For John. N74L vs N101 (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

ats4x4dotcom said:
I dont normally state the obvious, but now you have, I guess you could say that is correct, without making a mod like a bump stop spacer, which the N74 needs as well, you have only .6" more travel than a "standard 2-3" lift" or mod the mount, because a shock wont get longer extended, without being longer compressed, and the vehicle has fixed dimensions these need to fit into, unles you mod something........ are you still with me here? [if longer shocks was easy, everyone would be doing it, of course...]

So we use a 10mm body spacer, and no bump stop spacer, for our "normal" Bilstein premium package, which = within.6" of travel to the N74 mod, with 35's, and a small rub on the smooth inner fender in the rear is only telling you your suspension is almost maxed out, so dont think you need to limit travel just so tyres dont 'touch" because if your tyres dont rub, it means you can fit bigger ones :D .

So, basically what you're saying is you can't provide anything with better travel than what John has proposed with the N74L. On top of that, instead of adding a simple bumpstop extension to run the N74L, you add a 10 mm body lift to gain the same results? No thanks dude.

ats4x4dotcom said:
My only questioning has been how .6" could make so much difference to johns feel of the truck, and I have explained why the N74 doesnt make sense, for .6", thats why for a little more work, yo can make more gains than .6" but he seemed to be pretending to not understand the math,

That was not all you were questioning. You repeatedly bashed the N74L as inferior. I can go back and get quotes if you need me to. I think John explained himself just fine.

Also please respond to this post:
Greg B said:
I also want to add this. Some people are saying this is a .6" net gain. This is a blanket statement and is not true in all situations. Yes, it is true on a lifted 100 running 33's. You have to limit the upstroke by 2 inches with a bumpstop extension to gain the additional 2.6 inches of droop that the N74L's offer. This results in a net of .6 inches over the N101.

With a lifted 100 running 35's, this is not the case. In order to run the 35's, you have to use a bumpstop extension to keep the tires from rubbing in the fender wells. So, using an N101, you just lost two inches of up-travel. Which is a real trade-off for some people; loss of suspension travel to gain ground clearance from larger tires.

Now, go and add the N74L's like John did. You just got your full range of suspension travel back that you had before you started running 35's. As Christo said, as long as the spring doesn't unload you should feel pretty stable. If the spring stays loaded , how is that not a great improvement?

So far you haven't shown anything better.
 
GregB...here's one more partial pic for you. I cropped it in case Off Road uses the actual pic. In this spot I've never driven through without wheel lifting. I always teeter-totter. Look at this shot. Totally level truck and all 4 wheels on the ground. In fact, since the rear extends so much and it's still loaded it forces down the front end so the front wheel now doesn't lift. This is what I meant by being more "stable"...because it is! Normally here the rear flops down and the front wheel gets air. No more.

The system totally bolts on in minutes. I retained the 863 ONLY in the 100 because nobody had ever used this shock before. I did not retain it (like many others) in the same setup on the 80 and for 3+ years of crazy wheeling I've never lost a spring. This is an easy install. Heck, you can buy the drops from Slee all ready to bolt.

I'd luv to see another UZJ100 (not a solid front axle) with this much articulation. AUSSIE TRUCK SHOPS POST UP! (But with multiple photos to prove it's a UZJ. My rear plate proves that's me. :) ) I owned this vehicle with OME and 33's without bumpstop lowering and know it never flexed like this. This is one helluva improvement no matter what the #'s are. SCREW the numbers. :D

54092601-L.jpg
 
Last edited:
ShottsUZJ100 said:
GregB...here's one more partial pic for you.

I'd luv to see another UZJ100 (not a solid front axle) with this much articulation. AUSSIE TRUCK SHOPS POST UP! (But with multiple photos to prove it's a UZJ. My rear plate proves that's me. :) ) I owned this vehicle with OME and 33's without bumpstop lowering and know it never flexed like this. This is one helluva improvement no matter what the #'s are. SCREW the numbers. :D

John,
Thanks for the photo. I'm definitely doing it. I've already got the parts in my garage. Just waiting for the Slee bumper to get here so I can bolt everything up. I'll post pics when I'm done.
 
sleeoffroad said:
If the wheel had any pressure on it, why does it look like this tire just spun? Compare to tire on the other side? :D

Yer such a troublemaker. It could have in this general area. Actually, the twisties change direction and the suspension cycles here. Plus, I didn't lock here. Don't need too any more. :D
 
I`ve never seen so MANY people try to DISPROVE another member before...


