Fox vs King 2.0 Coilovers: Everything you need to know when choosing coilover shocks

TRD

TRD

Active Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Location
Hermosa Beach
I've written an article comparing Fox and King 2.0 Remote Reservoir Coilovers to help you choose between the two. I frequently hear people saying "do you prefer blue or black", but that's not really the whole story. To write the article the shocks were dyno tested, disassembled, and compared for performance, durability and value.

Check out the full King vs Fox 2.0 Coilover Shock Comparison Article.

I have been tuning and engineering shocks since 2001 and prior to starting AccuTune Off-Road I was the chief engineer at a shock manufacturing company. I have tons of experience connecting lab data with real world performance at have invented patented shock technology used in premium shocks.

The article hits the highlights between the two shocks, and I'd be happy to dive into the details here, let's talk shocks!
 

Attachments

  • Fox vs King 20 Coilover Comparison.jpg
    Fox vs King 20 Coilover Comparison.jpg
    64.6 KB · Views: 349
BRUISER said:
cliff notes? which is better for the price :)
Click to expand...

When it comes to 2.0 Coilovers both brands offer good performance but Fox is more durable because their piston rod is twice the strength, they use better oil, they use better seals, and their shocks include the remote reservoir mounting clamps ... all for nearly the identical price as King.
 
I know the article is a very basic overview, but it's worth mentioning increased hysteresis as a byproduct of friction in the Friction section.
 
That is a cool article though, it's good to see side-by-side comparisons of aftermarket products.

On a side note, the difference in recommended nitrogen pressure between the Fox and King is likely due to the difference in compression and rebound flow between the two. Higher flow is generally more resistant to cavitation, because the pressure drop below zero has a slower rise or happens at a higher velocity. Could also be due to the difference in fluid, but I doubt it. There's a tradeoff there for increased reservoir pressure though, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Fabrik8 said:
That is a cool article though, it's good to see side-by-side comparisons of aftermarket products.

On a side note, the difference in recommended nitrogen pressure between the Fox and King is likely due to the difference in compression and rebound flow between the two. Higher flow is generally more resistant to cavitation, because the pressure drop below zero has a slower rise or happens at a higher velocity. Could also be due to the difference in fluid, but I doubt it. There's a tradeoff there for increased reservoir pressure though, that's for sure.
Click to expand...


I think King recommends 150 psi because they use a very "deep" u-cup and friction would increase drastically if they increased the pressure.
 
Back
Top