Offset TRE for Radius Arm Clearance (1 Viewer)

[Nay]

First off, yes, I know about Delta arms, no I won’t use them for a number of reasons. That’s a topic for elsewhere.

I just finished updating my setup to @landtank ’s caster plates that provide more tierod clearance. I get a bit more pinion angle than typical and have less tierod clearance, even taking into account the HD tierod. I’ve compared to @Andrew Bluemel ‘s 80 with the same lift and plates except he also has a 1” spacer up front, and he has substantially more clearance after accounting for the larger diameter tierod. This is 5.5” of lift where I should have a half inch of clearance.

In looking at potential solutions, I am wondering why we couldn’t run a GM 1 ton offset TRE setup that Jeeps use to push the tierod out for aftermarket diff cover clearance, only oriented toward the axle where there is increased clearance to the radius arms.

It’s 1” of offset and at full crank I can’t see any clearance issues by coming inward 1”. The pinion is flat over an inch back so it doesn’t reduce clearance over stock location.

Ream out the tapers to the large GM taper and get a strength upgrade and major clearance gain. Seems this would relatively cheaply solve most tierod clearance issues. Anybody tried it? Search yields nothing.

Offset Tie Rod Kit

Check out the deal on Offset Tie Rod Kit at RuffStuff Specialties

www.ruffstuffspecialties.com

 

[landtank]

We did 4-4” lifts one weekend at my house and one of my good freinds has a 1991 Fj80 and his results mimic what you are seeing. The other truck’s results were different than his but the same as each other.

we later swapped in locked axles from a 96 and there was no change in clearances. We concluded that it had to be in the arms but never confirmed that as he didn’t care about the results.

edited for clarity and additional info

 

[SNLC]

I have ran the GM 1ton offsets, albeit in a crossover conversion on an 80.

I wouldn’t again.

You are looking for the easiest solution but with pushing 6” of lift, you are asking a lot. Without arms suited for your lift, which create their own probs, you have little choices at this point.

In my opinion, I would start looking at fabrication vs bolt in solutions. It sounds like that is where you are at with the Cruiser.

When it comes to fab, two ways to make it right meaning two directions to go, keep radius arms and setup the geometry for your lift or dump the radius arms and go 3-link.

Just my opinion and advice.

Cheers

 

[mudgudgeon]

On my first 80 I cut and rotated the knuckles to correct caster with a 4" lift. (Around 2005) It meant the tierod clashed badly with radius arms.

I bored out the tapered hole in the steering arm, and bolted through the steering arms and hiem joints on a fabricated tie rod with spacers to raise the tie rod clear of radius arms. I had no issue with my setup, but wouldn't do the same now.

 

[jcardona1]

I am wondering why we couldn’t run a GM 1 ton offset TRE setup that Jeeps use to push the tierod out for aftermarket diff cover clearance, only oriented toward the axle where there is increased clearance to the radius arms

No reason you can't. I did it several years ago when I ran y-link steering. Had the arms reamed out by a local shop. You might not even need offset TREs as the GM 1-tons should sit a bit taller than the FJ80 TRE.

The challenge will be finding good quality GM TREs. All the bargain bin TREs sold by 4x4 shops like RuffStuff/Barnes/Ballistic etc are pretty crappy and get very loose/floppy after a short while.

These Synergy 'metal on metal' TREs are supposed to be really good, but I only see them for Jeep and Dodge applications. It doesn't look like they make the GM version anymore. I would look into the Dodge version and build your own tierod tube. The Dodge TREs have a 1" shank vs 7/8" for the GM: https://www.polyperformance.com/synergy-dodge-heavy-duty-metal-on-metal-tie-rod-ends

 

[jcardona1]

Or 2.5 ton TREs if you're feeling froggy

Tie Rod Ends By Size - Tie Rod End - TMR Customs

If you are searching for tie rod ends in all shapes and sizes, come see the vast selection that TMR Customs has to offer. We have all the right sized tie rod ends for any of your jeep or off roading needs.

www.tmrcustoms.com

 

[Nay]

No reason you can't. I did it several years ago when I ran y-link steering. Had the arms reamed out by a local shop. You might not even need offset TREs as the GM 1-tons should sit a bit taller than the FJ80 TRE.

The challenge will be finding good quality GM TREs. All the bargain bin TREs sold by 4x4 shops like RuffStuff/Barnes/Ballistic etc are pretty crappy and get very loose/floppy after a short while.

These Synergy 'metal on metal' TREs are supposed to be really good, but I only see them for Jeep and Dodge applications. It doesn't look like they make the GM version anymore. I would look into the Dodge version and build your own tierod tube. The Dodge TREs have a 1" shank vs 7/8" for the GM: https://www.polyperformance.com/synergy-dodge-heavy-duty-metal-on-metal-tie-rod-ends

Thanks for all the replies - sounds like the quality would be the primary issue and I could get the clearance just with the bigger TRE. The DOM side would be easy with weld in adapters. I’ll look into those Dodge TRE.

I’d consider heims since stack height would be pretty easy with misalignment spacers, but I’d rather keep TRE given this isn’t a crossover application.

What I did in the past was install an OME bushing upside down - this was correcting over rotation of the pinion as well and it worked perfectly since it creates tierod clearance and my caster was still good.

Now at 5.5”, I could do it again and I actually bought Ironman rubber offset bushings, but I think I’d lose too much caster at this lift height. I’m a degree(ish) rotated down in terms of pinion angle, so I have max possible caster and it’s driving perfectly (for what it is).

I just pulled the rear driveshaft to make sure my light vibes are from the rear since I haven’t corrected that end yet for the lift increase - those joints are about 2° misaligned, which is too much at this operating angle and I’m fixing that. Maybe a hint of grumble at 65 mph on accel, but I have to strain to notice it and I had it up at 85.

I could do the bushings and then drop the frame end to get back the caster and a bit more clearance as well. That may be the easiest thing since the frame end correction would be very minor and just a “washer mod”. 2° up with the bushing and then 1.5° back down frame end, both adding to clearance.

FWIW about retaining stock arms, you can’t push the axle forward on 38s without a lot of cutting. The stock arms with Landtank’s brackets are in perfect alignment without any inner fender work except to angle the rear back into open space with a BFH. This is ideal for arm angle as a slider and for tire fitment so I need to make the clearance work. If you were designing a radius arm for this application, it would look exactly like this. Coil is properly aligned, everything fits to tight tolerances.

This is full stuff of a 38. I appreciate the idea that you should bring the axle forward - that great if you use smaller tires or don’t wheel. @landtank ’s plates are ideal - I just have one of those 80’s. The good is I seem to get more caster, I just have to tweak clearances.

 

[ChaseTruck]

The challenge will be finding good quality GM TREs.
...

On the D60 in the front of my K5, I use TRE's from Offroad Design, Carbondale, CO:

HD Tie Rod & Draglink Ends - Steering

www.offroaddesign.com

Those are bigger than the regular parts store ware.

 

[landtank]

Thanks for all the replies - sounds like the quality would be the primary issue and I could get the clearance just with the bigger TRE. The DOM side would be easy with weld in adapters. I’ll look into those Dodge TRE.

I’d consider heims since stack height would be pretty easy with misalignment spacers, but I’d rather keep TRE given this isn’t a crossover application.

What I did in the past was install an OME bushing upside down - this was correcting over rotation of the pinion as well and it worked perfectly since it creates tierod clearance and my caster was still good.

View attachment 2750442

Now at 5.5”, I could do it again and I actually bought Ironman rubber offset bushings, but I think I’d lose too much caster at this lift height. I’m a degree(ish) rotated down in terms of pinion angle, so I have max possible caster and it’s driving perfectly (for what it is).

View attachment 2750443

I just pulled the rear driveshaft to make sure my light vibes are from the rear since I haven’t corrected that end yet for the lift increase - those joints are about 2° misaligned, which is too much at this operating angle and I’m fixing that. Maybe a hint of grumble at 65 mph on accel, but I have to strain to notice it and I had it up at 85.

I could do the bushings and then drop the frame end to get back the caster and a bit more clearance as well. That may be the easiest thing since the frame end correction would be very minor and just a “washer mod”. 2° up with the bushing and then 1.5° back down frame end, both adding to clearance.

FWIW about retaining stock arms, you can’t push the axle forward on 38s without a lot of cutting. The stock arms with Landtank’s brackets are in perfect alignment without any inner fender work except to angle the rear back into open space with a BFH. This is ideal for arm angle as a slider and for tire fitment so I need to make the clearance work. If you were designing a radius arm for this application, it would look exactly like this. Coil is properly aligned, everything fits to tight tolerances.

View attachment 2750447

This is full stuff of a 38. I appreciate the idea that you should bring the axle forward - that great if you use smaller tires or don’t wheel. @landtank ’s plates are ideal - I just have one of those 80’s. The good is I seem to get more caster, I just have to tweak clearances.

View attachment 2750454

I honestly think it’s worth your while to compare your arms to that of the truck that sits correctly. I’ve found Toyota manufacturing discrepancys with two other products. The first was my seat brackets, it seems there are one of two positions that the block for the following nut is welded at. I had to modify my design to account for that. You need to remember that Toyota make hundreds of thousands of any part and it just takes one setup to be different but within specs for a stock truck to become a problem for a modified one.

 

[jcardona1]

On the D60 in the front of my K5, I use TRE's from Offroad Design, Carbondale, CO:

HD Tie Rod & Draglink Ends - Steering

www.offroaddesign.com

Those are bigger than the regular parts store ware.

Good stuff! I'll have to save this one for future reference.

 

[Nay]

I honestly think it’s worth your while to compare your arms to that of the truck that sits correctly. I’ve found Toyota manufacturing discrepancys with two other products. The first was my seat brackets, it seems there are one of two positions that the block for the following nut is welded at. I had to modify my design to account for that. You need to remember that Toyota make hundreds of thousands of any part and it just takes one setup to be different but within specs for a stock truck to become a problem for a modified one.

I’ve actually had two sets of “new” arms since a front end accident 4 years ago, the first was because one was bent in the accident and the second is I wanted extra time for bushing pressing without the arms pulled so I just grabbed a set locally - those are what I have installed now.

This issue preceded that accident and after I had the frame straightened I didn’t even need an alignment, so I agree that it’s a factory spec issue and my suspicion is the axle brackets are just rotated down a bit. I have @Andrew Bluemel ’s to compare with the exact same setup and he has both more tierod clearance by a lot as well as pinion more in-line.

This may be why I wonder why people struggle so much with caster, I just have a bit more to start with. The upside down caster bushing works perfectly and it’s easy enough, I just think it’s going to back it off a bit much.

I have the arms with the OME bushings. I think I’ll swap them in and see, easy enough test.

 

[ajax1]

I’ve actually had two sets of “new” arms since a front end accident 4 years ago, the first was because one was bent in the accident and the second is I wanted extra time for bushing pressing without the arms pulled so I just grabbed a set locally - those are what I have installed now.

This issue preceded that accident and after I had the frame straightened I didn’t even need an alignment, so I agree that it’s a factory spec issue and my suspicion is the axle brackets are just rotated down a bit. I have @Andrew Bluemel ’s to compare with the exact same setup and he has both more tierod clearance by a lot as well as pinion more in-line.

This may be why I wonder why people struggle so much with caster, I just have a bit more to start with. The upside down caster bushing works perfectly and it’s easy enough, I just think it’s going to back it off a bit much.

I have the arms with the OME bushings. I think I’ll swap them in and see, easy enough test.

I have a spare set of Toyota arms if you need them here in junction

 

[Nay]

On the D60 in the front of my K5, I use TRE's from Offroad Design, Carbondale, CO:

HD Tie Rod & Draglink Ends - Steering

www.offroaddesign.com

Those are bigger than the regular parts store ware.

This could be a good option. If it’s not too much trouble, could you measure the stack height from top of the knuckle to center of the threaded rod? Might be enough to raise it how much I need.

Thanks!

 

[Nay]

I have a spare set of Toyota arms if you need them here in junction

Thanks - I’ve replaced my originals twice including the set I just installed so it’s not the arms. I think my bracket mounts are just slightly out of spec in rotating pinion down (more stock caster) and that’s why I consistently get more rotation than expected from plates.

I’m 2 for 2 on that and it’s a good problem to have if you are picking problems. Only question is the easiest way to solve it.

 

[landtank]

If you stacked your arms on top of another set and used the bolts to pin the two at frame and rear axle bushing, something around a 1/4” difference between the two front bushings would be enough.

 

[landtank]

The tight tolerance between tie rod and arm is either axle or arm at the axle.

 

[ChaseTruck]

This could be a good option. If it’s not too much trouble, could you measure the stack height from top of the knuckle to center of the threaded rod? Might be enough to raise it how much I need.

Thanks!

That'll unfortunately take a bit... I'm currently in Baton Rouge, and the truck lives in Arizona... I'll be there Labor Day.

 

[Nay]

That'll unfortunately take a bit... I'm currently in Baton Rouge, and the truck lives in Arizona... I'll be there Labor Day.

Thanks, I can ask Offroad Design, appreciate the lead here. They are selling 1 1/4” .250 wall DOM threaded for 7/8 18 tpi tierod ends, which is exactly the spec of the Slee DOM I have. I’d need 44” length but they sound made to order and under $200 with the HD ends.

High steer tie rods

These tie rods are for a high steer system i.e. with the tie rod attaching to high steer arms on the top of each knuckle. NOT the stock location. These are based around our steering arms, we cannot guarantee fitment with anyone else's steering arms. Built from 1-1/4" x .250" wall DOM steel...

www.offroaddesign.com

This is a general “good to know” option.

 

[Nay]

The tight tolerance between tie rod and arm is either axle or arm at the axle.

My guess is my original holes at the axle end are set slightly back since I have what looks like a forward axle alignment. These are my previous 4” Flexi coils that are about a half inch less lift than my current VT 144 so 5” of front lift here (I have no weight up front it’s less than stock).

With 2” bumpstop extensions on 5” of lift I don’t have any issues with coil contact or coil bow and I never had issues with rear inner fender contact back with a big 37 on 3.5” of lift.

I think the answer here is always the same: do the work. The updated caster plates gave me an increase of about 3° of pinion angle pushing the max tolerance of the axle end u-joint. If I back it off 2° I get about 5mm more clearance to the tierod - offset bushing sitting upper right.

And then I have about 1.5° of pinion angle where I can drop the frame end if needed to get back caster. There’s plenty of room here for a weld washer. Both motions increase tierod clearance and I know I’ll be running good caster in alignment with the axle exactly where 38’s fit perfectly.

 

[ChaseTruck]

This could be a good option. If it’s not too much trouble, could you measure the stack height from top of the knuckle to center of the threaded rod? Might be enough to raise it how much I need.

Thanks!

Here's a pic of one on my spare drag link (I use these ends for tie rod and drag link on the K5). Haven't had any real problems, some had developed wear spots, but don't remember when they went on the ruck, it was a long time ago. Probably should have paid more attention to the amount/type of grease in there. The rubber grease caps become loose, but now they have Kevlar-reinforced cups that settle that issue. Had to replace one because I somehow managed to break the grease zerk off the end at the pitman arm after contact with the leaf spring somewhere on my Johnson Valley trip a while ago.

By the way, when I messaged Stephen at ORD, he said best to call them to discuss specifics; something about tapers.