Icon Vehicle Dynamics Suspension Review (1 Viewer)

[Reckless]

So after years of deliberating, I finally pulled the trigger on Black Friday for a complete set of 2.5 Icon Coilovers RR with CDC ($2550). It was a very difficult decision and I had many second thoughts during the 2 month waiting period. I am very serious about my Land Cruiser and wanted the best suspension money could buy for my needs (comfort, handling, high speed driving). In retrospect I believe my stock suspension was shot even though there were no external leaks.

What drew me to Icons was the high speed handling (digressive springs) and alot of positive feedback from mud members (BIG, BIG THANKS!!!).

I have never seen coilovers or used them so this is my first experience with a set. I wanted to keep stock height and originally wanted to level out the vehicle (no rake). I didn't fully realize that leveling out the rake would increase the height by 1" making it more difficult for entry for my parents. Not too happy about seeing them struggle getting in and out (makes me think of AHC each time).

This review is a bit early as I have not been able to fiddle with the rear settings- it is set to S currently and my guys and I could not find the remote resis out in the dark, muddy cornfield. (I thought the rears were supposed to be mounted in the wheel well - not sure if my mechanic improvised - he did mention that the Slee sliders changed the routing). Also, rear shocks are making my Bruiser's butt sit extra high in the air as they are not broken in yet.

On the pavement:
Car is not jarring anymore at speeds above 20-25 mph. Under 10 mph it seems much worse than stock and bounces all over the place in super rough terrain. Kind of a pain in slow, jammed parking lots that are completely torn up. At highway speeds it is amazing and smooth. I have been testing various settings and I notice the more firm I put the fronts the more comfortable it gets at high speeds. Currently running 8 on the fronts, drove 150 miles @ 80+mph and I am not tired, nor is my back or legs hurting. Previously, my body would tire from the bumpiness. There are still minor bumps but overall no jarriness. I thought it might take out even the minor bumps but that might be wishful thinking. In the beginning I did feel every crack and crevice on the road but not feeling it soo much now.

Offroad:
Chicago warmed up this weekend and so the mud was extra muddy. We drove through some cornfields at 40 mph (front 8, rear S). I wanted to firm up the rear to see if we could go faster but the mud felt like we were sinking if we stood still in it. I plan on trying this again soon once I talk to my mechanic about adjusting rear settings.

Handling:
It is beyond amazing. U-turns are now a one lane affair (used to take me more than 2 lanes). I am pretty sure turning radius is less than my 2001 BMW 750IL. Also, before at speeds over 80mph I felt like there wasn't proper control and would hardly go higher than 80mph unless out in the open. I am still getting used to the car being 1" taller. It's lost a little bit of the aerodynamic feel of nimbly cutting through the wind but it corners much better now. I am more confident driving and adjusting the settings feels like it changes the tightness in the steering wheel. Softer I set it the looser the steering wheel becomes. The handling feels much more crisp and sharp and body roll is greatly, greatly reduced.

Comfort:
I realize comfort is all in the rear spring now. Since I am using stock rear springs, ride is plush. I wouldn't call it super plush but its good especially at speed - much better than stock. I am still trying to see how much of a difference adjusting the CDC valve makes. At first it didn't feel like much difference between settings from a comfort perspective. I noticed it mostly at high speeds. But starting to notice it more now after putting 100+ miles. Not sure if I should change rear setting for highway, S is supposed to be softer than stock.

Braking:
No more nose diving under heavy braking. Much more controlled, probably due to being level.

Tire Pressure:
I have kept it at 42 right now but read a different review that found 38psi better. May try that soon.

Armour?
Not seeing the pavement move as I throttle makes me think I am moving slower or maybe I am fighting more wind resistance? Either way I have been throttling more. Its making me think of putting on the front deluxe ARB winch bumper I have lying around. Only reason I didn't install it is because I didn't want to increase drag. But it may be lost now since I am 1" taller? How much worse can it get? I don't like the idea of 'strapping a fat chick on the bumper' as some other mudder put it. It sounds like it might mess up handling.

Final Thoughts:
My initial impression was handling and comfort were going to be better than what they turned out. They were good but not as much as I was wishing for. I was wishing for the impossible - Super Plush and razor sharp handling. I would say it is plush and has sharp handling. Definitely a great improvement and probably the best 5800 lbs SUV is going to get.

Would I do it again?
Most likely, I think this set was perfect for me other than having to lift 1" in the front. I might have tried going a different route but don't think I'd get the satisfaction I am getting from the Icons. I imagine in order to fit the larger piston they had to increase travel by increasing vehicle height. The CDC option has been nice but not sure how much I am going to fiddle with it.

