Thanks Dan, will do..
866 vs 865 and a bull bar questions
- Thread starter rzpapp
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
spressomon said:Shotts,
Did you do the measuring for the shock extension for your 863's (to make sure they don't limit the spring travel and/or top out thus loading the mounts) or just kinda flying by the seat o'your pants (not that there is anything WRONG with that)?
Between Amando running the Rubicon and Shotts wheelin' his in AZ and Moab, I can't imagine that this setup of 863's and N101's isn't OK. Besides, I don't think it will hurt the shocks anyways. The front shocks are what limit the front travel. My guess is the rears are limited by the shocks even with 866's in there. What else is there to stop the flex? Swaybars maybe?
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
SINCITY100 said:
Nope, I would not recommend that. It is plenty strong, but I would not stick a 6k lb truck in the mud then attach a 9k winch to it and try and pull it out.
SINCITY100 said:
Oh, that was a response to Slee. I was just picking on him.
I am thrilled with the bumper. It held up well in Moab and my 80 buddies like the improvements Slee made over his 80 bumper (integrated receiver, more safety with pin/swing stop design). I always hoped Slee'd be aggressive when he designed the 100 bumper and it was worth the wait. I'm glad now I worked him so hard to make it aggressive.
The other brands don't offer much (if any) off-road improvement. I also prefer the spare in the center.Greg B said:
Somebody's gotta try 863's (not 863J) and the 80's L-rear shocks. I have that on the 80 and the springs have never come out. The droop is better and therefore traction. Gotta try on the 100 but I'm tired of swapping parts. Who has an old but decent set of 80 L-shocks to send me?
spressomon said:Shotts,
Did you do the measuring for the shock extension for your 863's (to make sure they don't limit the spring travel and/or top out thus loading the mounts) or just kinda flying by the seat o'your pants (not that there is anything WRONG with that
I was never told to check this when I bought them. ???
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
On the 80 and the 100, the shock is supposed to be the limiting factor when extended. However fitting longer shocks you have to make sure you don't over compress them.
sleeoffroad said:
Rear bump stops are lowered 2" in the 100 just like the 80.
I'd not want my 100 any stiffer in the rear. (863)
Those 866's look like they'll be stiff unless you load up the back (gas tank/drawers, etc).
?????
Those 866's look like they'll be stiff unless you load up the back (gas tank/drawers, etc).
?????
ShottsUZJ100 said:
Not necessarily, as Slee mentioned, ARB lists them as a progressive spring, so for the first bit of spring movement (not 100% sure on how much movment), they are only 240 lbf/in, whereas your 863's are 250 lbf/in, most of your onroad suspension movement is rather small compared to offroad flexing... might actually be disirable? Someone try them out... we have used nothing but the 865's on installs here in SLC, might have to talk someone into the 866's soon
ShottsUZJ100 said:
The 866's are great...even around town without all the hunting/camping gear (with my 100 set-up as is); no complaints other than lift...I just need a little more lift for normal loads and a bit more lift than that for heavier loads. I think the best thing for me to do is to add 15-20mm packer for levelling while running the rig without all the hunting/camping gear AND to add the air spring bladders to the coils to add more support for those once-in-awhile really heavy loads.
spressomon said:
Yep..As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the 866`s give a very nice ride when UNLOADED... It only gets better when there is some weight back there.
The thing I actually liked about the 866`s is that the entire vehicle seems to "settle" to a nice, even height as you load the 100 up (I.E. the front end and the rear drop almost the same amount, so it doesnt look like its tail is sagging. (refer to an earlier thread on "roof racks" to see how my rig sits loaded from floor to ceiling PLUS over 300 lbs on the roof !..I only had room for ME in the truck ! )
I also (like spressomon) plan on adding packers or air-bags to the springs after I add a more "substantial" rear bumper, but for now, my current set-up (OME T-bars/866`s) is PERFECT for my needs.
cruiseroutfit said:
Kurt...that is a GREAT chart and information: THANKS!
P.S.: Shower kits ETA update?
ShottsUZJ100 said:Rear bump stops are lowered 2" in the 100 just like the 80.
Shotts,
If I understand him correctly, I think what Christo is saying is that the shock limits travel on the droop (extended) end of the axle. The bumpstop limits the uptravel (compression) end. If you use too long of a shock, the shock would be the limiter at compression instead of the bumpstop. And with the weight of the vehicle coming down hard this could damage the shock and/or mounts.
I too, would be very interested to know how much unused compressed length there is on the standard N101 shock. For instance, if there is 2 inches of remaining up-travel in the shock when the spring is fully compressed or the axle is hitting the bumpstops, then you could add an extension to the existing shock allowing 2 more inches of droop without affecting up-travel. This is a common practice on LR Discoveries and might be beneficial for us too.
cruiseroutfit said:Not necessarily, as Slee mentioned, ARB lists them as a progressive spring, so for the first bit of spring movement (not 100% sure on how much movment), they are only 240 lbf/in, whereas your 863's are 250 lbf/in, most of your onroad suspension movement is rather small compared to offroad flexing... might actually be disirable? Someone try them out... we have used nothing but the 865's on installs here in SLC, might have to talk someone into the 866's soon
I prefer the progressive springs. I've used several pairs on previous Rovers and they worked well. The biggest advantage is that they give you a certain amount of lift with light loads and as you load them down they get stiffer so that they don't sag as much as a normal spring once it hits it's load limit.
So far, I like the ride of the 866's just fine. I haven't had the opportunity to load them down yet. I am going to add some trim packers before too long though. I want a little more height in the rear.
Greg B said:
That all makes sense for sure. Thing is that the 80 and 100 rear ends are very similar. They have OME reg and L for the 80. Both work fine though with the L you should lower the bump stop. I'm certain this is the same on the 100 though OME doesn't offer an L-shock because TECHNICALLY they don't offer a matching J-spring because the front can't be lifted to match.
Bottom line: If an L works OK with an 863 on an 80, it should on a 100? Ya? I'm willing to try but I need the L-shocks.
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
ShottsUZJ100 said:
The L shocks and the J spring has nothing to do with one another. Yes, they are used together, but they were never designed as a matched pair by ARB.
---- from my site ------
2. What are J springs?
These springs were developed for the South American Market. In 2001 I met with ARB at Sema and that is where we learned about the springs. Slee Off-Road was looking for longer springs and shocks to work with our 5" lift. With the help of the South American distributor for OME, we convinced ARB to start importing those. These springs are not part of a 3" lift kit. The springs are not supported by ARB as part of a lift kit. The reason for this is that they can not supply method to correct the caster. To quote from the ARB fitment guide
"OME850J/OME863J coils and N73L/N74L shocks should be installed together, although they do not comprise a kit. Fitment of N73L/N74L shocks requires mandatory installation of .75" (20mm) Front and 1.25" (30mm) rear bump stop spacers to the front and rear suspension to prevent shock absorbers from bottoming out under full compression. These bump stop spacers are not available from OME and will need to be sourced from the installer."
J springs are about 1" longer than the equivalent rated regular spring. In certain cases, especially where the front of the truck is heavily loaded, it makes sense to swap to the J springs in the front to level the truck out. However, whenever the front is lifted above 2.5" we suggest that the caster be measured to determine how close to stock the geometry is.
3. What are L shocks.
At the same SEMA meeting, we requested longer direct bolt in shocks for the 80 Series Land Cruiser. It took some convincing and a large stock order, but we finally got L shocks. They are 50mm longer on extension and about 20-30mm longer on compression. Again, as with the J springs these were intended for custom applications and not supported as a kit by ARB.
sleeoffroad said:
Gotcha...so if the 100's rear bump stops are lowered 2" like is needed on an 80-series then why couldn't we slap the L's on a 100?
You said to me "because the 863 spring might fall out. You really should use a J-spring so this doesn't happen."
In my 80, after 3+ years of wheeling, I've never lost an 863. So, if the 863 is staying in and with an L-shock in an 80, why can't I use the same rear setup in the 100?
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
ShottsUZJ100 said:
Nobody says you can't. I am just pointing out the possible issues. See other post for specs on shocks.
