100-Series Suspension

[spressomon]

In response to a post in the SPC-Slee UCA arm thread I was going to start a shock thread...but then chickened out

It seems there is an expectation and to a larger degree a misconception, especially with those that have purchased or want to purchase aftermarket shocks, specifically higher performance mono-tube type shocks, they will get both improved comfort AND better control.

Based upon my experience chasing that dichotomy over many years I came to the conclusion its a choice of one or the other...not both: Ultimate comfort AND ultimate control from a non-bypass style shock. The way my 100 is currently set-up with OME t-bars, 2" Fox shocks with remotes in the front, OME864 springs in the rear with custom Radflo 2.5 shocks & remotes in the rear it still not "cushy" for a DD rig. But off-road the suspension is very, very dialed.

Enter bypass shocks: This is the current aftermarket shock technology that can get very close to offering the best of both worlds: Comfort AND control. Unfortunately, at least with external tube bypass shocks, this comes with significant cost and packaging (as it relates to the 100 platform) issues.

With a position and velocity sensitive valve system, brought to the game with bypass shocks, one can come very close to maximum comfort and maximum control in an aftermarket shock system.

Fox and King both offer internal bypass shocks that mostly eliminate fitment issues on our 100's. However they don't offer them pre-tuned for 100's and that leaves a large gap between off-the shelf performance expectations and reality for most of us.

Just thought I'd start the subject in here...

 

[Mxndrnks]

I was wondering what happened....

I agree. Off road my truck feels amazing. On road i am not as happy. Seeing i am spending less time Offroad these days... I often think about my options.

The other trend i am seeing with all this is the same road I went down. Using aftermarket uca's to lift the front higher.... It just doesn't work out.

 

[spressomon]

Yes...that is another big misconception with our IFS: Where the real travel limitation lies.

Acute CV and steering end angles only accelerate wear/shorten life span. If we wanted to run sans anti-sway bar we could lower the front diff to provide better CV angles...but we're still left with the significant issue related to steering end angles...

My motivation for the building the arms I'm currently running was mainly from a caster correction perspective...which Carl's arms I originally ran did not adequately provide.

 

[spressomon]

It will be of interest, of course, to see what the actual alignment (caster mainly) specs are on Bighead's new SPC UCAs. And would be nice to view pics of the inner bushing-to-frame/cam brackets to see how much skew, if any, exists.

Nice to see a new product offering but they've had trouble in the past with the adjustment/lock down nut not being able to adequately keep the ball assembly in position especially with any lateral force/tire hit.

And I'm not digging on how exposed the ball joint rubber bellows is in relationship to the tire sidewall. Gritty mud/snow/ice and/or recovery chains will surely prematurely wear the bellows...at least via the photos Bighead posted up.

 

[1loudLX]

I was fingering some of the new SPC arms earlier, me likes. But the ball joint wasn't on

 

[spressomon]

I'm just daydreaming...but given the front suspension height most of us are running and the resulting track width reduction it would seem we could, without the need for a lengthened CV, utilize +1" longer UCA and LCA. My UCA's are adjustable in/out so I think I could reuse them...so "just" need longer LCA. I'll have to take some measurements the next time I have the CV out...

So it would, essentially, end up being 1" total wider track width than stock...and theoretically end up with slightly friendlier angles for steering and CV. Of course sectioning the steering cradle and lowering the diff would be the total cat's meow...

And with a custom LCA we could move the axle center forward...increasing relative caster, slightly increasing approach angle and providing a little more rear of tire to fender clearance...with ~3.5* caster.

The SAS thread got me thinking about all this again...effing dangerous.

 

[Mxndrnks]

Step away from the regular forum..... Nothing good to come from that...well it is rare when it does...

I did find the post about the SPC UCA's for $150 less than Slee and MT. So ordered a set to replace the Total Chaos. Gonna replace the LCA's soon too. Boots are torn again. I have already rebooted twice, and replaced both ball joints once.

Then it should be about time for new tires and another 90k service.... This is going to be an expensive year for the cruiser...

 

[hoser]

Could the center of the CV shafts just be lengthened/sleeved and balanced? Wall thickness too much?

