AHC shock (ram) spacers......what's the point? (1 Viewer)

[ga12r1]

The discussion seems to be right on the money here.

I’m offering these primarily to those who want a “lift” on a budget while retaining OEM stroke height for the rams and/or allowing larger tires/more droop. There are many different reasons to run or not run these on a 100 Series.

At the moment I’ve actually removed them from my truck because after replacing the OEM UCAs with Nitro uppers, the UBJ became the bind point of the suspension at approximately 25.5” hub to fender. That’s a lot of travel and I observed the CVs getting extremely close to a bind at that point.

View attachment 3570784

View attachment 3570785

View attachment 3570786

The TLDR on these is simple:

More downtravel = more problems (for a 100)
But if all you’re looking for is higher ride height and to fit 37s or 38s to impress the ladies, these are for you

I think it would also be a good idea to specify here that you aren’t running AHC rams. You have a broken oem on one side and an IM FCP on the other(what a piece).
What is the length of that FCP compared to a AHC ram or stock length shock? That could be why you are dropping too much for cv and bj

 

[harshjay]

The discussion seems to be right on the money here.

I’m offering these primarily to those who want a “lift” on a budget while retaining OEM stroke height for the rams and/or allowing larger tires/more droop. There are many different reasons to run or not run these on a 100 Series.

At the moment I’ve actually removed them from my truck because after replacing the OEM UCAs with Nitro uppers, the UBJ became the bind point of the suspension at approximately 25.5” hub to fender. That’s a lot of travel and I observed the CVs getting extremely close to a bind at that point.

View attachment 3570784

View attachment 3570785

View attachment 3570786

The TLDR on these is simple:

More downtravel = more problems (for a 100)
But if all you’re looking for is higher ride height and to fit 37s or 38s to impress the ladies, these are for you

Groovy.

The discussion seems to be right on the money here.

I’m offering these primarily to those who want a “lift” on a budget while retaining OEM stroke height for the rams and/or allowing larger tires/more droop. There are many different reasons to run or not run these on a 100 Series.

At the moment I’ve actually removed them from my truck because after replacing the OEM UCAs with Nitro uppers, the UBJ became the bind point of the suspension at approximately 25.5” hub to fender. That’s a lot of travel and I observed the CVs getting extremely close to a bind at that point.

View attachment 3570784

View attachment 3570785

View attachment 3570786

The TLDR on these is simple:

More downtravel = more problems (for a 100)
But if all you’re looking for is higher ride height and to fit 37s or 38s to impress the ladies, these are for you

Nice. Ok, I am getting the niche these fill now.

We have 2x 100’s right now.

One is new+mint+16k kn odo. It got a 2” body lift, and I have a 37” tire I am going to massage into the front opening. It will be cosmetic, and be driven by my wife around town.

The other has 110k on odo, sway away TB’s, King rear with spacer. Now I want the 37” to be in this as well, so it will also receive a body lift, but maybe even a smidge more than 2”. I will also re-gear + lock at same time, and cut up and re-fab my Victory bumpers.

 

[harshjay]

But to answer the OPs question: to improve ride quality on a lifted AHC truck.

Right, but I don’t actually see them doing that, as you have changed the relationship.

 

[harshjay]

Limit straps with a bump stop drop, and nicer bump stop like from Perry parts would be a nice combo. Effectively moving your usuable travel down a little bit, would help keep your wheels outta the cruiser body.

Bump stop drop?

I swapped in a set of Timbren up front in my heavy 100 (7500 camping load out), to try and combat the squish+fender kiss

 

[harshjay]

Can I throw in an aside question here….

In say H+4lo, and you unload the rear end over a drop, do you hear a somewhat jarring thud?

Is that the ram on full extension?

Would the spacer help combat that nastiness?

Or a limit strap to help out?

 

[ga12r1]

Can I throw in an aside question here….

In say H+4lo, and you unload the rear end over a drop, do you hear a somewhat jarring thud?

Is that the ram on full extension?

Would the spacer help combat that nastiness?

Or a limit strap to help out?

Generally speaking the shocks are the limiter in the rear. So it definitely could be.
If you are gonna run a 37 you will likely need to extend the rear bump. When you do that I would advise either a shock spacer or cutting out 2” or so from the shock mount and welding it back up. There’s a lot of droop to be realized in the rear.

 

[BurnsCrew]

Bump stop drop?

