OME864s on 100s?

[Pskhaat]

I don't see this asked anywhere (maybe my search was bad). There are folks who run 863s on their 100s, theoretically, 864s should yield the same lift yet with greater load range. Plus I love the way the 864s ride as I have them on my 80.

As the 100 is greater weight than the 80, I would guess I would appreciate the 864 ride as much, no? Anyone else running these on their 100?

 

[ats4x4dotcom]

They will work, and the 100 is heavier on the rear axle, so they should ride a little better when empty in the 100.

We have just designed a spring between the 863 and 864 and between the 864 and 868, in a design that rides much nicer when empty, than the 864, which can be to harsh IMHO.

 

[wngrog]

I cannot imagine needing more load range than 863's. I have them on my 100 with a drawer full of crap, slee non tire bumper and I pulled my trailer with around 4-500 in tongue weight and they did not squat more than 1/2" or so.

Truck still had a 1" back to front rake loaded with the trailer.

 

[spressomon]

Same here...the 863 (read my 100 configuration below) loaded with dog and crate, fridge/freeze, hunting gear, etc. seems just right. I haven't towed a trailer yet...but that's next. I couldn't imagine running around, unloaded/unladen, with anything stiffer than the 863. FYI: Christo did let me try a custom 4" 80 spring set just to see how my loaded rig worked with it...but it was definitely on the harsh/over stiff side (and too tall).

My biggest complaint/issue is with the OME 101 rear shocks with the my rig as configured: They are not enough dampening for the 863 and my rig.

 

[Pskhaat]

wngrog & spressoman:

Maybe too many years bumping around in my old FJ40, I dunno, but I'll tell you that my wife packs for armegeddon whenever we travel in our 80. We are packed to the roofand every bit of free space. My 863s (in my 80) became the saggin' waggon everytime we went anywhere, it was embarrassing. I had two sets of 863s too as I thought there was something wrong with my first set. I run 864s now and I not only enjoy the ride of the 864s without load, but appreciate it even more with.

Now that all aside, since the 100 will soon be the new travel vehicle and it is heavier, I figure why not, but reading you're guys posts have me double-thinking myself on these. I just can't see how the 863s won't sag my 100 the same as they did my 80???

 

[Greg B]

Check with Amando (i4c4l0 on Mud). I remeber him posting a while back that he runs 864's sometimes with really heavy loads and then runs 863's the rest of the time. He could give you some real world experience.

 

[spressomon]

wngrog & spressoman:

Maybe too many years bumping around in my old FJ40, I dunno, but I'll tell you that my wife packs for armegeddon whenever we travel in our 80. We are packed to the roofand every bit of free space. My 863s (in my 80) became the saggin' waggon everytime we went anywhere, it was embarrassing. I had two sets of 863s too as I thought there was something wrong with my first set. I run 864s now and I not only enjoy the ride of the 864s without load, but appreciate it even more with.

Now that all aside, since the 100 will soon be the new travel vehicle and it is heavier, I figure why not, but reading you're guys posts have me double-thinking myself on these. I just can't see how the 863s won't sag my 100 the same as they did my 80???

Good information regarding your 863/864 80 experience. As you know without quanatative weights it is hard to compare our different vehicle loads. I think if (always subject to change depending upon the 'freshness' of the data) I need a little more lift in the back I might opt for air bladders...but again this is all one big experiment by all of us where the data for good decisions is changing somewhat rapidly as more 100's get modded.

 

[dclee]

I think if (always subject to change depending upon the 'freshness' of the data) I need a little more lift in the back I might opt for air bladders...but again this is all one big experiment by all of us where the data for good decisions is changing somewhat rapidly as more 100's get modded.

Spresso -

If you are looking for maximum rear axle articulation, I would avoid the airbags. However, that being said, I already have a set waiting to go into our 100 because our interest for that truck is not crawling over rocks and flexing out the axles, but instead maximum load carrying capability for expedition-type offroading. Different strokes and all...

 

[spressomon]

Spresso -

If you are looking for maximum rear axle articulation, I would avoid the airbags. However, that being said, I already have a set waiting to go into our 100 because our interest for that truck is not crawling over rocks and flexing out the axles, but instead maximum load carrying capability for expedition-type offroading. Different strokes and all...

My uses of my 100 sound similar to yours...our focus is off-road exploring, hunting, camping...and if a challenging passage presents itself so much the better and interesting too.

 

[dclee]

My uses of my 100 sound similar to yours...our focus is off-road exploring, hunting, camping...and if a challenging passage presents itself so much the better and interesting too.

Cool!

 

[siglo]

I've been thinking for the past 2 days of removing the AHC system and installing 864s and 101s in the rear. I don't like the damping effect of the AHC shocks now especially when the LC is unloaded.. I've been driving around lately with a full water tank. oddly, it makes the LC handles better (only an extra 55KGs).. any other option beside the 101 shocks for heavy rear ends? spressomon's statement is making me reconsider dumping the AHC since better dampening effect was one of the reasons to begin with..

 

[ats4x4dotcom]

I cannot imagine needing more load range than 863's. I have them on my 100 with a drawer full of crap, slee non tire bumper and I pulled my trailer with around 4-500 in tongue weight and they did not squat more than 1/2" or so.

Truck still had a 1" back to front rake loaded with the trailer.

You need to bring your 100 on my desert trip this year then, 2 weeks doing the 2 most remote tracks in Aus, [most do one, or the other in a trip] being self sufficent, with cooking, food, fridge, clothes, to go sub zero overnight temps and 35 deg c days, and carting 100lt water and 400lt fuel, for 2 people in a car, as well as 2 spare wheels, and a heap of vehicle spares across spinifex in the desert on no real track, to cover over 1000km [over 600 miles]

a 100 with family for this type of trip will go 4400kg [aprox 9500lbs] on the first day.

below is a pic of last years trip through similar country, with 1100 odd sand dunes to cross in the proccess.

 

[tabraha]

9500lbs You need one of the turtle exped vehicles!!!

 

[Bongani]

I run the 864's at the back. Without any kit inside the vehicle the lift was 130mm compared to the 90mm that the guys with the unladen 863's here in ZA typically get.

My vehicle permanently packed and when overlanding for extended trip the 864's make perfect sense. It is amazing how quickly the load add up. Fuel and water alone is 210kg. Add to that the drawer system and 74l fridge freezer, rear wheel carrier then it is getting close to 350kg and then I have no other kit at the back.

If you liek the ride of the 864's then get it but if you drive with an empty rig it will be a bit bouncy and your lift will be rather big.

 

[spressomon]

I heard a well founded rumor that two of the more knowledgable guys on this forum, that have LC aftermarket busninesses, are working on a custom 100 spring that will be somewhere between the 863 and 864 for heavier laden 100's: And hopefully a shock to match!