Maybe it's time for a 200! Joe Bacal claims almost 15" of travel in the FRONT from the stock suspension arms. But sure the 3.5 triple bypass King shocks have something to do with it too.

 

[spressomon]

Yeah...did my 2nd 90K last summer before I lost my well equipped garage.

I think part of our steering rack woes is related to the unfriendly angle and additional stress caused by the outers being so much below the centerline of the rack.

Although I certainly can appreciate the increased durability and perhaps reliability of a SAS...just not convinced its the end all, given the compromises an SAS brings to our platform, for how and where I use my rig. If I had access to a shop I might embark on the custo LCA project...but can only dream right now

 

[Mxndrnks]

I hear you... I was set on a sfa. I would just build a 60-62 and get rid of the leaf springs.

 

[spressomon]

^ Gary's 62 on the 80 project was the snitz! Like others I was distressed to see it totaled...but great he and his daughter survived without much physical injury. But I'm with you Jonathan for my dream overland rig!

 

[hoser]

Here's the easier way to get a 60/80 hybrid. Lol. Of all the terrible LC frankenstein jobs, it actually looks okay to me.

 

[1loudLX]

Measured my front ride height wednesday, I was about 40mm lower than what Slee normally sets ride height at. Guess that's why I still have a steering rack. Raised it up 8-10mm

 

[Hugh Heifer]

Here's the easier way to get a 60/80 hybrid. Lol. Of all the terrible LC frankenstein jobs, it actually looks okay to me.

My brain is not comprehending what my eyes are seeing...is that an 80 with the headlights and grill from a 60? Freaky.

 

[hoser]

Yes, it's an 80 series with 60 series grill.

 

[spressomon]

I heard through the grapevine the SPC balljoint has a 60-degree range of articulation. Given you should have a couple degrees on each side for prudent over-travel protection (beyond your fixed suspension movement max/min measures) that leaves you with a little less than what Carl's UCA (spherical bearing) brought me.

It was probably mentioned but I don't recall seeing the recommended suspension height the SPC arms were designed for...assume 20.5"-21". Not sure how their travel is proportioned for droop and compression relative to the static location they've designed it for...

I don't need them...but was hoping to see at least 10 degrees (70+ degrees) more articulation from their balljoint.

 

[hoser]

Thanks, Dan. Like you alluded to, of great importance is how the UCA is 'centered' in the range of motion. I don't think anybody is increasing their suspension compression past the stock bumpstops, so added balljoint angularity on that end is not needed and would be unused.

 

[Mxndrnks]

So... I have a set of these sitting in the garage now. Let me know what you want measured and I will see if I can get you numbers.

 

[spressomon]

Jonathan, when you do the install it would be interesting to know, if you have the time and willing to do this, how much up travel and how much down travel, from resting (say 20.5" effective front suspension height) the SPC arms have.

You'd need to do this with the t-bar loose, no shock mounted...of course photos would be nice too

Unrelated to the above and an FWIW/FYI for you: I assume you will thoroughly check to be sure your shock limits the droop/down travel and the LCA bump stops completely stop the compressed/up travel...so the ball joint doesn't come close to taking the hit/"bottoming" out...(be sure to know how much the LCA bump stops compress at full hit). Can't remember: Did you buy a nitrogen tank?

 

[Mxndrnks]

Jonathan, when you do the install it would be interesting to know, if you have the time and willing to do this, how much up travel and how much down travel, from resting (say 20.5" effective front suspension height) the SPC arms have.

You'd need to do this with the t-bar loose, no shock mounted...of course photos would be nice too

Unrelated to the above and an FWIW/FYI for you: I assume you will thoroughly check to be sure your shock limits the droop/down travel and the LCA bump stops completely stop the compressed/up travel...so the ball joint doesn't come close to taking the hit/"bottoming" out...(be sure to know how much the LCA bump stops compress at full hit). Can't remember: Did you buy a nitrogen tank?

Dan- I'll see what I can do. Gonna be a couple months before I get around to the install. If there are any measurements I can do on the bench, I'll do those this week.