I swapped in a set of Timbren up front in my heavy 100 (7500 camping load out), to try and combat the squish+fender kiss

Bump stop drop, for example like 1/4” washers to lower the bump stop and limit your uptravel by 1/2-3/4”. It does between the frame and your bumpstop. In my experience you get about 3x the uptravel limit from the size of the bump stop drop.

I’m sure @patch or Lee will chime in on this. But with the AHC ram, it’s a hydraulic system. So the dampening could be thrown off by lifting it 2”. By adding the ram spacer, you would put the ram closer to its OEM ride height so that it could appropriately dampen.

 

[BurnsCrew]

Generally speaking the shocks are the limiter in the rear. So it definitely could be.
If you are gonna run a 37 you will likely need to extend the rear bump. When you do that I would advise either a shock spacer or cutting out 2” or so from the shock mount and welding it back up. There’s a lot of droop to be realized in the rear.

Yes, Lee is right here. On other applications, like the 4runner. The rear 4 link can’t fully droop because the gas tank interferes. On the 80/100/200 platform. There is alot of room for the links to move.

I have done what Lee suggested on the rear axle housing, as well as added longer shocks, longer brake lines, spring retainers and 2” bump stop drops. At this point, it’s my opinion that you are pretty much maxed out on travel without elongating your E Brake line or wheel speed sensors.

 

[ga12r1]

@BurnsCrew with his rear shock mounts cut and relocted/shortened and 36s

 

[ga12r1]

Right, but I don’t actually see them doing that, as you have changed the relationship.

Simply put if someone does an AHC lift that leaves them with only 1” of droop the spacers will definitely and drastically improve ride quality. No way around it.

 

[BurnsCrew]

@BurnsCrew with his rear shock mounts cut and relocted/shortened and 36s
View attachment 3570824

There’s a little more travel left I believe. That rear wheel was still pushing down.

 

[ga12r1]

There’s a little more travel left I believe. That rear wheel was still pushing down.

Yeah .you weren’t maxed out. That’s just a quick photo I grabbed. That’s about how my truck looks maxed with the 37s

 

[BurnsCrew]

Reaaaaal nice.

 

[hoser]

Heyo,

What's the point of the shock spacer?

I read the description from CruiserPatch, but still doesn't seem to make sense.

If you have not modified the length of the control arm, and have done a 'sensor lift' (modified the selected ride height within the available range), you have not changed anything in regards to travel, nor the requirement for a longer or shorter 'shock'.

It seems much more so, that you have in fact compromised the shock cycling, and not left it open to bottoming out, and increasing bottom pressures and globe pressures.

Right?

Suspension travel range is unchanged, and shock is shortened.....that sounds like the wrong direction.

Using a shock spacer is the same as moving the lower shock mount, higher. You'll notice a lot of suspension kits use shocks that are the same/similar length as stock. If you lift the suspension and reduce the down travel, you'll certainly lift wheels more often. Using the shock spacer or raising the shock mount, you would gain down travel (and reduce up travel) but the percentage of up vs down would be more favorable for general wheeling.

For rock crawlers, generally 4" of up travel is good enough and you want the rest of the travel to go into down travel.

Those particular front extension brackets are a bit tall though for the front IFS. They are that way because they can't be any shorter without cutting into the mounts. Ideally, it would just be a custom mount. A limiting strap could work and actually would be better. I believe the front suspension hits the bumpstop much before the shock is fully compressed. Would have to measure again.

 

[GTV]

I believe 200 series AHC rear shocks are about 2” longer than the 100’s. I’m curious to know if they’re compatible.

 

[BurnsCrew]

I believe 200 series AHC rear shocks are about 2” longer than the 100’s. I’m curious to know if they’re compatible.

That’s a great question. I believe those rams are interchangeable. One of our buddies is swapping a 300 series AHC shock to his 100 rear AHC truck. Hopefully he comments on this particular scenario.

 

[hoser]

200 (Cheap at $60/ea)

100

 

[GTV]

I haven't taken a close look at the 100 series units but here's some details on the 200's-

Anatomy of an AHC shock

Fronts Measuring from center of eyelet to shoulder of shock piston Compressed - 18.75" Extended - 24.5" Monotube. 5.75" travel. 30mm shaft with internal oil passage. 43.5mm piston. 54.5mm shock body. Lower bushing - 16mm bolt hole, 53mm bushing shell Has internal valving. ~11 element...

forum.ih8mud.com

The 200 is heavier and judging by its coils a higher percentage of the vehicle weight is on them vs the 100. I'm not sure if that would have an effect or not.