ARCHIVE 100 Series Coil Over Conversion Kit (6 Viewers)

[ScubaJon]

If your conservative then you most likely will not be going anywhere you need coil overs

"super beefy" doesn't really take into account load paths and dynamic loading. May work for a while, but how long? 50k miles? 100k? idk. I'm being conservative.

 

[Somebodyelse5]

If your conservative then you most likely will not be going anywhere you need coil overs

Last I checked, you don't "need" coilovers to get anywhere specific. More travel? sure. But this setup, and coilovers alone, don't give you more travel.

All I'm saying is that we don't have the whole story and assuming the shock mounts are strong enough because they "look beefy" isn't something I'd be comfortable with. We like our cruisers because they last forever... forever means fatigue sets in, increasing loading will mean fatigue sets in sooner. Statically I'm sure the mounts are fine, but dynamically all bets are off.

We are hear to discuss, maybe the shock mounts are strong enough, idk I'm just saying I think it's worth a thought.

 

[nukegoat]

"super beefy" doesn't really take into account load paths and dynamic loading. May work for a while, but how long? 50k miles? 100k? idk. I'm being conservative.

Indefinitely IMO. And lets remember that the shocks are going to induce higher loads than the springs anyway in typical high velocity impacy. And lets remember that those shock mounts also supported the AHC dampers which do supply spring force

 

[Somebodyelse5]

Indefinitely IMO. And lets remember that the shocks are going to induce higher loads than the springs anyway in typical high velocity impacy. And lets remember that those shock mounts also supported the AHC dampers which do supply spring force

I guess I keep forgetting that AHC exists... I think you're right though

 

[Newps]

Indefinitely IMO. And lets remember that the shocks are going to induce higher loads than the springs anyway in typical high velocity impacy. And lets remember that those shock mounts also supported the AHC dampers which do supply spring force

I guess I keep forgetting that AHC exists... I think you're right though

I totally forgot about the AHC, it make a lot more sense now why Toyota made them so over built. I kept trying to figure out why Toyota would build a shock mount to coil over specs. So now both top and bottom mounts were built to support the entire weight of the vehicle.

Let's play devil's advocate here and say there was a catastrophic failure. Worst case you would sitting on your bumpstops. You would still be able to steer and brake.

Possible failure points, the top mount is not "likely" going to be it. Way to much metal up there something else is going to give before that does.

So you are looking the bottom mount or the coil over. I know the 3rd Gen 4Runner and Taco guys have bent their stock coil overs. The ones that I have seen posted up were all from jumping a little too much. Here's a shot of our buddy Luke Porter aka 4x4Labs from KOH this year.

Quick trip to the local Napa store and few hours later he was up and running again. An aftermarket coil over (King, Icon, Radflo..etc) is going to be built a lot better then any manufactures stock one. Also if you are jumping your Landcruiser you an idiot. These things are stupid heavy stock, let alone once moded. I was stupid once too but that was in my youth and with pickup trucks.

Last one is the bottom mount. All load forces are up and down. We already know it was designed to carry the weight of the vehicle due to the AHC system and the shock mount loads. Not really sure how you could make it fail, bumpstops are going to engage before you bottom out the coil over. But it does bring up the question why are the 3Gen / Taco guys bending theirs? They too should be hitting the bumpstops and not bottoming out the coil over.

All in all pretty interesting stuff to think about. Radflo is around the corner from me and Glen has always been a great guy to talk with....hum.....?