 

[RyanR]

Great review! I have felt similarly about every suspension setup I have had. Huge gains in some areas and compromise in others. I would love to see ICON develop a remote electronic actuator for their CDC setup so you could adjust on the fly.

 

[linuxgod]

Under 10 mph it seems much worse than stock and bounces all over the place in super rough terrain

Not surprised, actually. That's the difference between a progressive and a digressive shock. Progressive shocks start out soft and get stiffer the harder you run them. Digressive shocks start off stiff and get softer the harder you run them.

If it's too bumpy now, drive faster

 

[Reckless]

My thoughts exactly!

I have been very curious will progressive shock handle high speeds really well? Or is digressive much better for this?

I found the rear CDC adjustment near the slide step.

 

[Markuson]

Thanks for the detailed post.
Glad you are pleased.
Your comments about low-speed rough terrain sound normal to me.

The part that doesn’t make sense to me is the report of dramatic reduction in turning radius. That should not dramatically change simply due to a lift.

?

 

[Reckless]

I don't think it was the lift. The dramatic change happened from putting their shocks on in place of the stock rear shocks. Car started turning almost on a dime. I can do it with speed now. Reminded me of an experience when I when I was 16 test driving a 300zx with my dad trying to convince him to let me get one and we both were enjoying doing u turns on the street. The 300zx was really low to the ground so it made u turns almost effortlessly. The LC being tall and bulky is not as nice but with the icons started to feel like a ballerina.

 

[Markuson]

I don't think it was the lift. The dramatic change happened from putting their shocks on in place of the stock rear shocks. Car started turning almost on a dime. I can do it with speed now. Reminded me of an experience when I when I was 16 test driving a 300zx with my dad trying to convince him to let me get one and we both were enjoying doing u turns on the street. The 300zx was really low to the ground so it made u turns almost effortlessly. The LC being tall and bulky is not as nice but with the icons started to feel like a ballerina.

Hmmm... No biggie, and not meaning to argue...
It's just that rear shocks shouldn't have any detectable effect on turning radius either.
They simply dampen/rebound at different rates than the originals when hitting dips or bumps. But unless you have rear-wheel steering like a Monster Truck...it wouldn't change the turn. You could (theoretically) have NO rear shocks--just tires attached to a solid, free-wheeling axle--and your rear tires will still follow your turn essentially the same as before.

But anyway... No biggie. Sounds like you are pretty happy with your Icons.

 

[Reckless]

I don't mind being corrected and I fully agree it doesn't make complete sense to me either. So don't feel shy about putting me in my place. I'd rather learn.

I had my mechanic put front suspension first day and rear suspension second day. I wanted to see what the difference was. My buddy and I both noticed that on second day the car had much, much less body roll. It was actually turning much differently. I wasn't expecting such a dramatic change. On first day my buddy wanted to test the limits of the front suspension and he was going 100mph on the highway and we started drifting because the back end was coming out. Same stretch of highway I am able to go over 120mph now and not feel the back end come loose at all.

I don't know if it could be that the suspension was causing the rear end of the vehicle to be jacked really high in the air. It looked way out of place.

 

[Markuson]

I don't mind being corrected and I fully agree it doesn't make complete sense to me either. So don't feel shy about putting me in my place. I'd rather learn.

I had my mechanic put front suspension first day and rear suspension second day. I wanted to see what the difference was. My buddy and I both noticed that on second day the car had much, much less body roll. It was actually turning much differently. I wasn't expecting such a dramatic change. On first day my buddy wanted to test the limits of the front suspension and he was going 100mph on the highway and we started drifting because the back end was coming out. Same stretch of highway I am able to go over 120mph now and not feel the back end come loose at all.

I don't know if it could be that the suspension was causing the rear end of the vehicle to be jacked really high in the air. It looked way out of place.

I don't ever intend to put you in your place. Just thinkin...

And yes. On my setup, it's feels similarly better and better the faster I'm driving. Slow, dramatic bumps are alway felt more, since the slow speed means the truck has time to be pushed up, or dip down into ruts/holes. Wondering if maybe the turn radius seemed better because of the lack of body roll. I know in my little WRX, there was nothing more fun than cornering because it stayed mostly level and just felt glued to the road. It FELT like it turned on a dime, even though it's actual turn radius wasn't particularly stellar.

 

[TeCKis300]

Glad you are able to document your impressions. This will be useful for others that want to take that step without having had a chance to experience them in person. As has been mentioned, suspension tuning is a highly intertwined mix of performance compromises.

I agree with Markuson on your turning impressions. It's just that initial turn-in feels that much sharper as there's less associated roll.

Curious, sounds like you're still running stock rear springs??

As a avid suspension guy, any particular reason you've chosen this route? As most suspension systems are tuned as a system, you'd be surprised by the consequences of tuning one axle and its impact to the other end. With a relatively softer rear spring rate, that end will get more of the work to relieve suspension energy transferred from the front. I'm not sure your rear passengers may have the same impressions on comfort as they're experience will be more dictated by the rear bouncing due to the relatively higher front spring rate.

Also with a stiffer front spring. In regards to higher speed cornering. The stiffer front axle roll-rate will actually make the car understeer more at high speed. This matches your impression that the rear stays more planted. This might be a good thing for what you're looking for. Though on asphalt performance will see the rig be slower (but more stable) in spirited back-country driving.

 

[robe]

So after years of deliberating, I finally pulled the trigger on Black Friday for a complete set of 2.5 Icon Coilovers RR with CDC ($2550). It was a very difficult decision and I had many second thoughts during the 2 month waiting period. I am very serious about my Land Cruiser and wanted the best suspension money could buy for my needs (comfort, handling, high speed driving). In retrospect I believe my stock suspension was shot even though there were no external leaks.

What drew me to Icons was the high speed handling (digressive springs) and alot of positive feedback from mud members (BIG, BIG THANKS!!!).

Glad to hear your suspension is finally on and that you are happy with the results. Sounds like your experience so far is very similar to mine. And, like you, I at one point thought I'd have the best of all worlds - "super plush and razor sharp handling" looks etc. I've come to the conclusion that I will not get my stock ride feel without sacrificing another trait. Having said that, I'm enjoying my Icon set up more and more, and I'm certain you will too. Now from all this writing you did (great job by the way), you missed one thing (or maybe I did) - and the pictures!?!?

Robert

 

[Reckless]

I don't ever intend to put you in your place. Just thinkin...

And yes. On my setup, it's feels similarly better and better the faster I'm driving. Slow, dramatic bumps are alway felt more, since the slow speed means the truck has time to be pushed up, or dip down into ruts/holes. Wondering if maybe the turn radius seemed better because of the lack of body roll. I know in my little WRX, there was nothing more fun than cornering because it stayed mostly level and just felt glued to the road. It FELT like it turned on a dime, even though it's actual turn radius wasn't particularly stellar.

You are probably right. I did feel that it was a tighter circle but it may be how I cut the the turn. I did one of those go out and cut back in and it took less than half the cul de sac which seemed amazing at the time.

 

[Reckless]

Glad you are able to document your impressions. This will be useful for others that want to take that step without having had a chance to experience them in person. As has been mentioned, suspension tuning is a highly intertwined mix of performance compromises.

I agree with Markuson on your turning impressions. It's just that initial turn-in feels that much sharper as there's less associated roll.

Curious, sounds like you're still running stock rear springs??

As a avid suspension guy, any particular reason you've chosen this route? As most suspension systems are tuned as a system, you'd be surprised by the consequences of tuning one axle and its impact to the other end. With a relatively softer rear spring rate, that end will get more of the work to relieve suspension energy transferred from the front. I'm not sure your rear passengers may have the same impressions on comfort as they're experience will be more dictated by the rear bouncing due to the relatively higher front spring rate.

Also with a stiffer front spring. In regards to higher speed cornering. The stiffer front axle roll-rate will actually make the car understeer more at high speed. This matches your impression that the rear stays more planted. This might be a good thing for what you're looking for. Though on asphalt performance will see the rig be slower (but more stable) in spirited back-country driving.

My idea was not to lift the vehicle. I wasn't aware of any springs recommended for no lifts. I called Icon and that was they recommended for my situation. I also have OME phobia from my 100. When I was buying the set I thought I could run the setup at completely stock height without any lift. The website says 0-3" lift it should say 1-3" lift.

I did have a friend in the back when we were flying over the corn fields he didn't complain but I didn't pay full attention as we couldn't find the CDC valve (its next to slider). I am going to check rear comfort this weekend. I am going to setup my mattress in the back and have my friends drive me and see what my back says.

 

[OregonLC]

Has anyone driven the BP-51s back-to-back against the 2.5 CDCV Icon's?

I have Raflo 2.5s on the 100 and the ride report is similar; firm and a bit harsh when slow but butter on big stuff. It's competition engineering; high on perfomance at the expense of comfort. While the BP-51s are (numerically) a lesser shock, I wonder if they wouldn't be a better ride mate for all-around use. I may be willing to sacrifice performace above 9/10ths if it is comfy at 1/10th.

 

[Markuson]

Has anyone driven the BP-51s back-to-back against the 2.5 CDCV Icon's?

I have Raflo 2.5s on the 100 and the ride report is similar; firm and a bit harsh when slow but butter on big stuff. It's competition engineering; high on perfomance at the expense of comfort. While the BP-51s are (numerically) a lesser shock, I wonder if they wouldn't be a better ride mate for all-around use. I may be willing to sacrifice performace above 9/10ths if it is comfy at 1/10th.

I’m extremely happy with my BP setup...but it’s hard to fully convey in writing, since my “plush” my be someone else’s “harsh.”

Also...it’s a lot more complicated than which system you run. Each of them are changed dramatically by 4 factors:
-Rear spring rates and type...
-Front preload selected
-Compression/rebound settings selected
-Over-all rig weight (fully loaded of empty)

So...even driving those in two separate trucks side by side still won’t tell the full difference since each can be dramatically different in feel due to those 4 variables.

 

[OregonLC]

Fair enough, but you should be able to get a pretty good idea of the baseline response of the systems. If the Icon is harsh at slow speeds when light it will still be relatively harsh when loaded up. Similarly if the BP-51s start to fade on rough roads in town, they'll be a problem on the trail.

I'd just be curious to read the impressions of two similarly outfit 200s with the two different setups.

 

[Markuson]

Fair enough, but you should be able to get a pretty good idea of the baseline response of the systems. If the Icon is harsh at slow speeds when light it will still be relatively harsh when loaded up. Similarly if the BP-51s start to fade on rough roads in town, they'll be a problem on the trail.

I'd just be curious to read the impressions of two similarly outfit 200s with the two different setups.

I'm similarly curious and I do understand your point and question. It's one of those frustrations when trying to figure it all out.
I mention it mainly because both systems can be poorly matched to a purpose and weight.
Rear springs and front pre-load have a massive impact on ride. The greatest shock in the world will feel nasty if rear springs are too stiff, etc.

I think a GREAT comparison might be hopping in @Willy beamin rig and Icons--because he had Icon calibrate for his specific truck weight/use...so it is known to be set up very well. I might have to ask if I can hop in there this Summer in Moab, etc.. Very curious myself.

 

[OregonLC]

Completely agree. And not to mention driving style and terrain type. I once had ambition to build my 100 as a mild crawler, but discovered that remote camping ('overlanding') was more my thing than the offroad parks. Point being, I'll trade some performance for comfort.

Have you had any fade out on your BP-51's? You have a decent amount of metal on your rig to push around those BP-51 valves.

 

[Markuson]

Completely agree. And not to mention driving style and terrain type. I once had ambition to build my 100 as a mild crawler, but discovered that remote camping ('overlanding') was more my thing than the offroad parks. Point being, I'll trade some performance for comfort.

Have you had any fade out on your BP-51's? You have a decent amount of metal on your rig to push around those BP-51 valves.

If there has been fade, it has been too small to change how I drove, and frankly was not noticed. I've done a good deal of desert runs at speed, and they've performed extremely well. Nothing like a race, but certainly enough to give them a long, steady workout overruns, dips and everything in between.

And ya, I am definitely heavy, as you say. With my wife and only moderate gear, extra fuel & water (and my drawers which are always full), we tipped the CAT scale at 8160#...and that was with about 9 gallons missing from my tank. But then about 400# of that were people.

 

[Reckless]

Has anyone driven the BP-51s back-to-back against the 2.5 CDCV Icon's?

I have Raflo 2.5s on the 100 and the ride report is similar; firm and a bit harsh when slow but butter on big stuff. It's competition engineering; high on perfomance at the expense of comfort. While the BP-51s are (numerically) a lesser shock, I wonder if they wouldn't be a better ride mate for all-around use. I may be willing to sacrifice performace above 9/10ths if it is comfy at 1/10th.

@Island1064 He had the BP51s on his truck and switched to Icons. He felt the Icons were better.

I do think BP51s are a great and viable product. In fact I think I wouldn't have the lift issue if I had gone BP51s. My biggest gripe with the BP51s is how they are adjusted. They give you the ability to change both rebound and compression which makes it much more customizable but requires a spanner wrench. I don't know how people get inside their wheel wells on the street. All I have to do is twist a knob and even for my driver side front it's ridiculously tight with a 1" lift (I barely have 0.1" to twist the knob and can't see the settings even with one of those tiny plumber cameras). I generally mess with the settings while pumping gas (which I pump daily).

Personally, my mind keeps thinking what would it have been like if I had gotten the 3.0s instead of the 2.5s. With larger piston shafts, more oil, larger ride zone, 2x bump zone. Only thing I keep telling myself is that I would have had to lift it another 0.75" more which I don't want to do.