KDSS lean with stock suspension (1 Viewer)

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

I feel like I have seen this setup before on MUD. Maybe something similar.

I believe you are correct. I tried to quickly find the corresponding member but didn't quickly get a hit so I gave up. I'd say with 90%+ certainty the previous owner posted on this forum.
 
Found it. Pretty sure it is this one at a different stage of modification.

 
And some history on the truck @200seareez

 
I'd be just as scared by that electrical system as the rusty kdss. What are they trying to do, run a call center out of their cruiser? Who needs 16 outlets?
 
:edit: double post.

The plot thickens, now you can track down and harrass the previous owner :devil:

I would probably just return it while you still can unless the dealer is open to re-negotiate repairs (unlikely)
 
So they dumped it to a dealer who tried to flip it to an unsuspecting customer, Nice!
 
And some history on the truck @200seareez


Run, Forest. Run!

Dump this truck.
 
And some history on the truck @200seareez

Um yeah, so his dealer quote was $9k to fix the KDSS.

I'd return it, unless you bought the Carmax warranty and it covers the repair...
 
Don’t know how many parts need to go, but Lexus dealers also quote $25k-$35k to fix a $100 leaky hydraulic tube. So maybe the $9k a red herring.

I’m not arguing he should keep the truck. I’m just playing devils advocate in interest of a LC being kept on the road.
 
Depending on how you look at this, this may be an opportunity, or it may be a problem.

Playing devils advocate on the opportunity side. Especially if the rest of the mods are to your liking. KDSS delete has been going on a long time in other toyota rigs like the T4R and GX. Maybe look into some of those forums.

The harder-core modders consciously delete the system. Sure there's cons, but there's benefits too including better independent articulation for smaller lower amplitude bumps that KDSS won't necessarily disengage for. Fire roads and washes are an area where KDSS has the potential to limit capability. Modders have found additional stability and speed under these use cases, with less tossing side to side.

Some ways to compensate for less or no sway bars is to increase suspension spring rate. Many are already doing that and begs the question if there's too much roll resistance when KDSS is paired with stiff springs, particularly in the use cases where KDSS may not disengage.

Those that do KDSS delete seem to generally only replace the front KDSS bar with a static front bar. There's ways to get a rear bar in too without much fabrication and cost depending on your resources.

Personally, if I were in that situation, depending on the deal you got, it may be a good opportunity to go further down the modding rabbit hole. There's just as many that probably shouldn't.
 
Depending on how you look at this, this may be an opportunity, or it may be a problem.

Playing devils advocate on the opportunity side. Especially if the rest of the mods are to your liking. KDSS delete has been going on a long time in other toyota rigs like the T4R and GX. Maybe look into some of those forums.

The harder-core modders consciously delete the system. Sure there's cons, but there's benefits too including better independent articulation for smaller lower amplitude bumps that KDSS won't necessarily disengage for. Fire roads and washes are an area where KDSS has the potential to limit capability. Modders have found additional stability and speed under these use cases, with less tossing side to side.

Some ways to compensate for less or no sway bars is to increase suspension spring rate. Many are already doing that and begs the question if there's too much roll resistance when KDSS is paired with stiff springs, particularly in the use cases where KDSS may not disengage.

Those that do KDSS delete seem to generally only replace the front KDSS bar with a static front bar. There's ways to get a rear bar in too without much fabrication and cost depending on your resources.

Personally, if I were in that situation, depending on the deal you got, it may be a good opportunity to go further down the modding rabbit hole. There's just as many that probably shouldn't.
What does that say about LX drivers?…The devil has a lot of advocates…
 
Very much a side topic, but how hard would it be to swap a kdss from one vehicle to another. I am very much thinking about removing it, curious what value it will have for others that may want it.
 
What does that say about LX drivers?…The devil has a lot of advocates…

It's a fair question. Both LCs and LXs owners, maybe not the second, and maybe not even the 3rd, are going to have to face this reality. As these are complicated systems, and there's enough older examples, going past the point of reasonable upkeep.

