Aftermarket struts for lift!!??

[MrSmithsTB]

Answering some dummy on the OS and these came to mind. I am not sure what anyone thinks about using these for a real off-road application. With the diminishing quantities of stiffer front springs, they could be a viable option for gaining more front lift. 1" of front lift with the adjustable collar, while reusing stock springs.....

http://www.jegs.com/i/Bell-Tech/146/25011/10002/-1?parentProductId=1087687



Thoughts?

[Trail X]

The collar by itself could be an alternative to a lift, but nothing will really take the place of a stiffer spring rate.

[MrSmithsTB]

True, but there is nothing to take the place of a stiffer spring anyway. At least once the vultures eat up the remainder of the 89 and 86 springs. This option may not be equivalent, but could still combat the sag of armor or add some height for members not looking to add a bunch of steel.

[fishsticks]

IMO our problem isn't needing new front struts. We need to conquer the half-shaft angle problem. Bilstein HDs do fine in our current form.

Our front springs are a single rate with a mostly uniform coil size. Aftermarket springs should be a breeze from other off the shelf applications.

Someone just needs to look.

[The Roadie]

This accomplishes the same function as taking a Bilstein to your lathe, cutting a new circlip groove 3/4" higher than the existing one and relocating your lower spring perch to the new higher location. Which is a free way to precompress your spring like adding the traditional spacers we put on top from many other vendors. The drawback is now you're not using the relatively proven Bilstein, but the Belltech "Street Performance" shock body. Note the words "Street" and "lowering" in their copy. Ick.

It doesn't lengthen the strut, it's just another way of getting precompression.

If they would sell, or anybody could trivially reverse engineer or measure a shock body, the 3/4" sleeves they add on top of their single lower perch circlip groove, we could be doing this to Bilsteins. I took one of my takeoffs apart years ago when this trick was first proposed for a cheap lowering tactic, and saw how the lower coil perch was installed on the shock body. Amazing the groove side walls can take all the shear forces on them. Everybody should go look at one their OEM takeoffs.

[OregTrailBlazin]

This accomplishes the same function as taking a Bilstein to your lathe, cutting a new circlip groove 3/4" higher than the existing one and relocating your lower spring perch to the new higher location.
Amazing the groove side walls can take all the shear forces on them. Everybody should go look at one their OEM takeoffs.

Bilstein has a 5100 series that has different clip setting to get lift (not for our platform).. You can check out the Tacoma ones here for a visual http://www.wheelersoffroad.com/05uptacoadjbils.htm

It is amazing that little clip holds the whole thing together. On these units, the lower seat incases the clip completely, and is machine matched. The clip cannot come out in any way. It would be a good option for our rigs if someone wanted to tackle it. The company RCD started making them for the Tacoma through bilstein, maybe if we start asking them, they might start looking at our platform.

[lupisnegris77]

I'd personally rather spend the money on the stiffer springs. but thats just my 2 cents. About the same price and the springs are a surefire way to get the lift

[chevycrew]

Stiffer springs limit the uptravel of the suspension (unless you are using the higher spring rate to compensate for added weight), and by lifting you are already limiting the available droop.

The stock rear suspension on the rigs works great, but the front needs work. By running a spacer lift, or, moving the groove up on the struts, you maintain the factory ride and uptravel.


Im not sure I agree with the cv shafts being the limit. Once you gain more travel from those, then you run into other problems (steering and a-arm angles)


There is only so much you can do with this style of suspension in this platform.

[lupisnegris77]

There is only so much you can do with this style of suspension in this platform.[/quote]

Very true.

[MrSmithsTB]

I bring something like this up as an alternative for when stiffer "stock" springs are no longer available. Wanna get the extra height without further compressing the springs? Add some strut extensions. They have been discussed. With the inside of strut spacer, we could safely add a 2" extender without hitting bumpstops prematurely. For that matter, a larger spacer, or even 2 spacers, would be doable with the extenders. Of course, this is just my theory. I know a lot of people have opposing points of view.