Congrats John !! ;)
 
SINCITY100 said:
I`ve never seen so MANY people try to DISPROVE another member before...


Congrats John !! ;)

Its not disproving a member, its facing reality, the sums just dont add up, once the bump stop spacer is added.

Interesting the people who cant do the math all own a 100 ifs, and thought it was a good idea LOL.
 
Greg B said:
So, basically what you're saying is you can't provide anything with better travel than what John has proposed with the N74L. On top of that, instead of adding a simple bumpstop extension to run the N74L, you add a 10 mm body lift to gain the same results? No thanks dude.

Well, i spelled out an easy conversion, and what we offer standard has the same travel, without the spacer, so Im not sure what you mean here, I dont know if you have ever tried a 10mm body lift, but it uses the original bolts, and prevents the bull bar and rear bar from connecting with the panels when they get hit wheeling. given your limited experience though, from what your trying to say, becoming obvious, i will cut you some slack.



Greg B said:
That was not all you were questioning. You repeatedly bashed the N74L as inferior.


It is inferior, its valving, and build quality suck, and it has .6" more travel with the 50mm spacer.

Greg B said:
Also please respond to this post:


So far you haven't shown anything better.

Well "better" is the eye of the beholder I guess, and given you havent been able to be involved with anything we do, all I can go by is facts and data, from a much bigger core sample than one.... before seat of the pants of the individual, which doesnt support the data, but given you seem to have a limited knowledge on this subject, see above. You go for your .6" improverment, Im sure it will be good,.... because you thought so, as it would seem from what you have said, bolting on a spacer and a shock is within your realm of comprehension.

Dont forget to let us know how it goes.
 
Last edited:
ats4x4dotcom said:
It is inferior, its valving, and build quality suck.


I have had an OME steering damper blow out on me. A friggin' STEERING DAMPER!!! (This is on the 80.) I also have been in communication with a big LC community in South Africa and pretty much everyone there is going to Ranchos (I know, maybe not much better) because of OME blow-outs. Unfortunately, OME was it when I did my 80.

If Bilstein had an application, I'd be all over it like white on rice. I asked at one time about a 14" Bilstein application for 80s, but never got a response. I think it's the 7100??? It may require re-doing the shock mounts. If there is something similar for the 100, I'd be interested, as I don't think OME shocks will ever sit on my 100. OME coils and T-bars maybe, but not shocks.

IMHO, Bilstein makes a far superior shock, and Koni if it were more affordable. Tokico (OEM Toyota) are also excellent. After that, you have to go custom. I've got a lot of experience with Billys in road vehicles, and in terms of quality they are tough to beat.

My $0.02,
 
dclee said:
If Bilstein had an application, I'd be all over it like white on rice. I asked at one time about a 14" Bilstein application for 80s, but never got a response. I've got a lot of experience with Billys in road vehicles, and in terms of quality they are tough to beat.
My $0.02,

14" on a "standard" armed 80 would be more travel then the suspension could use, but we are working on a bilstein shock to suit 4" lifted 80 here. 10" and 12" travel shocks generally cope with standard bushes, non swivel arms and no A frame

We are also doing a Fox bypass and emulsion shock package over the next month or so, now we have all the data and have the 80 longer shocks ordered, looking forward to the bypass shock on my vehicle.

2.5-bypass2top.jpg


p_offroad_noncoil_20x58_remote_reservoir_l.jpg
 
ats4x4dotcom said:
14" on a "standard" armed 80 would be more travel then the suspension could use, but we are working on a bilstein shock to suit 4" lifted 80 here. 10" and 12" travel shocks generally cope with standard bushes, non swivel arms and no A frame

We are also doing a Fox bypass and emulsion shock package over the next month or so, now we have all the data and have the 80 longer shocks ordered, looking forward to the bypass shock on my vehicle.


NICE! :eek:

So, will Christo be your agent in the States...
 
ats4x4dotcom said:
Its not disproving a member, its facing reality, the sums just dont add up, once the bump stop spacer is added.

Interesting the people who cant do the math all own a 100 ifs, and thought it was a good idea LOL.

I'm sure you have pictures of your system in order to aid your sales? Please post some of an IFS 100 that shows the rear articulation (like my pic above). Thanks much! If it's better I'd be the first in the US to do it.
 
SINCITY100 said:
I`ve never seen so MANY people try to DISPROVE another member before...
Congrats John !! ;)

Actually, we are just janking his chain :) Just think, if John was not posting all these pictures, we would have to work all day and have no fun.

I know that the truck gets more droop. It has always been known that the shocks limit the travel and that you get more droop with longer shocks, however it is important to know that you loose up travel.

I think Darren is debating total travel, vs just droop in the case of John.

Darren also advocate more distance between the shock mounts, so that one can also gain uptravel and not have to bumpstop the vehicle to protect the shock. Takes more work, but would be nice to have travel in both directions.
 
I have an observation on the topic of loosing suspension compression with John's setup. It would appear in John's last photo that the tire can be stuffed almost to the point of the tire rubbing the wheel well when resting on the bumpstop. That picture depicts all of the compression that a 35" tire is capable of so why is more compression from the shock beneficial?

SO, where I'm going with this is that if you can stuff the tire to the point of rubbing then the focus should infact from that point on be maximizing droop until the point that added droop takes away from compression just enough so that the tire barely rubs or almost rubs when fully compressed. It would appear to me that if he had more up travel left on the shock it would be wasted as the tire is fully stuffed already and the extra compression left on the shock would not be utilized. If shock compression is available but not reachable then the maximum droop is reduced.

To make a long story short here's what I'm having trouble grasping:

Someone explain to me how (one more time I guess) there is a loss of uptravel if the wheel well is still being reached by the tire? I'm just failing to see how his setup's uptravel is inferior to an alternative setup with a mystery shock if the tire can't go any further up!

It would seem in this thread that if both John's and Darren's setups can stuff the tires, and John's shocks allow for more droop then there's more total travel there. I either think that the two of them are not measuring the same specs or are not measuring from the same spots but something appears inconsistent.

As much as I hate to say it, and at the risk of sounding like a stat jockey, would an RTI comparison on similar degree ramps clear the air any? I'm gonna go get a beer now. :beer:
 
I still can not grasp why you would approach fitting shocks "off the shelf" for a different application, slap them on a fairly modified suspension setup of springs and not bother to actually do it the way the rest of the world does - actually measure the compressed distance between the shock mounts and the extended distance :doh: :rolleyes:

I mean how hard is that? And once you know those measurements you could then choose the appropriate compressed/extended length of shock and then go about figuring out the valving, etc. This would also be the time to consider modifying the shock mounts to suit your needs/desires.

I brought this up previously as I've never seen any numbers from how much shock travel is getting used. Like when that tire is stuffed how long is the shock? Is the shock truly maxed out in length or is something else limiting travel? How do you know if you don't measure the shock?

Also, this is where Darren's 10-mm body lift makes a difference in how much up travel can be accomplished.

John, please start carrying around a tape measure!

Oh, and Derek, the 80's use of the Bilstein 7100 14" travel and the valving is on the 80's list. As far as I know there are at least 4 people running them.

Darren, the Fox's are very well praised by the pre-runner folks out here in the desert and by the Rover folks - go figure.
 
tabraha said:
I have an observation on the topic of loosing suspension compression with John's setup. It would appear in John's last photo that the tire can be stuffed almost to the point of the tire rubbing the wheel well when resting on the bumpstop. That picture depicts all of the compression that a 35" tire is capable of so why is more compression from the shock beneficial?

SO, where I'm going with this is that if you can stuff the tire to the point of rubbing then the focus should infact from that point on be maximizing droop until the point that added droop takes away from compression just enough so that the tire barely rubs or almost rubs when fully compressed. It would appear to me that if he had more up travel left on the shock it would be wasted as the tire is fully stuffed already and the extra compression left on the shock would not be utilized. If shock compression is available but not reachable then the maximum droop is reduced.

To make a long story short here's what I'm having trouble grasping:

Someone explain to me how (one more time I guess) there is a loss of uptravel if the wheel well is still being reached by the tire? I'm just failing to see how his setup's uptravel is inferior to an alternative setup with a mystery shock if the tire can't go any further up!

It would seem in this thread that if both John's and Darren's setups can stuff the tires, and John's shocks allow for more droop then there's more total travel there. I either think that the two of them are not measuring the same specs or are not measuring from the same spots but something appears inconsistent.

As much as I hate to say it, and at the risk of sounding like a stat jockey, would an RTI comparison on similar degree ramps clear the air any? I'm gonna go get a beer now. :beer:




Tad: That is why the Aussie is promoting the 10mm body lift. Although 10mm seems like it would hardly be worth the effort...but who am I to judge :)
 
sleeoffroad said:
Actually, we are just janking his chain :) Just think, if John was not posting all these pictures, we would have to work all day and have no fun.

I know that the truck gets more droop. It has always been known that the shocks limit the travel and that you get more droop with longer shocks, however it is important to know that you loose up travel.

Darren also advocate more distance between the shock mounts, so that one can also gain uptravel and not have to bumpstop the vehicle to protect the shock. Takes more work, but would be nice to have travel in both directions.

I guess thats what I am a-wonderin`.....HMMM..I know length is restricted by the (OE) mounts, so can an extension bracket for the shock be fabbed to allow the shock to maintain its full (stock) compression, yet open up longer when extended?... now I am REALLY confused !! ( Its fairly easy for me)..

If nothing else, the mod (if possible) would silence many ...

But you have a point Christo...It IS fun to yank Johns chain !!
 
dclee said:
NICE! :eek:

So, will Christo be your agent in the States...

Im sure Christo can produce a similar set up easily, but Im sure he will get some pics in his email in box when completed.

As for the 10mm body lift, its easy, uses the standard bolts, takes about 1hr, and is all that is needed, which is what we aim for. Why do a 2" bodylift if 10mm achieves the required result?

On my troopy [2001]I ran 36 x 13/16 TSL's on 10" rims, with 3" suspension lift, and 10mm body lift, and rear bump stops on the front, which were slightly longer [20ish mm] so they didnt rub articulated. I also had 80 front shocks [similar front suspension] making 70mm more droop with sway bar spacers for the tail shaft, and I modded the rear of the front control arms to take a castor correction bush, moving the diff forward 14mm, to stop the tyres rubbing on the lock, along with a fender flatten of the body seam, and some new mud flaps.

My rear shocks were also extra long, and I modded an OME spring pack to suit my requirement, and had the shocks valved to suit [was close to coil spring valving to stop weight transfer]

On my 40 [in 2000] we moved the front fenders up to the bonnet line, and made the rear arches bigger, longer, same as the front, and stretched the wheelbase to 98" using 60 series springs, so with 38"s it looked fairly normal, until it got close, on the road, and we did this by redrilling centre bolt holes in the diff plates, moving big eye mounts for the springs on the chassis, using 75 series power steering, wider housings, widening the front fenders, and swapping the rear chassis x member shock mounts to the rear of the pipe section, instead of the front, and cut the sills off, to match the bottom of the fenders new height.

On my prado we panel beated the front inner fenders, and re painted them with factory wrinkle paint, to allow 285's on 80 series offset rims to fit in the original fenders with no body lift, and a 3" suspension lift, with no bump stop spacers, so the movement of the rim outward on the 80 offset, stopped them rubbing on the chassis on the lock.

On my 80 we used a 30mm body lift, to fit 36" swampers [back in 1996,] with 75 series rear shocks, we changed the top mount on because they were the longest we could get at the time, and had them re valved. [had to use a 20mm bump stop spacer then] We also changed the rear mounts by cutting them off the housing, shortening them, and re fitting them to the diff housing, as well as moving the rear top mount up to suit, along with moving the spare wheel mounts up the 30mm + to fit the spare under as high as we could.

On my current vehicle we spaced the control arms forward 15mm [the amount of thread available] fitted copies of factory flares made 4" longer so we could cut out the fender, and trimmed alot from inside the fender, used 3.25" backspaced 17 x 10" beadlocked rims to stop them hitting on the lock, and made the tray fenders to suit, so the 40" tyres fitted with no bodylift, and we cut and trimmed the steel bull bar. [This keeps the vehicle looking balanced with biger tyres]The 6" springs work well with our extra long shocks [described already in this thread] and we have spaced the factory front bump stop 30mm down, to stop the tyres rubbing, but have gained 130mm of travel there still, and in the rear we have an offset steel bracket to alter the bump stop by 40mm, but offset it so at slow articulation, where the shock has in built hydro lock, the bump stop goes down beside the spacer, not restricting travel, but at speed, the spacer will contact the bump stop.

The spacers are there until we get the Fox shox with internal bump stop fitted, and the rear gained 160mm of travel,for fitment of the bracket, and we are at max travel of the standard bushes, and arms with this set up.

These are the sort of mods which dont look like "booty fab" [rhs on its flat, drilled out hockey pucks, afterthought looking flat bar brackets, cut up platic chopping board packers etc,] and to the average person, dont look modified, and this is what we try to achieve, is a balance, so the car stands out for its balanced look, and seemingly factory parts looks, and we do it this way, because anyone can do "booty fab"
 
Last edited:
tabraha said:
I have an observation on the topic of loosing suspension compression with John's setup. It would appear in John's last photo that the tire can be stuffed almost to the point of the tire rubbing the wheel well when resting on the bumpstop. That picture depicts all of the compression that a 35" tire is capable of so why is more compression from the shock beneficial?
any? I'm gonna go get a beer now. :beer:

For the same reason more droop is, because both contribute to your total travel. Johns suspension tavels within.6" of the last shock he had fitted, it just moves up and down in a new plane 50mm lower than previous, because it goes up 50mm less, and comes down 60mm more, so total pretty much same for the effort, which is most noticable on a ramp, because you can move the amount of travel up or down as much as you like, but if the total travel is the same amount, it wont go any further up the ramp.

John needs to run at least 20mm bump stop spacer for that shock, but that would improve up travel by 30mm [1 1/4"] with the extra .6" making around 1 3/4" extra travel, and a 10mm body lift would mean the tyre has more room to be compressed, which would also mean you could space the shock up the extra 10mm, and them you only need a 10mm bump stop spacer, so you then gain another 10mm of travel, increasing your total gain at the rear to over 2 1/8" , and then, if you cut the thread off flush with the nut, you could gain another 1/2" travel by removing the current 10mm bump stop spacer, improving total rear travel by 2 3/4" [aprox] but if the tyre touches an area that doesnt hurt the tyre, then let them rub, I say, because you then get an audible warning in the drivers seat, that your about to run out of travel ;)
 
ats4x4dotcom said:
For the same reason more droop is, because both contribute to your total travel. Johns suspension tavels within.6" of the last shock he had fitted, it just moves up and down in a new plane 50mm lower than previous, because it goes up 50mm less, and comes down 60mm more, so total pretty much same for the effort, which is most noticable on a ramp, because you can move the amount of travel up or down as much as you like, but if the total travel is the same amount, it wont go any further up the ramp.

John needs to run at least 20mm bump stop spacer for that shock, but that would improve up travel by 30mm [1 1/4"] with the extra .6" making around 1 3/4" extra travel, and a 10mm body lift would mean the tyre has more room to be compressed, which would also mean you could space the shock up the extra 10mm, and them you only need a 10mm bump stop spacer, so you then gain another 10mm of travel, increasing your total gain at the rear to over 2 1/8" , and then, if you cut the thread off flush with the nut, you could gain another 1/2" travel by removing the current 10mm bump stop spacer, improving total rear travel by 2 3/4" [aprox] but if the tyre touches an area that doesnt hurt the tyre, then let them rub, I say, because you then get an audible warning in the drivers seat, that your about to run out of travel ;)



Ok...I give up..would somebody just make a step-by-step instruction manual with any required parts (less shocks even) so someone with a clue (not me) can do this ?

It sounds as if a more capable 100 is possible with a few, fairly simple modifications

Its funny how, even though there is a market for a product...no-one takes the time to make it readily available...unless, of course, there are several thousand people asking for it at the same time !!

And dont give me that " it has to be relativley profitable in order to produce" crap !!

My point is..build it and they will buy it !!

Oh, damn....I forgot we are talking about the 100 series...NOBODY WHEELS A 100 !! Heh Heh...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom