witch one rides smoother

straight up i know there is already a thread on here about it and probably countless others everywere but down to how it works... everyone says hydros are smoother well im hearing that more and more often i understand how accumulators work but.... how in the hell could hydros be smoother i mean baggs are made of rubber meaning they would stretch and tehy are filled with a gas... gas is much less dense than liquid and obviously compresses much easier... hydros... offer supreme lift obviously however how could it be smoother, it is liquid inside of metal...neither of witch are very efficient on compression.... i know that the accumulators allow the fluid to enter them and then push them out but....it just dosnt make sense and how is it possible to get so much lift out of the front...the ball joints would limmit lift and the controll arms would also limit... i know the lift in the back can be achieved with a telescoping drive shaft...but those are rediculiously expensive....bassically convince me... i would like rediculious lift but dont want to compromise ride... and i jsut dont see how it works.

give me a tutorial lol and if you only use hydros or only use bags and have not used the other... please dont tell me that what you use is better because that is only a bias opinion and i already know the ins and outs of baggs

I have no experience with hydraulics so I will not comment on that. But I had a telescoping drive shaft built for under $250 with a brand new Spicer splined shaft. That also included swapping to a Toyota flange on one side with a new tube. Not that pricey.

I don't know about the balljoints up front on most trucks, but Toyotas are capable of 12" with stock parts.

properly charged accululators ride quite nicely with hydrolics. bud glen had em on his bodied 4 runner and it was smooth as hell. ive always had bags and enjoy them aswell

Most accumulators are filled with nitrogen and that's what actually makes them act like a shock. Having had both on my truck I can say both can be built to ride very nice. Spend the time and money to do it right and you will be pleased with the outcome.

Accumulators are basically airbags in little chambers. Since the oil does not compress and the nitrogen inside does (nitrogen since it does not change pressure per temperature, nor does it produce water), the energy can be absorbed at the cylinder acts like a shock. As far as lift goes, I don't see the need to lift higher than 8"front 10"rear and you will be able to do so without major driveline or control arm modifications.

what about using i beams on a ranger i saw 1 at a show a long time ago and it had some extreme lift i dont no how much but it was sweet

I think that both systems can be set up to ride very nice, but I think that the fluid inside of a hydraulic system would make fine tuning dampening (the shock's job) a bit tough. Where on a bagged system, the air does little to disturb the shock.

I had an idea to build a shock-like valve system that would install in-line with the accumulator and allow you to dial in the dampening effect of the fluid moving in and out of the accumulator. I feel that something like that would be useful for someone trying to squeeze every last bit of tuneabilty out of their vehicle...

on stock arms there would be no difference in the amount of lift with bags or hydraulics. the reason lowriders look like they get so much lift in the front is that they extend there upper arms 3/4 to 2"s. the reason they do this is not really to get more lift but to eliminte camber and to take some of the stress off of the ball joints so that they dont break while hopping. If you look at how a hopper sits when it is completely dumped it doesn't sit ver low at all.

thank you all so much and the video with the hydros was extremely helpful derek thanks alot