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

[harshjay]

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.

Japan 4x4 100 Series AHC Shock Spacers

AHC shock spacers return the internal ram to factory position after a sensor lift on a 100 Series Toyota Land Cruiser or Lexus LX470. They are designed to be bolted onto the lower control arm in the front (some drilling required) and bolted between the rear shock mount and shock on the rear...

www.cruiserpatch.com

 

[GTV]

Extensions keep shocks working in their designed range after a lift.

I have not tested it personally but I believe that the shock is the first thing to bottom out on droop. More droop = more travel.

 

[harshjay]

Extensions keep shocks working in their designed range after a lift.

I have not tested it personally but I believe that the shock is the first thing to bottom out on droop. More droop = more travel.

hmmmm, sure....but now one would have eliminated compression range, and the travel has not been modified, just the position within the range

So, if it did provide a bit more droop....all things being equal, this increased downward travel will be translated into increased bushing torsion, and driveline angles...so nothing is free. Sound like a big risk from solid engineering in the OEM position.

 

[GTV]

Every modification comes with compromises.

 

[ga12r1]

Every modification comes with compromises.

if one is concerned with those things then one shouldn’t be running a “AHC lift” to begin with.

 

[harshjay]

if one is concerned with those things then one shouldn’t be running a “AHC lift” to begin with.

The sensor ‘lift’ is a funny one. Not actually a lift, just a reposition within a fixed range of travel.

 

[ga12r1]

The sensor ‘lift’ is a funny one. Not actually a lift, just a reposition within a fixed range of travel.

Indeed. But it definitely changes CV angle, BJ angle, and a few other things from a place they would be maybe only 5% of the time to a place they will be 100% of the time.
Definitely not what OEM had in mind but it’s a compromise most are willing to make

 

[harshjay]

Indeed. But it definitely changes CV angle, BJ angle, and a few other things from a place they would be maybe only 5% of the time to a place they will be 100% of the time.
Definitely not what OEM had in mind but it’s a compromise most are willing to make

I still see no benefit.

You can run a bigger tire? But, now you can’t actually use all your travel.

Bad Ju Ju it seems

 

[ga12r1]

I still see no benefit.

You can run a bigger tire? But, now you can’t actually use all your travel.

Bad Ju Ju it seems

I mean I don’t either. “Lift” on this platform doesn’t allow increased tire size. I see no reason to run a lift.
Although with the AHC spacers you could run a larger tire size because you can lengthen the bump stop and not lose any travel. So that is definitely a benefit to some willing to compromise.

 

[harshjay]

I mean I don’t either. “Lift” on this platform doesn’t allow increased tire size. I see no reason to run a lift.
Although with the AHC spacers you could run a larger tire size because you can lengthen the bump stop and not lose any travel. So that is definitely a benefit to some willing to compromise.

Yah, we are on the same page.

I want full travel range, biggest tire, and retain full AHC.

So far, body lift is the ticket.

 

[ga12r1]

Yah, we are on the same page.

I want full travel range, biggest tire, and retain full AHC.

So far, body lift is the ticket.

Yes, I think we are.

Im a huge proponent of body lifts and think more guys should be running them. It's strange that they aren't more popular.

Most guys with traditionally sprung LCs get away with 35s without too much drama because their aftermarket torsion bars are handcuffing their articulation and not allowing full bump except for in extreme situations. Guys running AHC aren't handcuffed by those overly heavy bars and they can easily go to full bump. Some guys that put true 35s on AHC trucks find that the tires get into the fenders causing damage with moderate wheeling while traditionally sprung LCs do not.

The only real answer to this is either a body lift or spacing down the bumpstops. if you space down the bumps without a longer shock you lose travel. These spacers would allow you to regain that travel. If the CVs and BJ will handle the droop I say it's a win.

All that being said I definitely see uses for the spacers depending on the case. I would love to see more experimentation with them, pushing the limits.

 

[cruiserpatch]

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.

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

 

[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

Limiting straps set just right could be the answer.

 

[cruiserpatch]

Limiting straps set just right could be the answer.

I’ve been considering that as an option as well. Perhaps I can cook something up

 

[ga12r1]

I’ve been considering that as an option as well. Perhaps I can cook something up

Talk to Scuba Steve and Shawn. They seem to be all in on them.

 

[BurnsCrew]

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.

 

[BurnsCrew]

To me, it’s a fine tuning thing.

 

[ga12r1]

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.

Is there an echo in here Zach?

 

[BurnsCrew]

Is there an echo in here Zach?

That’s right. I guess so!

 

[BurnsCrew]

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