseph]

157" KingRanch Powerboost Max Tow with CCD

Came with the Pirelli's (20") and I run them at 32PSI cold.

Added RAS to the rear suspension and adjusted them to less than the 1mm spacer setting that they recommend for carrying weight, but I am using them to "tame" the rear end over bumpy roads. Helped tremendously.

However, I was very disappointed in how conservative Ford tuned the CCD, especially in Normal mode. There's so much potential in active damping, but not giving the driver access to settings was heartbreaking.

So I've been messing with the VDM module and currently it's starting to make me finally smile with CCD!

I've edited the properties with Forscan related to unsprung weight. Basically I have increased the value by 20% and the result is the real-time algorithm seems to have upped the damping to compensate. The best way that I can describe the difference is it dulled the sharp edges of road bumps and potholes. It's muted. It's lovely, actually.

I have more experimenting to do, but first I need to address keeping the truck flatter with some rear Antisway bars. (and the front oem sway bar isn't anything to write home about)

I don't want to try to use damping to keep the truck from body-roll. And if I did try to use damping to limit body roll the damping then wouldn't match up with the oem spring rates.

Anyways, if you aren't feint of heart, here's the settings that I altered:
Everything that was 750Kg, I changed to 900Kg (20% increase)
And what was 525Kg, I changed to 625Kg
(just short of 20%)

I had zero issues with DTC's

I'm stubbornly dedicated to seeing if I can get this CCD feature dialed in. I LOVE the technology behind it and the price is an outright bargain. But if I can't get the truck to handle the way I want it to, I WILL yank it all out and return to Fox 2.5 DSC, or something similar.

It's possible for an F150 to ride and handle fantastic for a truck. I've accomplished it before. We'll see if this CCD can be dialed in.

@Snakebitten this is great info! I'm going to give this a try soon. The values you have squared off in the red box, are those the only values you changed?

Also how are you liking the rear sway bar? Do you still recommend it?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Snakebitten]

@Snakebitten this is great info! I'm going to give this a try soon. The values you have squared off in the red box, are those the only values you changed?

Also how are you liking the rear sway bar? Do you still recommend it?

Thanks in advance!

Yes sir. I only edited the values that I also provided the hex value for. I would love to get feedback concerning if others had the same original values as my truck had?
If your starting value in Kilograms is more or less than mine, then my edited value would be a smaller or larger increase than yours. At least by some percentage.

As for the Sway bar.....
I'd add the Sway bar first, if I was to start all over. It doesn't directly address the damping issue, but it certainly plants the truck and made such a positive influence on the overall way the chassis carries itself.

 

[PatchManager]

Looking at the VDM spreadsheet, I see my AsBuilt values are all very similar to @Snakebitten's AsBuilt values with the exception of the wheelbase (mine is the short bed). The fuel capacity the same at 30.6 gallons. His spreadsheet shows 20 gallons, but the value is 74 hex or 116 decimal.

Four of the parameters are "wheel wheel and tire mass". My values are also 2EE or 750 kg or 1653 lbs, which seem way too high. That seems way off for the mass of the wheel and tire. Other parameters already account for the unsprung wheel mass, so it certainly seems like the wheel and tire mass should at least be different and smaller values than the unsprung wheel mass values.

721-32-01	****	xxxx	xx--	FL wheel wheel and tire mass (FL) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-01	xxxx	****	xx--	FR wheel wheel and tire mass (FR) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-01	xxxx	xxxx	**--	RL wheel wheel and tire mass (RL) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-02	**xx	xx--		RL wheel wheel and tire mass (RL) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-02	xx**	**--		RR wheel wheel and tire mass (RR) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)

 

[Snakebitten]

Looking at the VDM spreadsheet, I see my AsBuilt values are all very similar to @Snakebitten's AsBuilt values with the exception of the wheelbase (mine is the short bed). The fuel capacity the same at 30.6 gallons. His spreadsheet shows 20 gallons, but the value is 74 hex or 116 decimal.