[lupisnegris77]

Theorys are all good and well but only one way to find out....If i had the extra cash laying around i might give it a whirl. So on that note if anyone decides to take a gamble let the rest of us know if it works!! lol

[fishsticks]

Im not sure I agree with the cv shafts being the limit. Once you gain more travel from those, then you run into other problems (steering and a-arm angles)


There is only so much you can do with this style of suspension in this platform.

CV angle is my current limiting factor. My A arms still have some usable angle left to them and tie rods can always be flipped to the top of the knuckles.

I'm at 4+" right now. If I could get to 6" with some usable droop on softer springs I'd do it and never touch it again.

I have (terrible) drawings. I just need to be able to take the truck down for awhile to do anything. The Camaro is on wife duty while her car is down, and then is away for the winter, and maybe disassembled for some maintenance.

[MrSmithsTB]

Nothing I can do at this point but make shopping lists for some point in the future. I could see 2" strut extenders, 2" worth of collars, my current spring/lift setup. That's @4.75" of lift. Less .75" from sag associated with bumper/skids, put it at @4" of lift with the same ride quite I have now. Not to mention being able to run larger tires without fear of bashing the fenders.

Maybe even get someone to groove the bilstein struts or to make spacing sleeves to use on them. The belltech struts should be the same diameter, perhaps they will sell the sleeves separate.

[fishsticks]

Nothing I can do at this point but make shopping lists for some point in the future. I could see 2" strut extenders, 2" worth of collars, my current spring/lift setup. That's @4.75" of lift. Less .75" from sag associated with bumper/skids, put it at @4" of lift with the same ride quite I have now. Not to mention being able to run larger tires without fear of bashing the fenders.

Maybe even get someone to groove the bilstein struts or to make spacing sleeves to use on them. The belltech struts should be the same diameter, perhaps they will sell the sleeves separate.

You can bind the CVs with unmodded shocks using top spacers or even by shimming the top bolt with washers like JD & I did. Even with the UCA flip the very next factor becomes the CV angle. Using 2" strut extenders will have you replacing CVs more often than I do.

[MrSmithsTB]

You can bind the CVs with unmodded shocks using top spacers or even by shimming the top bolt with washers like JD & I did. Even with the UCA flip the very next factor becomes the CV angle. Using 2" strut extenders will have you replacing CVs more often than I do.

As it stands now, yes I would. Like I said it's all theory at this point, but the numbers are in anticipation of experiencing more sag from armor upgrades with stock springs. That front set up would ultimately place me at a resting suspension height equivalent to yours or even lower. I expect to lose at least an inch from a skid/bumper combo w/winch.

[Trail X]

Donny... you need an oil pan spacer.

[The Roadie]

Strut extensions are only a danger to the inner CV joint at full extension. But it's an extreme danger, and I think the only safe way to do that would be to add limiting straps.

Flipping the tie rod end to the top of the steering knuckle would require drilling out the tapered hole, but that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing because then you could find a better unit with 16mm threads and NO STUPID CROOKED PART to break. Or even fabricate one with a Heim end.

[Trail X]

STUPID CROOKED PART to break

Think of it as a mechanical fuse.

[The Roadie]

Think of it as a mechanical fuse.

I have been, but I want a slightly higher amp value. When I'm driving along on rutted trails, I'm already making 5 decisions a second where to place each of the wheels, worrying about traction, momentum, ground clearance, sharp-edged rises and falloffs that might fully compress a spring or allow a wheel to fall into full extension, where I would go in case of a brake failure, trying to stay off the power if the wheels are turned to reduce stress on the outer CV joints, etc., etc. Since I broke my first (now second) tie rod end I also have to keep a constant watch out for ruts that could overstress the steering, and also a CONSTANT watch for places I would steer uphill (if possible) to make sure a broken tie rod wouldn't launch me down a 4000 foot dropoff with few trees or rocks to slow me down. Otherwise I'd never go over 2 MPH and I wouldn't be able to cover as much ground.

[fishsticks]

Mine broke at the base of the threads more or less. Are you actually breaking the curved part or just lamenting it's ability to become a lever-in-the-wrong direction?