IFS Lift kit

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

I almost bought a WCOR kit back in the mid 90's. The extra travel is only brought about due to the 3" longer arms, which is nothing more than a band-aid to compensate for the lack of really engineering a solid mini-truck IFS system. Yes, I said it; a lack of engineering.

Downey took a chance a long time ago on u-joints. They failed, but they at least tried to deliver a kit that had the correct track width and still provide 12" travel. Scott Ellinger of Rockstomper fame surpassed 14" of travel with a 4" trailmaster kit, 1/4" ball joint spacers and a centered 3rd member to allow for longer axles with Porsche inner CV's. He ran it for years with good success. He thought outside of the box, but inside of the stock track-width.

Legality is another issue; I can't handle the extra width in my state - too much heat from the law. And frankly, it just looks damned stupid on a DD/Weekend warrior.

My $.36
 
Bullet, I just finished setting up my '93 4Runner with the ball joint spacers and I'm quite happy with them. I got my entire setup from TRDParts4U.com as a kit. The nice thing about this is that the OME shocks that come with the kit are the proper length for a Toyota with 1.5" of lift. The fronts are not quite maxed out when the upper control arms squish down the bottom out bumper. (Note: you do not want the low profile bumpers with this setup. Stay with stock or you risk over extending the ball joints and CV joints.) There are a number of places to get the ball joint spacers online. You'll want the longer shocks to take advantage of the slightly longer travel. The benefit of these over simply cranking the tortion bars is that they actually do offer a bit more travel as they allow the spindle to push the lower control arm down further on full extension. On full compression the hub will extend up to the same position as stock.

There has been a lot of talk about tortion bars and a few have it right. All single stage springs have a linear relationship between deflection and spring rate. The weight a spring will support = the spring rate x the distance (or angle for a tortion bar) it has flexed. http://www.engineersedge.com/spring_torsion_calc.htm [On the link, P x M = the weight supported]. So a tortion bar (spring) with a larger diameter will always be stiffer. It will take less preload or tortion to achieve the same ride height. From there though the tortion bar will support progressively less on extension and progressively more on compression. The smaller tortion bar will always provide a more consistent spring rate across the full range of travel and will thus give a smoother feeling ride. A Cadilac for instance has a spring with a soft spring rate and a load of preload. I wanted a soft ride and I stuck with the factory bars.

Also remember that for a good ride your rig should be able to extend as much as it can compress so cranking bars to the point where your upper control arm is nearly touching the extension bumber will limit the extension you have and won't help your ride overall. It all depends on what you want.

If you do go with the ball joint spacers, you don't actually have to cut your upper control arm to fit them in. The steel these are made of is relatively soft and I was able to use a 24oz ball-peen hammer and a huge punch made out of an old tie-rod to bend the back part of the control arm enough to fit the blocks and the ball joint in there. There are a couple of tricks I could tell you if you end up doing this. This steel does offer strength and I wasn't comfortable just cutting it out and leaving sharp inset corners. I'm sure it's fine either way though. Once the installation is done you want to soften up the tortion bars to balance out the fact that your control arms are now at a steeper angle and will be nearly topped out. Then good luck finding a dumbass alignment monkey who will be willing to align it for you. I went to three shops before I could find a genious able to do it.

My next purchase will be the idler arm truss, since these always wear out on Toyotas even with stock tires and ride height.

I've also had a toyota IFS truck with the Trailmaster 4" lift. They are just a suspension relocation setup. I didn't know much at the time an I never installed the bottom out bumper relocating blocks, which allowed for more flex. It probably could have broken something on a big compression, although I had jumped the truck high enough to bounce back off the front back off the ground and it didn't seem to do any damage. I was probably either lucky or just didn't know any better at the time to see what damage I had done.

Sorry for the long post, but I hope this helps.
 
pics of my IFS w/ BJ spacers (poser shot)

eaf69eb8.jpg
 
I likie the bud built skid plate.
:cheers:
 
Even though this thread went a couple of different ways, I learned alot and now have 1.5in lift for free. Thanks guys. I'll post pics when the 33's are mounted.
 
Bear80 said:
You do know that the TC kit is 3" wider than the Downey right?? That's just goofy and the porsche axles are waaaay stronger than stock t-100 axles.
Click to expand...

On a first gen rnnr I would agree with the goofy part, however the 89+ trucks don't hardly even show it with the right fender.
Witness:
07nv-d301.jpg

vs.:
07nv-d206.jpg

and:
07nv-d217.jpg


Quantify that second statement. How are they stronger? Is it the axle shafts themselves that are stronger or just the CV'S?

I can tell you first hand that the TC kit will crawl. Maybe not like my '84 does, awful danged close and there have been many, many times I wished mine was an IFS. To get the same travel as a TC kit w/o widening the track width means that you are exceeding the OE max angularity. That is a recipe for failure. Matt @ TC very carefully designed his kit to maintain the stock CV angularity and use common parts in the process.

FYI, That gulley that the Nissan is in the posted TC movie link is the GateKeeper on John Bull in Big Bear, CA
 
ntsqd said:
Quantify that second statement. How are they stronger? Is it the axle shafts themselves that are stronger or just the CV'S?

I can tell you first hand that the TC kit will crawl. Maybe not like my '84 does, awful danged close and there have been many, many times I wished mine was an IFS. To get the same travel as a TC kit w/o widening the track width means that you are exceeding the OE max angularity. That is a recipe for failure. Matt @ TC very carefully designed his kit to maintain the stock CV angularity and use common parts in the process.

FYI, That gulley that the Nissan is in the posted TC movie link is the GateKeeper on John Bull in Big Bear, CA
Click to expand...

The porsche CV joint can take a much much steeper angle and is much stronger than any stock Toyota joint. The shaft is what you make, it has to be custom so I would imagine chrome moly.

I never said that a TC kit has ANY short commings, other than individual preference.--I would buy a kit in a hear beat if I had the chance for desert running.--For what I do, I'd rather have what I use and keep the stock width.

I also agree if you do like me and run 12" of wheel travel with a stock width, there is a much greater chance of breakage. However I've gone over all my stuff and know exactly it's limits.

I've said my peace on this.....
 
Last edited:
wow this is one bickering thread! Im just going to say from experience, that MOST of the bracket style ifs lifts I've seen give you bump stop spacers that do decrease the amount of space between the a arms and the bumps, BUT, who says you can't make your own spacers??? Superlift IMO has the best off the shelf bolt on bucket of steel lift I've seen. What are you going to do with this truck? These arguements about TC and Downey are a joke, hands down. TC lifts are made for one thing, going fast. Yes they will do better crawling than a bracket lift but will still never compare to a straight axle. Why spend money on a pile of metal brackets if you want to wheel? At 500 bucks or whatever they cost now, you could save another few hundred bucks, and hit up marlin, allpoo, trailpoo, or any poo and get an sas kit for a grand, and most of them are even coming with solid axle rebuild kits etc. now adays. If you really want an IFS lift, go Total Chaos, I don't care if a porsche CV has more strength running at high angles, because thats the reason total chaos widens the front end so much. Ever seen a SCORE truck up close? They are much wider in the front, and even most mass produced vehicles with IFS (especially chevy) have a wider front end than rear, it's about handling. With a wider front track you have major grip on the terrain, and with a narrower rear track it makes it easier to whip the ass end around a corner sideways doing twice the MPH you should. And T-bars, if you buy sway away or similar t-bars for lift, you are going to kill yourself. They are stiffer than a dehydrated turd ripping your butthole in two after not drinking water in the desert for 5 days, and belong, solely, on a long travel suspension lift. I've had them, with stock ifs, and it sucked, bad. Cranking up t-bars, I did that as well, they will fatigue bad after a few years and sit right where they started. I dunno, I guess it boils down to what you want, do you want to haul ass and catch air? Get total chaos, downey is cool yeah yeah, but total chaos has a real lift, not some rancho with a million dollar make over lift, If you want to go slow, and drive over s*** people dont want to walk up, save your money and wheel easier trails until you can afford an sas, you wont regret it unless you do the wrong thing, either way, if you think your going to make your vehicle perform like a miracle for 600 bucks or less, you are sorely mistaken. I'd put a locker in the back of an IFS truck and chop the sheet metal to fit 33's long before I'd drop a dime on a bracket lift. Just my 25billion characters=ing 2 cents.
Best bang for buck scenario, IFS bracket lift, cut down bumpstop spacers, bj spacers, f250 upper shock mounts, stock t-bars, chevy rear springs, and a rear locker. Otherwise save up some scrill.
 
Just noticed a invalid statement. While a 930/4/5 CV is no doubt stronger than either yota CV, they do not, repeat do not have a greater operating angularity than the stock outer CV. The stock outer was designed to deal with steering angles, the 930's were not. To the best of my recollection Ellinger's aforementioned white truck with a centered front 9" diff used stock outers for this reason. At least it did when I met up with he and David coming off the Rubicon in '98 or '99.

I guess it ticks me off when people say the TC is over priced or poo-poo it for some other reason when they've obviously never ridden in a truck with one of their kits on it. In addition to TC's own testing, some of the Locos Mocos beta test their stuff. One of those guys used to hard core wheel a LA (Rubi, Hammers, etc.), but now uses an TC'd IFS. To my knowledge he doesn't do the hard core trails as much, but he does still go once in a while.
Something that never seems to get mentioned is that TC's kit does not move the front diff from the stock location. No drop-down brackets used at all. So the only downside to the TC is that you gain 3" per side in width. Heck, those who've gone to 10" rims have gained the same over a stock LA, and they've got hellacious scrub radius as well.

For those ultimate hard core trails, yea, it's really hard to beat an LA. I think I've got Patch (an LA) riding pretty good up front and I've kept up with or even occasionally passed some of the wannabe "pre-runners" while chasing Wayne's Class 10 car or Jav's 7S truck. However, for the guy that wants to go on trails that aren't in the class of trails whose names end in "hammer" I see no reason to abandon the IFS. If he may also want to go fast at times then he'll have more than the TC kit involved in making the much, much higher unsprung weight of an LA behave itself.

To me the biggest issue with an IFS is the weak front diff. Not sure what the solution there is. Both 9" installs that I've seen (there's a T-100 that Ventura 4x4 did for a friend floating around out there somewhere) were major fabrication projects.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with the last two statements, personally I like the tc kit better for a wider stance, no diff drop, 2.0 or 2.5 inch shocks, and they are just beefcake. For an IFS kit, the downey kit is right behind it IMO depending on what you want to do, I haven't seen the downey coil over IFS kit in some time (they were just making it when I was looking at IFS kits) but it could be a contender. It really is all about what you want to do with the truck, every kit has its application.
 
Bear80 said:
I don't want to offend you ntsqd, but it seems you're causing a
comotion just to get some attention. You have presented good info but who is
arguing with you so that you need to set on your soap box and spout off
how great TC is??

Ok with that said, it seems some of your points are directed at me so
I'll entertain them.

Please take the time to carefuly read before jumping to conclusions.
The need for the Porsche joints are due to the fact that the STOCK INNER
JOINT cannot take the increased angles along with the extention and
compression needed with a narrow track. The outter joint is fine and with
the use of the Porsche inner you keep the stock width while having
12-13" of wheel travel. I urge you to come look at my truck IN PERSON and
tell me I'm wrong. I agree the gain of 3" up front is a benifit.
HOWEVER for ME in south Texas, it's a waste of MONEY and PURPOSE. Really
where am I going to pre-run around here and do I really want to daily
drive on the road with a goofy wide front track and spend well over $500
more than what I got for the same amount of wheel tavel?? Don't think
so.

Also, don't get your granny panties in a bunch when someone bad mouths
TC. TC makes a fine product and there are plenty of users that can
speak for that, no need for you to make it a personal vendetta to
convience the world. Without question the TC kit is a sure bet for high speed
fun and of course it can hold it's own on any terrain due to the amount
of 'wheel travel. Is it for EVERYONE, well that's not your choice to
make, I tend to think a solid axle is the best choice for the typical
'wheeler. If I recall the old Broncos and even the one FJ40 that ran the
Baja 1000 where all solid font axles. A bracket lift too is just fine,
much cheaper than any long arm kit and suitable for a weekend 'wheeler.
Click to expand...
I'm certainly the cause of trying point out that an SAS is not the one-all, be-all cure for anything IFS. I'm not the only one, but I've been saying it since the ORC email list days, which makes me one of those saying it the longest.

People will race anything if you give them a place. As it happens I have extensive contacts in the Early Bronco world and the foremost authority on EB's raced off road is a friend of mine in PHX. He will tell you that the two biggest problems facing someone who wants to off road race an EB is it's front live axle and it's short wheelbase.

As for causing a comotion just to get attention, you very obviously do not know me very well. I don't give a damn about getting attention. It surprises me when someone in the field knows who I am b/c I don't make of point of saying "Here I am!" & in fact would rather be incognito. I am an opinioned basterd, but I scale my basteredness to the level of that opinionation which I encounter.
I do give a damn about people getting all of the info related to their question, and in as an unbiased view as I can help present. I won't state which suspension design I think best w/o knowing the specifics of the intended use. At that, it's still just my opinion.

And, check your refs, that last I knew one of the greastest limitations of the 930/4/5 CV's is their distinct lack of Plunge compared to other, less strong CV options. Some high travel race vehicles have had to resort to high dollar telescoping halfshafts b/c the high zoot CV's don't have enough plunge travel.

I don't know much about the Downey product other than what anyone can read about it. My thots about it are that it might be a good compromise depending on the intneded use, but to pay attention to what it's costs are compared to the other possible options. My impression is that it is close to that of a TC w/o providing as much function. Where the balance point will be is up to the owner of each vehicle.
 
Rancho IFS lift kit with Downey slip yoke axle shafts kit

Hello All
I am running a 91 toyota P/U with rancho IFS lift kit. I aquired the Downey slip yoke axle shafts kit. Supposedly with this kit and my preveously installed Rancho kit I can put the differential back up where it belongs..

Question(s):
The instructions for the Downey slip yoke axle shafts kit is/are at least to me vary vague. Anyone have any experience with this kit that can give me any pointers on installation? Especiallly on removing the axle shaft remnants? Or I live in the LA area, can anyone recommend anyone that can do this for me?

Help Mr. Wizard
Al7OU
 
Maybe post up some pics, so we can see what you're working with.

Jim Downey is no longer in business, but he does occasionally post here, maybe you can send him a PM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom