(another) help me pick the right springs thread (1 Viewer)

[riffman12]

I promise I searched and I've looked through almost every thread I can relating to this.

My new to me 2003 LC has some reverse rake and I'd like to correct this for when I head out camping and load it up with more gear. I have most recently come from the AHC world and haven't dealt with conventional spring setups since my 80 back in the day.

The current setup:
- Icon shocks
- Factory torsion bars - 21.5" hub to fender (I believe these are lifted)
- OEM rear springs - 20.5" hub to fender with the current weight on board.

My current added weight:
- 150lb drawer and fridge slide setup in the back (these stay in the car year round)

My future expected weight:
- 150lb roof tent that I run for half the year
- I'd estimate an additional 30-50 lbs of gear in the back when I actually go camping
- I think I'll also be adding a tow hitch which the vehicle does not have at the moment - probably another 50ish lbs

As you can see I'm 1" lower in the back than the front. No good. My questions:

1) with a 21.5" hub to fender measurement in the front, can someone confirm this is higher than stock? It definitely sits higher than my LX in normal mode.

2) What would be the ideal spring for this application? I want to get some rear springs that will net me a slightly higher ride in the back than the front. I guess if I'm running 21.5" in the front I probably want 22.5" in the back with my everyday drawer weight?

The two options that seem most logical are the OME 2860 (2" lift, medium load) and the OME 2865 (1.5" lift, medium load). I'm assuming that with no rear aftermarket bumper the heavy load options will be overkill for my applications. I'm leaning towards the 2860 but worried the butt will be in the air when it's unloaded. I know there are also progressive rate springs and newer spring brands that I'm not as familiar with.

Any help would be greatly appreciated (or pics / measurements from other members)

Here's a pic of how it sits now:

 

[AlpineAccess]

OME medium rate 2.5" are what I had with that setup, minus the RTT but with more gear. Rode well and sat at 22" with a trim packer to offset the gas tank weight a little more.

 

[riffman12]

OME medium rate 2.5" are what I had with that setup, minus the RTT but with more gear. Road well and sat at 22" with a trim packer to offset the gas tank weight a little more.

Thanks! Do you have pics of that setup by chance?

 

[MountaineerLC]

Your front is too high and needs to be lowered for sure. Off the top of my head, the front on my stock LC is about 19.75".

 

[yackowski]

Ah, you're wanting the less than 23" stink bug look but also some height to match that front setup. I've been there lol. 2865 will need packers and still be pretty tired with that fridge setup when they settle. I swapped to 2866 and packers (15L/10R) and love it so far. I have a Dissent rear bumper, no third row and pull a trailer once a year and it holds up well with the spring progression.

*I have no experience with the following - just observations in my decision process. I think your next best OME bet would be the 2860 or 2863, but I think the 60 might sag too much when you load it up and the 63 would be stink bugged most of the year.

 

[riffman12]

Your front is too high and needs to be lowered for sure. Off the top of my head, the front on my stock LC is about 19.75".

Sorry I should have clarified. I like the height that the front is at. Trying to find a rear set up that works well with it.

Ah, you're wanting the less than 23" stink bug look but also some height to match that front setup. I've been there lol. 2865 will need packers and still be pretty tired with that fridge setup when they settle. I swapped to 2866 and packers (15L/10R) and love it so far. I have a Dissent rear bumper, no third row and pull a trailer once a year and it holds up well with the spring progression.

*I have no experience with the following - just observations in my decision process. I think your next best OME bet would be the 2860 or 2863, but I think the 60 might sag too much when you load it up and the 63 would be stink bugged most of the year.

the 866 is progressive right?

I'm leaning towards the 2860 to hopefully get a bit of rake when unloaded, but a level setup when loaded up.

 

[AlpineAccess]

Thanks! Do you have pics of that setup by chance?

I don't, but the 2.5" medium springs will settle about a half inch with the weight you're talking about.

You should net 22" - 22.5" of ride height with a few hundred pounds in the back which is what you want as the vehicle will handle much better with some rake.

I would recommend getting a 10mm trim packer for the gas tank side to even out the cruiser lean. In my experience, despite the spring's having an extra 5mm of height or so on the drivers side I ended up needing to add another 10mm to get it level with a full tank of fuel. You might find that you can load heavier gear on the passenger side and balance it that way, but I just throw stuff in where it fits.

 

[yackowski]

Sorry I should have clarified. I like the height that the front is at. Trying to find a rear set up that works well with it.


the 866 is progressive right?

I'm leaning towards the 2860 to hopefully get a bit of rake when unloaded, but a level setup when loaded up.

Yes they are. Ok yeah sounds like those two taller springs are definitely what you’re looking for. I’d do some searches on here with the spring numbers to narrow it down. It looks like both the 2860 and 2863 have a 10mm taller spring on the left so that’s nice.