The Difference Between Emulsion & Remote Reservoir Shocks

To provide a comprehensive overview, it is important to briefly discuss the hierarchy of shock designs. Emulsion monotube shocks outperform twin tube shocks in terms of comfort, performance, and durability, thanks to their larger pistons, gas charge, and superior construction quality.

When people mention Remote Reservoir shocks, they often focus on heat dissipation, but this is not the sole reason for their superiority over Emulsion shocks.

A key benefit of remote reservoirs is their ability to maintain lower operating pressures, which is achieved by mitigating gas pressure buildup. All shock absorbers function somewhat like air shocks, where the movement of the piston rod results in a significant volume displacement that alters gas pressure. In the case of emulsion shocks, this change can be quite pronounced, with some 2.0 emulsion shocks potentially reaching pressures of up to 600 psi.

The increasing and difficult to predict gas pressure causes problems:

• Harder to select springs – The pressure acts like a spring and lifts vehicle making it harder to calculate initial spring rates.
• Can cause harshness – Progressive spring rate adds hard to predict force which could cause harshness (Fox standard compression valving is softer for emulsion shocks for a reason).
• More harshness – High gas pressure causes MUCH more friction which causes harshness.
• Less durability – All that pressure is rough on seals which are now clamping on the piston rod with 3x the pressure.