Slee 4" heavies and 37" Iroks

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

I wheeled it mildly a few weekends ago, only broke my front ring gear ;). Spent a little time just flexing it out and getting the feel for it. No major obstacles...I didn't even know I broke until I hit 35 mph in high and heard the hammer sound. Broke one tooth off the front ring gear...doh!

This setup works great. Much more flexy for the loads that I run, stability is improved (lower COG), and I like the looks better. These are the 4" heavies in the rear, which I think are just perfect for my usage.

No driveline vibs (I have front and rear DC shafts though) with the slee arms. I have the truck up on stands right now so I can operate on the front third later today. Once I get the diff repaired I will have more trail reports :)
 
Nay said:
Save your coin and get a crawler box. Flex isn't the 80's issue, the wheelbase is long enough that it can handle major obtacles without a need for outrageous front end flex.
Click to expand...

Oh, that is on the list. I just want to wait and see what is developed that can give me what I want with as few cuts and mods as possible. Sounds like a year is a good period of time to wait and see what happens.

Nay said:
I like the move to lower - the supsension should work better with OME L shocks as it will be better balanced, and total travel is unchanged. Looks much better, too - you appear to have about 5" of lift and the 37's are perfectly centered in the wheel well visually.
Click to expand...

It really does. The Ls appreciate the reduced starting position and the ride has improved a bit. I didn't think the 6" heavies would be too much for me given the rubber skin, tools, etc. but I just don't run trails loaded down. I pack in, unload, then wheel.

Glad to see these comments guys! Appreciate it. I just hope this keeps up and it doesn't turn into the grilling the FOR thread has become :D.
 
DanKunz said:
Glad to see these comments guys! Appreciate it. I just hope this keeps up and it doesn't turn into the grilling the FOR thread has become :D.
Click to expand...
  1. Exactly what is their spring rate?
  2. What is the exact molecular composition of the alloys in use? (If you do not know this, you should ask slee, or you'll need to take them to a metallurgist immediately.)
You should not be running these without knowing these answers. Even if you think it is more stable, and you think it rides, drives, looks, and handles better with these springs, you may be wrong. You'll never fully know until the above questions are answered.

:D
 
DanKunz said:
Glad to see these comments guys! Appreciate it. I just hope this keeps up and it doesn't turn into the grilling the FOR thread has become :D.
Click to expand...

You can't run 37's on a Slee 4". You need 5" of lift for 35's :flipoff2:
 
Nay said:
Save your coin and get a crawler box. Flex isn't the 80's issue, the wheelbase is long enough that it can handle major obtacles without a need for outrageous front end flex.

I like the move to lower - the supsension should work better with OME L shocks as it will be better balanced, and total travel is unchanged. Looks much better, too - you appear to have about 5" of lift and the 37's are perfectly centered in the wheel well visually.

Post your wheeling feedback, you did give up 2" of clearance and damn knows it matters with these pigs :cheers:
Click to expand...

Nay, just how many 3-linked 80's have you wheeled to compare?

The front end flex is more or less the same from the time it rolled off the line up to the point you get drastic. None of the aftermarket arms really claim to do anything other than correct caster and you will never ever get anywhere near the use out of the front OME L-shocks (N73L) so that's all pretty much a mute point, at least IMO.

I think you got it a little backwards. I think keeping it lower, loosing 2-4 inches of suspension height, staying with 35-37" tires is actually a very great reason to go with a 3-link up front.

Your results may vary.
 
I got a second hand set of 37’s to play with on my junk, only have run them on 4 trail days and around town for a couple of months. I ran a couple of what I consider aggressive rock gardens, that I have run many times with the 295’s as a comparison. With the 295’s I always called for a spot , on the second one with the 37’s rolled it without a spotter and no issues. The 33’s would get stuck between/under rocks, ledges etc, the 37’s roll right over. Very pleased with their performance, the low C/G, ride, stance with the OME “J” and setting the truck up to run them fulltime.