Four of the parameters are "wheel wheel and tire mass". My values are also 2EE or 750 kg or 1653 lbs, which seem way too high. That seems way off for the mass of the wheel and tire. Other parameters already account for the unsprung wheel mass, so it certainly seems like the wheel and tire mass should at least be different and smaller values than the unsprung wheel mass values.

721-32-01	****	xxxx	xx--	FL wheel wheel and tire mass (FL) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-01	xxxx	****	xx--	FR wheel wheel and tire mass (FR) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-01	xxxx	xxxx	**--	RL wheel wheel and tire mass (RL) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-02	**xx	xx--		RL wheel wheel and tire mass (RL) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)
721-32-02	xx**	**--		RR wheel wheel and tire mass (RR) • Kg = Hex2Dec(****)

Good job of looking closely.
Yea, the descriptions don't exactly match up to the Values, but the values are REAL, where the labels aren't required to be accurate.
Or at least the weight in Kilograms IS what the active suspension logic is running against. So regardless of it making sense, I just accepted it to be what it is from the factory and then adjusted what I believe was a conservative 20% increase.

If I received DTC's or unexpected consequences, I could always return it to factory values.

Instead, it went without a hitch and I was already approaching what I was after as a result of the other upgrade(s).

Remember, I just wanted Sport Mode damping, but in Normal mode. I have much better overall ride/handling than the original unmodified Sport Mode, so mission accomplished.

My only regret is that I didn't mess with the wheel rate value. If it is what its label implies, THAT is a straight forward method to alter the spring rate. But the VDM only has a wheel rate labeled for the front. So.........

By the way, I've probably already mentioned it, but if you want to experience what the maximum damping is like on the CCD dampers, unplug one of them and go for a ride. I'm not saying that the range is Buick soft (what I describe the oem damping as, especially in the rear) <to> Fox/Icon/King max, but the CCD's will get much stiffer than Ford is allowing them to with the oem settings. So the potential is there for firming them up if you need to. (off road/towing) I just didn't mess with the VDM values enough to map out what values might = what firmness level.

I gotta admit having someone finally hop in the water has kindled my curiosity a bit.

 

[PatchManager]

Good job of looking closely.
Yea, the descriptions don't exactly match up to the Values, but the values are REAL, where the labels aren't required to be accurate.
Or at least the weight in Kilograms IS what the active suspension logic is running against. So regardless of it making sense, I just accepted it to be what it is from the factory and then adjusted what I believe was a conservative 20% increase.

If I received DTC's or unexpected consequences, I could always return it to factory values.

Instead, it went without a hitch and I was already approaching what I was after as a result of the other upgrade(s).

Remember, I just wanted Sport Mode damping, but in Normal mode. I have much better overall ride/handling than the original unmodified Sport Mode, so mission accomplished.

My only regret is that I didn't mess with the wheel rate value. If it is what its label implies, THAT is a straight forward method to alter the spring rate. But the VDM only has a wheel rate labeled for the front. So.........

By the way, I've probably already mentioned it, but if you want to experience what the maximum damping is like on the CCD dampers, unplug one of them and go for a ride. I'm not saying that the range is Buick soft (what I describe the oem damping as, especially in the rear) <to> Fox/Icon/King max, but the CCD's will get much stiffer than Ford is allowing them to with the oem settings. So the potential is there for firming them up if you need to. (off road/towing) I just didn't mess with the VDM values enough to map out what values might = what firmness level.

I gotta admit having someone finally hop in the water has kindled my curiosity a bit.

I reduced the wheel and tire mass by 25% and have driven a bit with this change. I think the only thing that I have learned is that I'm not a good judge of how the ride changed due to changes in the CCD parameters. It is my impression that maybe this change had a positive impact on the ride, but this is like my wife asking me if I noticed anything when she changes her appearance in some "small" way. Me: "Yes... since you are asking, I must be noticing some small, but pleasing change." Actually, she mostly gave up asking me that a long time ago.

Anyway, I'm looking into getting or making a small measuring device to provide some additional and less subjective information for my experimentation. I have some road that I drive over all the time that should provide a fairly consistent test environment. I will also implement the change you made and see what difference that makes.

 

[Snakebitten]

My theory was based on whatever the CCD damping algorithm is, I was desiring increased damping. Firmer.
And although the difference from Normal mode to Sport might be described as subtle to some folks, I didn't have a problem sensing the firmer damping in sport.

And ANYBODY could tell the difference with "maximum available" firmness, which takes 15 seconds to initiate. In fact I think it's a great idea to experience that setting and drive with it a few minutes over known roads/railroad crossing/etc. It'll let you know what the potential range of damping theoretically is.

In my opinion, you would increase the burden, which is weight, to cause the algorithm to increase damping.
Of course in real life you would want to decrease the burden and thus the damping would feel firmer.

Think of the cargo area in the bed.
If you add 500lbs of bricks back there, you would feeeeel the trucks shocks suddenly not feel as firm.
If they were adjustable shocks, you would adjust them to be firmer in response to the additional burden.

Well CCD is a computer deciding whether to increase or decrease firmness, so to speak. By telling it a big fat lie about having 500lbs of bricks in the bed, when there really isn't, might get the algorithm to add damping (firmness) to the CCD shocks.

At least that's how I approached it.
And admittedly I didn't edit the values with anything extreme in order to verify that it's the right direction to go. Maybe the RAS and the Antisway bar has me falling for a placebo affect?

Unplug the driver's side rear shock.
I assure you that isn't a placebo.
Then when you edit the VDM, ask yourself if it feels like you are going in the right direction.

By the way, railroad crossings are a fantastic laboratory.

 

[McGuyver]

I have formulated an approach, just not sure when I am going to implement. Plan is to lay out a circuit of various conditions (will include RR tracks). Set up OBDlink logging parameters for lots of VDM pids and drive the circuit a few times in normal, eco and sport. Then analyze the logs to see how they differ. That’s the easy part, then one has to manipulate wheel mass or dampening parameters, drive it again in the different modes, compare data and repeat until arriving at desired outcome. All this will hopefully be confirmed by seat of pants and if you’re lucky your spouse will agree too.

 

[PatchManager]

My theory was based on whatever the CCD damping algorithm is, I was desiring increased damping. Firmer.
And although the difference from Normal mode to Sport might be described as subtle to some folks, I didn't have a problem sensing the firmer damping in sport.

And ANYBODY could tell the difference with "maximum available" firmness, which takes 15 seconds to initiate. In fact I think it's a great idea to experience that setting and drive with it a few minutes over known roads/railroad crossing/etc. It'll let you know what the potential range of damping theoretically is.

In my opinion, you would increase the burden, which is weight, to cause the algorithm to increase damping.
Of course in real life you would want to decrease the burden and thus the damping would feel firmer.

Think of the cargo area in the bed.
If you add 500lbs of bricks back there, you would feeeeel the trucks shocks suddenly not feel as firm.
If they were adjustable shocks, you would adjust them to be firmer in response to the additional burden.

Well CCD is a computer deciding whether to increase or decrease firmness, so to speak. By telling it a big fat lie about having 500lbs of bricks in the bed, when there really isn't, might get the algorithm to add damping (firmness) to the CCD shocks.

At least that's how I approached it.
And admittedly I didn't edit the values with anything extreme in order to verify that it's the right direction to go. Maybe the RAS and the Antisway bar has me falling for a placebo affect?

Unplug the driver's side rear shock.
I assure you that isn't a placebo.
Then when you edit the VDM, ask yourself if it feels like you are going in the right direction.

By the way, railroad crossings are a fantastic laboratory.

I do think we have different objectives, but the same goal of understanding how to adjust the system. I initially reduced the number because it seemed to make more sense, but it does seem as though it would make the ride less firm. Instead of more or less firm, I was hoping to make it more responsive. I haven't actually tried sport mode yet, so I plan to cycle through all the modes.

Sponsored