I think you know on the LX, there's currently several reasonable paths, to maintain, upgrade, or gut. The gutting solution wasn't always readily apparent on the LX side until maybe a few years ago.

LC owners are at this crossroads too. In the background, there's certainly people deleting or fixing KDSS as this isn't an isolated issue. Just that it hasn't been brought forward enough on these boards to tease out and identify reasonable paths. With enough discussion and creativity, I'm sure there can be solutions to deleting KDSS too. Whether as a compromise or taking it to the next level.
 
And some history on the truck @200seareez

Wow. That is some seriously good detective work.
 
Sure there's cons, but there's benefits too including better independent articulation for smaller lower amplitude bumps that KDSS won't necessarily disengage for. Fire roads and washes are an area where KDSS has the potential to limit capability. Modders have found additional stability and speed under these use cases, with less tossing side to side.

I'm curious where your data comes from about what is needed to "disengage" the sway bars?

My understanding is there is no threshold.. as long as one side of the vehicle compresses at the same time the bars limit disagreement between right and left sides (reduce roll). If anything happens that the compressed and drooped corners are diagonal, they don't limit anything.

"No" threshold is a blanket statement. To some extent there will be friction in the passenger side suspension twisting the sway bars in their mounts, that won't exist on the driver's side. But there are no valves within the KDSS system that only operate to link one cylinder to the other above a certain pressure delta or anything of that sort, which is what would be needed to set a sway bar disengagement threshold in a hydraulic system.
 
I'm curious where your data comes from about what is needed to "disengage" the sway bars?

My understanding is there is no threshold.. as long as one side of the vehicle compresses at the same time the bars limit disagreement between right and left sides (reduce roll). If anything happens that the compressed and drooped corners are diagonal, they don't limit anything.

"No" threshold is a blanket statement. To some extent there will be friction in the passenger side suspension twisting the sway bars in their mounts, that won't exist on the driver's side. But there are no valves within the KDSS system that only operate to link one cylinder to the other above a certain pressure delta or anything of that sort, which is what would be needed to set a sway bar disengagement threshold in a hydraulic system.

The current KDSS mechanical system unlocks in a the classic articulated situation. Namely when front to rear axle moves out of phase, it unlocks. In phase like a cornering situation, it'll remain locked. One takeaway from this means that each axle cannot response singularly, and depends on it's action relative to the other axle. Independent in some ways, but locked in other ways.

A great way to understand where the limitation is, is to look at the new E-KDSS system. With electronic controls, it can respond to a broader set of scenarios. To engage or disengage sways of the front and rear axle independently.

 
The current KDSS mechanical system unlocks in a the classic articulated situation. Namely when front to rear axle moves out of phase, it unlocks. In phase like a cornering situation, it'll remain locked. One takeaway from this means that each axle cannot response singularly, and depends on it's action relative to the other axle. Independent in some ways, but locked in other ways.

A great way to understand where the limitation is, is to look at the new E-KDSS system. With electronic controls, it can respond to a broader set of scenarios. To engage or disengage sways of the front and rear axle independently.


Earlier you said "better independent articulation for smaller lower amplitude bumps that KDSS won't disengage for". The only limit in articulation I can see from the current system is the rate.. a practical limit on how quickly fluid can flow through the lines from the rear cylinder to the front.. but this should only effect high speed large articulation events. I believe this may be the root of the head-tossing phenomenon..

Which can only happen because the 200-series KDSS has stiff sway bars when they are engaged to dramatically improve on-road handling. A non-kdss bar that doesn't toss heads only doesn't because it can't corner as flat.. where most people spend most of their time.

So I guess I disagree with the notion that there is a threshold for articulation before KDSS disengages the bars. Maybe a limitation on rate.. but that only applies because of the good things it does on-road.

I can't see how 200-series KDSS is a limitation on fire roads at all.. washes.. I don't know enough about.

But I will say letting good, properly set up dampers do more of the damping in those scenarios vs a stiff sway bar sure seemed to help with the head-tossing. At least in my case.
 
Tons for sale right here in this section. At least 5 listed with a price

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom