2022 CCD shocks ride like crap?

[Snakebitten]

No worries.
I'm just spitballing with the digital part of tuning the suspension myself. I have no credentials regarding, and nothing more than subjective evidence that the results are definitively measurable. I don't know how to anyways.

I AM completely confident that the before/after is an obvious improvement in chassis dynamics and composure. Especially over irregular surfaces. Or in plain cowboy English, "rides better. Less sloppy".

Sponsored

 

[PatchManager]

No worries.
I'm just spitballing with the digital part of tuning the suspension myself. I have no credentials regarding, and nothing more than subjective evidence that the results are definitively measurable. I don't know how to anyways.

I AM completely confident that the before/after is an obvious improvement in chassis dynamics and composure. Especially over irregular surfaces. Or in plain cowboy English, "rides better. Less sloppy".

After reading your posts again, I do think we are looking for similar results in terms of a "less sloppy" ride. I generally like the ride in "normal" mode, but I would like to reduce the bouncing around the rear-end does when going over something like a railroad track.

I made the changes to reduce the "wheel wheel and tire mass" as I previously mentioned and the change was barely noticeable, but I don't think it was for the better. Since those didn't seem to improve things, I removed those changes and replicated what you did. I do think it firmed up the ride somewhat. I am next going to try returning the front to the default value, leaving the rear at the values you use, and adjusting the front wheel rate.

I think you provided a link regarding wheel rate and it provides the following information:

The wheel rate of a suspension system can be used to calculate the ride frequency of a vehicle if the sprung mass is known. Ride frequency in hertz is given by:

Ride Frequency = 0.1592 * sqrt(wheel_rate/sprung_mass)

Typically passenger cars with a ride frequency below 1 Hz are considered softly sprung and are orientated towards comfort. Rolls Royce cars for example are less than 0.8 Hz. Most passenger cars have ride frequencies between 1.2 and 1.6 Hz with sportier cars around 1.8 – 2 Hz. F1 cars are > 3 Hz, but this would not be recommended for any car that drives on anything other than smooth race tracks.

Increasing the wheel rate will increase the ride frequency, which should make the ride firmer. As you mentioned, there is no rear wheel rate, so I will ignore that fact for now. I think I'll start with a 20 percent increase.

@McGuyver, have you started any experimentation yet? You seemed to outline a good approach.

 

[McGuyver]

@McGuyver, have you started any experimentation yet? You seemed to outline a good approach.

Still on the drawing board. Was able to log some other data with the OBD MX+ to see how it works but nothing past that…

 

[PatchManager]

Given the equation for ride frequency, if I increase the front wheel rate by 30 percent, that would move the ride frequency from 1.4 (assuming near the middle) to 1.6. With numbers around that area, the percent change in the ride frequency is about half the percent change in the front wheel rate. Hopefully that is noticeable.

 

[Snakebitten]

Looking forward to your experiments!

 

[PatchManager]

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,

You listed value for 721-37-01 as 30 N/mm. That would mean the hex value was 0x1E. Is that correct? The value I have at that location is 0x2D or 45 N/mm, which is much larger than what you have.

 

[Snakebitten]

Snakebitten,

You listed value for 721-37-01 as 30 N/mm. That would mean the hex value was 0x1E. Is that correct? The value I have at that location is 0x2D or 45 N/mm, which is much larger than what you have.

I'll pull my AsBuilt to verify. I know that I haven't edited it ever.
That's very interesting though if our trucks have that different of a value for that parameter.

I guess it would be cool if those of us with CCD would share our VDM AsBuilt values. I never considered that the trucks might be configured differently.

I'll post mine and then describe the truck as a 2022 KingRanch Powerboost 157" 4WD Max Tow.
20" wheels

 

[PatchManager]

Ok, that would be great. I think your wheel rate value is actually 0x30, so it is 48 N/mm, which is higher than mine, but close since mine is 45 N/mm.

 

[Snakebitten]

Ok, that would be great. I think your wheel rate value is actually 0x30, so it is 48 N/mm, which is higher than mine, but close since mine is 45 N/mm.

I haven't forgotten about diving back in on this and collaborating while the opportunity exists.
In fact I'm itching to do so!

But "they" have this old man busy the last couple of days and I haven't had a chance to focus on it.

Hopefully today after work?
If not, for sure tomorrow morning before the 7 grandkids and their lunatic parents (yea, they are mine too) ramp up my day.

 

[DBL R]

I agree.
If you want to experience just how much of that float the CCD system is capable of getting rid of? Just unplug the driver's side shock absorber!

It's eye opening.

The way the system is designed is IF there is any fault detected in any of the 4 corners, the VDM module will default to analog shock absorbers. And on CCD, unlike the Raptor, it defaults to full stiffness, rather than full softness.

I think you will be amazed at the range that these dampers are capable of operating in. I don't know why Ford has them programmed to be so soft, regardless of the drive mode selected. I haven't found any way of manipulating the system to be even close to what they are as analog dampers.

As I stated, the easiest to unplug is the drivers side rear. Here it is unplugged:

You will get an instrument panel warning as a result, but it clears itself when you plug it back in after one key cycle.

In analog mode the body roll side to side vanishes. And the front-rear pogo under aggressive braking is gone. So these "soft underdamped" (my opinion) shocks are being manipulated intentionally to be that way. Arghhhh

This is another reason why I personally believe that the truck will prosper immensely from a rear Antisway bar, and maybe even a heavier duty one up front to replace the anemic one from the factory.
I predict those changes will enhance the softer damping that Ford has programmed into the CCD logic. You might get your cake and eat it too?

Body control vastly improved with anti-sway forces in play, yet still having compliant damping for a nice ride on road irregularities. Or put another way, the lack of body control is exacerbating the soft damping?

I tried in a dark parking lot after flying back home tonight, no luck. Any pointers for getting the sensor to detach?

 

[Snakebitten]

Ok, that would be great. I think your wheel rate value is actually 0x30, so it is 48 N/mm, which is higher than mine, but close since mine is 45 N/mm.

Below is a sequence of screenshots showing my original factory AsBuilt VDM values.

And since I'm such an amateur, I didn't realize that "30" would be 0x30 as a Hex value, which is 48 in decimal. . Thanks for that.

I attached the abt file if it makes it easier to compare my VDM to yours. I renamed the extension to txt just so the forum would allow the attachment. You will need to rename it back to view it in AsBuilt Explorer app.

I only adjusted the values of the lines circled below

Thanks again for getting me interested again. Although I'm pretty happy with the current ride and chassis dynamics, I want to explore what the wheel rate value might bring to the table. As well as experimenting with a less subtle approach than I've taken so far. (20% deviation from factory values)

 

[Snakebitten]

I tried in a dark parking lot after flying back home tonight, no luck. Any pointers for getting the sensor to detach?

Yea, be careful if you can't find the little detent you need to depress to get it to unplug. You don't want to break the clipping mechanism.
Once you find it and it releases, you'll be able to do it again easily.

Every harness connector seems to have it's own unique release action.

 

[DBL R]

Yea, be careful if you can't find the little detent you need to depress to get it to unplug. You don't want to break the clipping mechanism.
Once you find it and it releases, you'll be able to do it again easily.

Every harness connector seems to have it's own unique release action.

Figured it out during the daylight. Definitely firms things up. Fixes porpoising at speed over consecutive bumps, but definitely makes things even as small as manhole covers jostling. I like it better than the stock softness, but I think your fancy way of coding for firmness while retaining softness over small bumps is the way to go. I’ll take the quick and dirty way until I have time to get forscan going.

 

[PatchManager]

Below is a sequence of screenshots showing my original factory AsBuilt VDM values.

And since I'm such an amateur, I didn't realize that "30" would be 0x30 as a Hex value, which is 48 in decimal. . Thanks for that.

I attached the abt file if it makes it easier to compare my VDM to yours. I renamed the extension to txt just so the forum would allow the attachment. You will need to rename it back to view it in AsBuilt Explorer app.

I only adjusted the values of the lines circled below

Thanks again for getting me interested again. Although I'm pretty happy with the current ride and chassis dynamics, I want to explore what the wheel rate value might bring to the table. As well as experimenting with a less subtle approach than I've taken so far. (20% deviation from factory values)

You are welcome. I work with hexadecimal and binary all the time.

Thank you for posting this. I will let you know of any differences between yours and mine.

The last thing I did was to return all value to the as built values and REDUCE the wheel rate by 30 percent. That 30 percent change should have produced a ~15 percent change in the frequency making the ride every softer. I wanted to make it softer because the previously values supposedly made the ride firmer, so I wanted to see if I could detect a difference. I think because I'm waiting at least one day between changes, I'm not really able to detect much difference.

I think what I will do save a soft setting, save a firm setting, and drive to an area nearby where the pavement transitions to a dirt road. I'll drive with the soft setting then immediately drive with the firm setting and see if I can detect a difference. If I can detect a difference, then I can try some adjustments.

I did install RAS this morning, so I'm anxious to see what difference that makes.

How are you viewing the data like you showed above and what I copied below?

 

[Snakebitten]

I use the AsBuilt Explorer software written by that guru dude.
It's awesome for comparing up to 4 AsBuilt files simultaneously.

https://www.compulsivecode.com/Project_AsBuiltCompare.aspx

Great idea building a couple (or more) AsBuilt configuration files and then loading them back to back for a fresher A/B/C comparison.

I have a particular back road stretch that is a really good sample for poor road conditions. It also has a couple of curves and a brutal railroad crossing.

I'd like to build a couple of experimental VDM configs, and then repeat the test path while logging a few of the VDM PIDs that appear to reflect the control micro-voltage changes that are driving the variable damping.

Then sit and sort through the data to see if there's data to back up what's mostly been subjective for me.

Sponsored