With IFS, lift doesn't change the relationship of the suspension/wheel stroke moving through it's arc to the truck. Lift only changes where in the stroke the truck normally sits. (shorter answer, valid for any height).
200 Series Lift using Tundra front IFS and Icon shocks
- Thread starter TexAZ
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
Sorry i thought you were talking about stance. Can i have a photo of the "poke" with your setup? Or direct me to a post.
Do want a cookie?
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
I think this is what you're asking for. I think the ride height is about 4" higher than stock.
Thanks! Exactly what I was looking for
This is the setup I'm most likely going with. But sometimes I feel like with the re-gear and Tundra swap, why not go for the 35's. Any regret on that? Or does it seem like getting to the 35's would be quite the undertaking.
35s aren't an undertaking if you consider your effective offset and tire width carefully. Narrower easier, but several are running 12.5" with medium effort.
I feel like i have read the 35" thread 4 times now and still don't have the confidence in ordering the tires. Tundra swap, rock warriors and some 35" KO2s. if only they weren't 12.5 wide. I know there is that other brand (forget which) that make a 35" narrower tire, but I'd rather stick with Nitto/BFG.
Seems like maybe 18" wheels would present a better option. My only real requirement is I want to be able to fully stuff them in the current fenders. Im not totally against the KDSS relocation, but it seems like there is some negative feedback on that route.
You can do it. If you've done gears already few drawbacks, lots of benefits. Maybe this 35x10.5x17?
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
I think once my current tires wear out, I'll get a larger tire. My fuel economy dropped since I regeared. Wish BFG made a 35 x 11.5r17
It probably comes down to what type of off-roading you do. Pre-runner and Baja running would be a big reason for the long arm Tundra setup. Technical off-roading: 35s. Or both if you want to go all out and modify the fenders.
Seems like you have all the supporting mods and are at a crossroads. I would personally say 35s. Tires themselves become so much of the suspension when aired down, combined with larger overall diameter to geometrically flatten ground features, superior footprint and traction, and improving rear axle and diff clearance in a way no suspension lift will. It'll still pound through washes and washboards with stock arms.
The recipe for fitting 35x12.5s under the fenders are well understood (see my build thread in sig). Wheel offset between 30-35mm (closer to 35 will be less rub). UCA or stock UCA trim. BMC. Tuck some plastics. For the LC, add KDSS relocation. Touch of camber to keep the tops of the tires further inward and also helps sidewalls from not rolling over as easily in a turn. Lift not even required.
I posted this elsewhere but you can see 35x12.5s tuck fine all day when setup this way. Wouldn't be able the run the same wide tires under the stock fenders with Tundra arms. Perhaps a mild body lift could make that work.
Last edited:
It probably comes down to what type of off-roading you do. Pre-runner and Baja running would be a big reason for the long arm Tundra setup. Technical off-roading: 35s. Or both if you want to go all out and modify the fenders.
Seems like you have all the supporting mods and are at a crossroads. I would personally say 35s. Tires themselves become so much of the suspension when aired down, combined with larger overall diameter to geometrically flatten ground features, superior footprint and traction, and improving rear axle and diff clearance in a way no suspension lift will. It'll still pound through washes and washboards with stock arms.
The recipe for fitting 35x12.5s under the fenders are well understood (see my build thread in sig). Wheel offset between 30-35mm (closer to 35 will be less rub). UCA or stock UCA trim. BMC. Tuck some plastics. For the LC, add KDSS relocation. Touch of camber to keep the tops of the tires further inward and also helps sidewalls from not rolling over as easily in a turn. Lift not even required.
I posted this elsewhere but you can see 35x12.5s tuck fine all day when setup this way. Wouldn't be able the run the same wide tires under the stock fenders with Tundra arms. Perhaps a mild body lift could make that work.
Yup, always about tradeoffs, and as you know, in so cal you can quickly go from rock gardens to bombing thru the desert. So i guess I figured the tundra swap was almost the same as going with spacers, tire fitment wise. And then you get the benefits of a lower cv angle at similar lift heights. Maybe i interpreted that wrongly.
nwfl4runner
GOLD Star
Does the tundra shock mount further out than the 200? I'm contemplating the swap, but with keeping AHC, worried about any change in the shock angle impacting things...
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
The lower shock mount is spaced out further., but it still works, I ran it that way until a removed the system.. See my thread in my sig.
nwfl4runner
GOLD Star
Good call man thanks. I assume the AHC didn't complain for the time you ran it?
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
Yeah, I ran it that way without issue with the AHC system.
If you do keep AHC, I'd recommend adding the LC shock spacers. This will do two things:
1) Additional ~1" down travel making for even more suspension travel on top of what the tundra arms provide
2) Pre-loads the AHC coil springs for added load capacity, or looked at it another way, brings up spring rate to better handle the extended tundra arms.
Same shock spacer is useful in the same way for even standard 200-series arms.
I think @turbo8 setup currently has the most front suspension stroke travel (~11.5") by pairing tundra arms with kings. Add in 35s and tire sidewall "travel" and it would be an articulating RTI monster. More info here:
Suspension Travel Comparison
Been meaning to do this to get some objective numbers to compare ride height versus droop travel versus compression travel. What better to do on a rainy day. Hope is that others may contribute and I'll update my table. We've known for awhile that some aftermarket suspensions increase what is...
forum.ih8mud.com
Last edited:
nwfl4runner
GOLD Star
If you do keep AHC, I'd recommend adding the LC shock spacers. This will do two things:
1) Additional ~1" down travel making for even more suspension travel on top of what the tundra arms provide
2) Pre-loads the AHC coil springs for added load capacity, or looked at it another way, brings up spring rate to better handle the extended tundra arms.
Same shock spacer is useful in the same way for even standard 200-series arms.
I think @turbo8 setup currently has the most front suspension stroke travel (~11.5") by pairing tundra arms with kings. More info here:
Suspension Travel Comparison
Been meaning to do this to get some objective numbers to compare ride height versus droop travel versus compression travel. What better to do on a rainy day. Hope is that others may contribute and I'll update my table. We've known for awhile that some aftermarket suspensions increase what is...
Already got those little guys in. Slowly working on convincing myself to move up to 37s, because the Stellar build has me all jealous.
That build is a beast and will probably set the new bar for this platform. I'm also watching eagerly.
