80 shock thread - familiar territory could use update (4 Viewers)

[AutoCraft Aus]

But don't these limit droop on a 3" lift (ie. they are rated for a 0-3" lift so if they are the proper length for a 0" lift aren't they too short for a 3" lift)?

The 2.0 Icons are 26.5" long, and just fit inside the compressed length on the bump stop, just, to be as long as they can be.

I think if you check compared to pretty much all the other 0-3" shocks, none will be this length, or ride as nicely.

Many of the shocks we have made use a custom body, because once you go remote res, you move the separating piston and gas space into the res, so you can make the compressed length of the shock shorter, for the extended length, when you do this. Most manufacturers dont do this, and quote stroke for size of the shock, using the same bodies and shafts per length as non res shocks.

Its how we fit 12" stroke shocks into an 80 with no front bump spacer, and a 30mm rear bump spacer, to suit the compressed length of the shock, by having them made custom, rather than assembled from generic parts.

Another benefit of a resi, is that when you manifold it on the body of the shock, rather than come out of the top cap, and you have an adjuster on the resi that isnt a pintle style oil flow restriction, so line pressures dont go through the roof, and spoil the ride, you can build a bump into the shock, as it goes to the last part of the up travel, past the manifold, at higher piston speed.

In our experience, rebuilding Kings often seems to be a "thing", and having to regas them often, and having to upgrade to a synthetic oil, and having to swap out the bearings they use for ones that last longer, and the shafts being prone to damage due to hardness, and corrosion, and the anodising disappearing,just to name afew of the things that saw us stop using them afew years ago, here.

We dont use anything that has a greater than 1.5% warranty return rate.

 

[LFD2037]

The 2.0 Icons are 26.5" long, and just fit inside the compressed length on the bump stop, just, to be as long as they can be.

I think if you check compared to pretty much all the other 0-3" shocks, none will be this length, or ride as nicely.

I made a post awhile back w/a bunch of measured lengths of 'off the shelf' shocks. This is the issue I find w/almost every single 'off the shelf' shock. They are designed (compression/extension length) to fit multiple lifts. I understand why they do this is to save money. It seems the only way someone can win w/that scenario is to be on the smaller end of the 'design' rating. Meaning, having a 0" lift & using a shock for a 0"-3" shock or having a 4" lift & using a shock for a 4"-6" lift. My situation is/will be having a 3-3.5" lift & being in the worst ext./comp. 'zone' for shocks. On paper, OME regular shocks are too short for 2.5" length & the OME L's are sized a lot more appropriately for that lift. I mean, if they fit a 0" lift then how the hell could they possibly be the best length for a 2.5" lift? Answer is they can't & they aren't. I probably won't ever go resi's as that's money I don't have( unless we can get a slammin' deal on a good set <$900). I just want to find the CORRECT length ext./comp. shock for what lift I'll be running. Since I'll be 3-3.5" lifted it looks like the OME L's (no thanks) or the longer Fox's will be my only true choices. It appears the ICON's will be too short. Btw, do you happen to have the measured length of an FZJ80 w/no springs or shocks with it sitting on the bumpstops (the absolute complete compression length w/all variables removed)? That's the only info. I don't have. Thanks for all your input!

 

[AutoCraft Aus]

Your sort of right, but because 0-3 will work when you have maxed compressed length, your not losing anything in up travel with no spacer, and maxxing the down travel, so the shock suits a 0 lift, because of compressed length, but is made as long as it can be to suit 3" lift.

Its not a "its shorter to do 0, but its as long as it can be to do 3, which will suit 0" arrangement, if that makes sense.

Front is 410mm [16.1 ] and rear is 395mm [15.5] from memory allowing 25mm [1"] bump stop crush.

Our 3" slinky long travels are 404mm [16"] comp front with 12" stroke, so thats as long as we can go without spacing the bumpstop in the front. If you add a 50mm [2"] bump spacer, to go to a 14" all you have done is moved everything down where the front wont travel anyway, by restricting up travel, to gain down travel.

In the rear we use a 425mm [16.7"] comp rear with 12" stroke which requires a 30mm bump spacer in the back for the compressed length, to maximise the travel.

This length of travel requires custom design coils for 3" lift with 3" extra free height to stay captive, sway bar spacers, and sway bar extended links, brake line extensions, diff breather extensions etc to make it all work, due to the amount of droop and travel. [Bump stop bigger, sway bar link as per pic]

Other type of sway bar extension.

Bump stop clearance is generally the starting point, to get a baseline of where you can get to from there, working with tyre clearance required, and how to get that in as compact a space as possible.

Then making everything work in the arc and amount of droop you get from that is the next logical step. How much can be gained for what amount of work comes down the the roll steer, clearance, compressed length, and wheel postions for the tyre size to get a package together that works as good as it can, for the sum of the parts, while keeping its manners on road.

 

[LFD2037]

Your sort of right, but because 0-3 will work when you have maxed compressed length, your not losing anything in up travel with no spacer, and maxxing the down travel, so the shock suits a 0 lift, because of compressed length, but is made as long as it can be to suit 3" lift.

Its not a "its shorter to do 0, but its as long as it can be to do 3, which will suit 0" arrangement, if that makes sense.

Front is 410mm [16.1 ] and rear is 395mm [15.5] from memory allowing 25mm [1"] bump stop crush.

Our 3" slinky long travels are 404mm [16"] comp front with 12" stroke, so thats as long as we can go without spacing the bumpstop in the front. If you add a 50mm [2"] bump spacer, to go to a 14" all you have done is moved everything down where the front wont travel anyway, by restricting up travel, to gain down travel.

In the rear we use a 425mm [16.7"] comp rear with 12" stroke which requires a 30mm bump spacer in the back for the compressed length, to maximise the travel.

This length of travel requires custom design coils for 3" lift with 3" extra free height to stay captive, sway bar spacers, and sway bar extended links, brake line extensions, diff breather extensions etc to make it all work, due to the amount of droop and travel. [Bump stop bigger, sway bar link as per pic]

Other type of sway bar extension.

Bump stop clearance is generally the starting point, to get a baseline of where you can get to from there, working with tyre clearance required, and how to get that in as compact a space as possible.

Then making everything work in the arc and amount of droop you get from that is the next logical step. How much can be gained for what amount of work comes down the the roll steer, clearance, compressed length, and wheel postions for the tyre size to get a package together that works as good as it can, for the sum of the parts, while keeping its manners on road.

Excellent info.! Do y'all have a website or more info ($$$) on those 3" slinky's w/matching smooth shocks? How's the on-road manners of the slinky's?

 

[GW Nugget]

Im running the medium springs front and rear, with bumper and winch up front, tire carrier and jerrycans in back. The ride is firm, but plush if that makes sense. The ride quality is perfect, but the shocks seem as if the valving is too firm. Hence why I liked the rancho 9 thousands, adjustability was great, and easy to change when going on different terrain. Anyone run rancho 9 thousands on an 80???

I do, I don't know if I have a bad set or not, but all 4 are like this. I had a set of the original 9Ks & loved them on my 40. But the 80 has coils & is heavy. I have the #999234 16.5 to 27 inches. fronts have a U bracket. In the video I have them set to 8 front 7 rear.

 

[LFD2037]

I do, I don't know if I have a bad set or not. I had a set of the original 9Ks & loved them on my 40. But the 80 has coils & is heavy. I have the #999234 16.5 to 27 inches. fronts have a U bracket. In the video I have them set to 8 front 7 rear.

Damn! If I have 2 people stand on the tailgate and bounce up and down mine don't move that much. I have OME shocked and 850/860 springs.

 

[DylanICON]

I do, I don't know if I have a bad set or not, but all 4 are like this. I had a set of the original 9Ks & loved them on my 40. But the 80 has coils & is heavy. I have the #999234 16.5 to 27 inches. fronts have a U bracket. In the video I have them set to 8 front 7 rear.

If the part # was not specifically for an 80 then the valving is going to be way off. In addition to the knob the internal base valving must be correct.

 

[GW Nugget]

If the part # was not specifically for an 80 then the valving is going to be way off. In addition to the knob the internal base valving must be correct.

You nailed it... I got a hold of Rancho today, the rep said that a #999234 is for a F150 rear.
I would say an 80 is heavier than a F150 in the rear......
Here is the lesson to be learned for to all after me.
Don't do this! It don't work for an 80.
My thoughts where since it was adjustable, I could dial it in.
The comp. & extension where perfect. 16.5" to 27".
I believe I'm just going to get some OME Ls since I have the coils.
At $100 per it really not many choices. 11.3" of travel with a 15.3" 26.3" in front.

 

[GW Nugget]

Those 3" Slinky coils look very inviting... who wants to be the 1st US ginny pig?
@AutoCraft Aus has them on SNOWY. Just click on his sig a couple post up from here. Its worth reading.

 

[HAAANK]

Calling @Golgo13 to join in and drop some suspension knowledge

 

[Golgo13]

I'll have to read through this over the weekend. Things are very busy at work as of late.

 

[warezdog]

I got the feeling I'm not the only one waiting for a GB for a 2.5" with res for a 2-4" lift for under $900 that bolts on!

 

[Qball]

I'm drooling over the icons now!

2 inch lift with no bump stop spacers and increased droop would be my ideal setup.

 

[hamishpotter]

I got the feeling I'm not the only one waiting for a GB for a 2.5" with res for a 2-4" lift for under $900 that bolts on!

I'm up for that

 

[cahill]

Anyone with experience with Slee's shocks want to chime in? I haven't heard much about them other than that they are pricey. It would be nice to see what people think of them and if possible how they compare to the Icons.

 

[warezdog]

I'm up for that

@FloridaFJ80 we have two on a group buy, is that enough to start a thread?!

 

[newtomelx]

Anyone with experience with Slee's shocks want to chime in? I haven't heard much about them other than that they are pricey. It would be nice to see what people think of them and if possible how they compare to the Icons.

@RS6tofj80 @scottryana
I have bought these but not had time to install them, from what Erich (RS6toFJ80) said I felt like they were the better choice, for me and my $$$ anyway. I trust Slee, he has been in business many years and knows the 80 better than most, to say the least. I figured I would let him do the research and get it right the first time. I do not want to be re-valving two or three times to dial it in. That is one reason why his shocks are a little more money> His is in line with other 2.5" shocks but they do not have Slee's experience, IMO. I will be changing to his 4" medium coils when I replace my shocks. I will be selling my FOR coils and shocks after I swap over. I am a little heavy for the progressive 3.5" coils even though they ride very well.

 

[hamishpotter]

@newtomelx would the Slee's work with both 2.5" OME springs as well as 4" Slee's or 3.5" progressives? I have 2.5" now, and would rather not keep changing everything if I change springs later.

 

[scottryana]

I really do like the Slee shocks, they are very high quality, and like mentioned earlier it is pretty clear the boys in CO did their homework.

The Slee's are nicely adjustable by using the nitrogen charge. I went with around 150psi which gave me a nice firm ride without being too harsh and the tires stay planted much better than with the OME's. I immediately noticed this when I made the switch and expansion joints on the highway felt much better.

I can not compare them to the King, Icons, or Fox on the 80 though. I have had King and Fox on other trucks in the past and both of them were good, I think the overall quality goes Slee>King>Fox.

Anyone with experience with Slee's shocks want to chime in? I haven't heard much about them other than that they are pricey. It would be nice to see what people think of them and if possible how they compare to the Icons.

@RS6tofj80 @scottryana
I have bought these but not had time to install them, from what Erich (RS6toFJ80) said I felt like they were the better choice, for me and my $$$ anyway. I trust Slee, he has been in business many years and knows the 80 better than most, to say the least. I figured I would let him do the research and get it right the first time. I do not want to be re-valving two or three times to dial it in. That is one reason why his shocks are a little more money> His is in line with other 2.5" shocks but they do not have Slee's experience, IMO. I will be changing to his 4" medium coils when I replace my shocks. I will be selling my FOR coils and shocks after I swap over. I am a little heavy for the progressive 3.5" coils even though they ride very well.

 

[newtomelx]

@hamishpotter

@newtomelx would the Slee's work with both 2.5" OME springs as well as 4" Slee's or 3.5" progressives? I have 2.5" now, and would rather not keep changing everything if I change springs later.

I would defer to Slee to answer your question definitively.