My observations on fitting; The biggest key is a relatively narrow tire if you want them to fit/stuff into the wheel wells, taking advantage of all of the suspension travel possible. The Cooper STT’s that I have are 10.25 tread and 12.25 overall width, about the same width as my brother’s Nitto 315’s. They touched the factory rear plastic bumper ends, the 4x4Labs bumper fixed that and had to take a small nip off of the rear inside of the flairs. I have 1.25” wheel spacers, they put the tires very close to the flares/fender edges with plenty of room on the inside, swapping to 1” should solve that problem. They will need some bump stop extension, but wont know the final size until fitting is done. Overall my experience fitting a narrow 37” is very similar to 315’s, basically the same tire except the 1” larger radius.

A larger/heavier tire is always going to add loads to the drive train. But my observation, from running the same trails with both is; If your happy with the trails and capabilities of the truck, moving to larger tires will make those same trails much easier/more comfortable, the rig walks over stuff that required more brute force before, possibly even putting less stress on the rig if running the same lines and driving style. Obviously if you step up the aggressiveness of your driving/lines the stress will go way up.
37_1.webp
37_2.webp
 
Nay said:
... Flex isn't the 80's issue, the wheelbase is long enough that it can handle major obtacles without a need for outrageous front end flex.
...
Click to expand...

When you wheeled a 80 with matched flex front and rear, you didn't notice any difference?:eek:

Most of our "testing experience” is comparing my brother’s rig to mine, they are setup the same, J’s, L’s, etc, the big differences are his 315’s, stock arms/CC bushings and mine has custom arms that allow the front to flex and for most days 295’s.

On his truck and several equipped similarly in our group the body closely follows the angle of the front axle, reducing the ride comfort, making the rear axle do most of the flex work, reducing ground pressure, traction or lifting tires on the light corners. Yes it can go the same places when locked.

When my rig runs the exact same lines, the body is much closer to the average of both axles flex, much less body angle change, jolting, harshness. Many times I run the same lines without lifting a tire, sometimes unlocked.

I don’t see how you can argue that tires staying on the ground, increased smoothness, traction, stability don’t make a more capable rig? In these pix it’s not fully flexed, but shows how the body sits more even between the flexed axles.
flex.webp
flex_2.webp
 
Only if you had these when doing slick rock the other month! I'll break it down for you: You would have had enough flex to make the last ledge and never pulled cable thus never frying your winch.
I'm really glad you did this, now I won't ask you if you've aired down enoughwhen riding shotgun:flipoff2: Those 6" heavies were STIFF.

Like George said, if you ain't rubbing you can bigger.... gimme a deal on those 37's
 
clownmidget said:
Nay, just how many 3-linked 80's have you wheeled to compare?

The front end flex is more or less the same from the time it rolled off the line up to the point you get drastic. None of the aftermarket arms really claim to do anything other than correct caster and you will never ever get anywhere near the use out of the front OME L-shocks (N73L) so that's all pretty much a mute point, at least IMO.

I think you got it a little backwards. I think keeping it lower, loosing 2-4 inches of suspension height, staying with 35-37" tires is actually a very great reason to go with a 3-link up front.

Your results may vary.
Click to expand...

My point was the gears will be more important, and that the idea of opening up a 3 linked front puts a performance goal that the 80's size doesn't necessarily meet due to the size liability (see Action Jackson 3-link followed by sale).

Now if you had a top chop plan coming as well, redesign the suspension, but I think people are a bit over excited about the idea of raising the 80's performance a trail class level just by changing the linkage.

I used to think a redesigned front end would be an initial goal for me, but I haven't found it to be a limitation - the size gets in the way long before front end flex.
 
Let me say a few things here, being my thread and all :grinpimp::

1) Thanks for the comments, I really appreciate the discussion and feedback.
2) Don't bring that FOR bad mojo in here, that crap can stay over there.
3) I DO NOT DD my rig. I drive to a trail, run it, and drive home. I do not have the vibrations from drivetrain, but I am running 37" Iroks. I have a lot of noise all the time. I am not interested in the smoothest, quietest ride. If it is safe, I am happy, even if it is loud.
4) I won't argue with anyone with another setup or with contrary ideas to my setup. I won't have a debate. I like my setup, I tweak my setup, you do yours. Show off results if you like (I do).
5) 3-link. A 3-link will improve my intended use of my rig. I am not planning on running anything more serious than I already have, I just want to do so with a bit more front end flex and overall control. A 3-link will do that for me. I have seen the results in others' designs and I am satisfied that if I design it properly I will be good to go. I would buy Carl's long arm kit, but I don't poop gold...so I am going to make my own (Carl, no slam, just too expensive. I will gladly put a big sticker in my window if you give me a kit :)).
6) Crawler...*droool*. It will happen.

I think that sums it up?

Oh, and Land Speeder...my winch didn't fry because of that ledge/situation. It was full of old muck and sand and the motor was toast. It is now spanky new and powerful!
 
DanKunz said:
Oh, and Land Speeder...my winch didn't fry because of that ledge/situation. It was full of old muck and sand and the motor was toast. It is now spanky new and powerful!
Click to expand...

Powerful enough to pull me up the last obstacle of 'Bump n Grind" in 14 days? I'm goin' for it this year! unlocked front with no winch!

Can't wait to see the cado in it's new stance!
 
I had to cancel the cruiser crawl plans...work and kid stuff in the way this year.
 
I agree a 3link may improve a rigs capability, but in a different way that some may think. It will increase the chances of keeping a front tire on the ground thus making it more stable and less prone to flops. AND looks :cool:

But the idea that with the added front end flex, (a tire that would have been previously off the ground), will now be touching ground and will have weight on it to pull you up an obstacle. That is yet to be seen. All the weight will be distributed on the other side of the rig so I doubt that tire will have too much to do with increasing your crawling capability the way I first imagined it.

Anyone agree?

That being said I still want a 3link:grinpimp:
 
Nice job brotha...

Low lift with big tires...Its the way to go.


I am dropping my rig a few inches and moving into some 39.5 IROKS



Side Note: Its funny how most people think that the bigger the lift you have the more capable it is. But it just boils down to my penis is bigger than yours junk. Just looking at all the hard core guys that spend a good amount of time on the rocks....Most of them all have minimal lifts, large amounts of flex, and large tires. None of this was directed towards you Dan.....Just ranting.
 
Jason Andrews said:
But the idea that with the added front end flex, (a tire that would have been previously off the ground), will now be touching ground and will have weight on it to pull you up an obstacle. That is yet to be seen. All the weight will be distributed on the other side of the rig so I doubt that tire will have too much to do with increasing your crawling capability the way I first imagined it.

Anyone agree?

That being said I still want a 3link:grinpimp:
Click to expand...

I would have thought the same until I saw clownmidget's 3 link at Dusy Ershim. It does increase the capability and lines it can take are impressive to say the least.
 
Correct. A 3-link allows for more 4-wheel contact. Yes, it doesn't always out the weight on the down tire, but it will allow the angles for the up tire to work better, as well as allow more help from the normally airborne tire. Stability is also increased because you aren't wheel standing and trying to control the subsequent lurch to 4 wheels again.

It will work better. Perhaps not a 100% improvement, but I am not looking for that. I suspect a 10-20% improvement justifies the costs. Plus, it is my toy, my trail rig, and I wanna do it...so thppppt! :)
 
Nay said:
My point was the gears will be more important, and that the idea of opening up a 3 linked front puts a performance goal that the 80's size doesn't necessarily meet due to the size liability (see Action Jackson 3-link followed by sale).

Now if you had a top chop plan coming as well, redesign the suspension, but I think people are a bit over excited about the idea of raising the 80's performance a trail class level just by changing the linkage.

I used to think a redesigned front end would be an initial goal for me, but I haven't found it to be a limitation - the size gets in the way long before front end flex.
Click to expand...

If you could have only one (lighter, crawl box, 3-link) this logic would work. But why not have as many as possible? I would rather have the gears than the 3-link but I want both. If Im going to have to chop the top to perform I will get a jeep.
 
Bingo...3-link AND a crawler...yum
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
Rate my plugs and Cylinders.... [Image heavy]
Replies
5
Views
593
unclegit
U
ceylonfj40nut
Need some dimensions on Slee Shortbus and installation
Replies
5
Views
714
SoTexCruiserDoc
SoTexCruiserDoc
ajax1
Slee step sliders on hdj81
Replies
1
Views
604
ikarus
ikarus
leonard_nemoy
Slee headlight harness
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
soulonwax
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom