On-Road Handling After Lift

[Beams37]

Hey,

Planning to a bit of lift for the wife's 200. Needless to say, it will spend 90% of its life going to the grocery. So, I want to make sure it doesn't lose its handling abilities when I do the lift. I've been looking at multiple options ... OME, OME BP-51, Tough Dog, Icon, Etc. ...

Can people share the setup they have and the changes they saw on-road? Also, any other insights or thoughts?

Thanks,

JB

 

[tominboise]

I put an OME on mine, with SPC UCA. Not super high. The handling is bit wonky on these anyway, with the KDSS and it hasn't changed much after I put the lift on it.

 

[TeCKis300]

The best thing you can do to maintain handling is to minimize suspension lift to keep suspension geometries optimal. Maximize tire diameter to get real lift under the axle (while keeping good suspension geometries). And perhaps layer with a body lift to get the final look you want, while keeping center of gravity low.

Suspension lift is the go to, but from a handling perspective, is actually a terrible way to do it.

Stock height keeps stock suspension geometry in its optimal alignments that minimize bump steer. Meaning hitting a bump doesn't induce unintended steering changes. Every suspension arm travels through an arc. Only in its most horizontal position does it nicely approximate vertical movement with minimal lateral deflections. Also designed into ride height is roll centers that geometrically reduces leaning in turns and anti-dive geometry to minimize brake dive.

Lift a suspension too much, and that all goes out the window.

Even more terrible is the funny side to side motions at the rear solid axle as a result of the panhard bar at a more extreme axle, causing odd jacking and compression forces, crabbing, and more.

 

[DPA200]

I did Tough Dog (Jason @ Trail Tailor), no UCA's. My wife i thoughts was gonna notice more, she said it was fine and didnt notice anything. I didn't notice any negatives to the on road experience, just a better viewing angle with the front raised up. I will say jason was a pleasure to deal with and talked on the phone to walk me through all the options. To me in that price range, you get more bang for your buck compared to OME. If money was no object, i would go for OME BP-51's, but a year in I've been super happy with the Tough Dog's

 

[Beams37]

I did Tough Dog (Jason @ Trail Tailor), no UCA's. My wife i thoughts was gonna notice more, she said it was fine and didnt notice anything. I didn't notice any negatives to the on road experience, just a better viewing angle with the front raised up. I will say jason was a pleasure to deal with and talked on the phone to walk me through all the options. To me in that price range, you get more bang for your buck compared to OME. If money was no object, i would go for OME BP-51's, but a year in I've been super happy with the Tough Dog's

If money was no object you would go with BP-51. Why not Icon? Why BP-51?

 

[benc]

I have the tough dog kit from @TRAIL TAILOR on mine and am extremely happy with it on and offroad! It actually handles both much better than stock.

 

[DPA200]

If money was no object you would go with BP-51. Why not Icon? Why BP-51?

I don’t have any scientific or concrete reason on this. Just a personal preference really, that’d I’d trust long term reliability better from OME based off their other products. I have a buddy local who has Icon on his 200 and loves it, so really I’m sure either one you couldn’t go wrong. I more just meant if I had 3x the $ of tough dog, I’d go with BP-51’s over what I have. Like I said though, tough dog is a real good bang for the buck and lots of positive reviews on Mud. I did 45mm bore 9 stage adjustable rear. This range goes all the way from marshmallow soft to rock hard which i actually use a lot depending on what I’m doing. I mainly felt with this I got much fatter bore, adjustments similar to higher end (icon and BP-51), for only a few hundred more than base OME.

 

[DPA200]

I don’t have any scientific or concrete reason on this. Just a personal preference really, that’d I’d trust long term reliability better from OME based off their other products. I have a buddy local who has Icon on his 200 and loves it, so really I’m sure either one you couldn’t go wrong. I more just meant if I had 3x the $ of tough dog, I’d go with BP-51’s over what I have. Like I said though, tough dog is a real good bang for the buck and lots of positive reviews on Mud. I did 45mm bore 9 stage adjustable rear. This range goes all the way from marshmallow soft to rock hard which i actually use a lot depending on what I’m doing. I mainly felt with this I got much fatter bore, adjustments similar to higher end (icon and BP-51), for only a few hundred more than base OME.

Also where I was at, to me I saw more value in being able to afford suspension and sliders at the same time, instead of spending everything on top of the line suspension. Based off the amount of beatings my sliders have taken (instead of my body) I very much am happy with that decision.

 

[Blandito80]

I had BP-51 shocks put on locally along with Slee Sliders that I purchased from Slee Offroad and had shipped. Definite improvement in bump control, etc in backcountry. I think most 'mudders' would go BP 51 over standard ARB due to the adjustability and capabilities of BP51 if you go OME and can handle the extra $. But, having been a bit frustrated with competency of the mechanics, I took my LC200 up to Slee OffRoad a couple of weeks ago in Golden, CO when it came time to have the ARB Sahara bumper, Warn Zeon Platinum 10s winch, ARB rear locker and Rigid lights put on. Bit of a hassle for me during a busy time, but well worth it. They did a truly professional and timely job with it. As part of the build, they fixed some of the hack job issues (improper slider mounts, bad compressor install, etc) from my local incompetents. They reset the front coil spring preload to handle the extra weight while keeping rake 'standard' and set adjustable shocks where they usually recommend. As part of your selection to keep your grocery getter handling well, I would advise to carefully choose your rear spring type to reflect true weight you will have in rear.

ALSO, Slee adjusted the alignment in a manner to correct 'classic' Toyota understeer and to make it even more stable at speed. It handles better now than stock and certainly better than post lift with standard Toyota alignment specs. It is still within the advised range, just improved. I was advised to replace the upper control arms, SPC, so that the proper alignment can be physically reached post lift. So, understanding the details and nuances of proper alignment are key when lifting.

 

[PaulC]

@Beams37 I just went through this whole process of selecting suspension the last 5 months. I'm sure there are folks who are more knowledgeable than me, but if I had to flowchart the decision making process for me, it would be something along the lines of:

1. The first fork in the flowchart is whether to go "monotube" (more oil) or "twintube" (less oil to dissipate heat)? Plus most monotubes use an "internal floating piston" to prevent the oil and nitrogen (emulsion) from mixing like in a twintube (though some of the twintube foam cells attempt to mitigate).
2. If "monotube," then do you use "coilovers" (adjustable height) in front or simple shock (not height adjustable)?
3. If "coilovers" in front, then "reservoir" (more oil) or no reservoir (less oil)?
4. If coilovers with reservoir, do you also opt for "bypass valves" (position sensitive dampening) and/or compression adjusters? IMO, these are overkill - I suspect most folks end up in step 3 of the flowchart above (a coilover system, regardless of whether it had reservoirs or not).

Two other factors that don't lend themselves to a flowchart are:

• Extended travel vs OE travel
• Tube diameter: The larger the diameter, the more oil the shock can hold to dissipate heat. My understanding (which may very well be wrong) is that a 2.5" diameter shock is comparable in performance to two 2.0" diameter shocks. ...and a 2.5" with reservoir is comparable in performance to two 2.5" shocks without a reservoir. Plus the reservoir allows the nitrogen to be run at a lower pressure, which translates into less wear. I couldn't find the specs to confirm the diameter, but I believe the "51" in BP-51 means its 51mm, which = 2.0".
• Maintenance schedule: The maintenance schedules vary. Twintubes are meant to be completely replaced when they wear out. Monotubes are meant to be rebuilt anywhere from 25k miles to 60k to... whenever it no longer works.
• Post-Sale Customer Service: Some brands have notoriously nonexistent service, while others will bend over backwards to make sure the customer is happy.

Below are the usual suspects. I'm happy to share my personal opinion on customer service and maintenance schedules - just send me a DM.

Monotube options

• King
• Icon
• Fox
• Radflo
• OME BP-51

Twintube options

• Tough Dog (foam cell)
• Ironman (foam cell)
• OME Nitrocharger

 

[Markuson]

Even with a mild lift, most any spring/strut upgrade is going to improve handling over the mushy stock units.

It’s true that a lower set keeps your COG low. On the other hand, if the springs are firmer—sometimes resulting in a bit of lift in many cases—you will most likely still find better handling (ie less nose-dive on braking and less body-lean/roll in turns) because of a firmer ride in general.

Basic OME struts/springs will be an improvement...unless you like mushy handling.
If you think you’ll feel picky about small differences, consider adjustable struts (like bop-51 and others) But spring weight in rear and coil-over preloading in front (if you buy an adjustable preload coilover) will have amajor impact on ride characteristics and definitely ride height regardless of what strut set you go with.

 

[Beams37]

@Beams37 I just went through this whole process of selecting suspension the last 5 months. I'm sure there are folks who are more knowledgeable than me, but if I had to flowchart the decision making process for me, it would be something along the lines of:

1. The first fork in the flowchart is whether to go "monotube" (more oil) or "twintube" (less oil to dissipate heat)? Plus most monotubes use an "internal floating piston" to prevent the oil and nitrogen (emulsion) from mixing like in a twintube (though some of the twintube foam cells attempt to mitigate).
2. If "monotube," then do you use "coilovers" (adjustable height) in front or simple shock (not height adjustable)?
3. If "coilovers" in front, then "reservoir" (more oil) or no reservoir (less oil)?
4. If coilovers with reservoir, do you also opt for "bypass valves" (position sensitive dampening) and/or compression adjusters? IMO, these are overkill - I suspect most folks end up in step 3 of the flowchart above (a coilover system, regardless of whether it had reservoirs or not).

Two other factors that don't lend themselves to a flowchart are:

• Extended travel vs OE travel
• Tube diameter: The larger the diameter, the more oil the shock can hold to dissipate heat. My understanding (which may very well be wrong) is that a 2.5" diameter shock is comparable in performance to two 2.0" diameter shocks. ...and a 2.5" with reservoir is comparable in performance to two 2.5" shocks without a reservoir. Plus the reservoir allows the nitrogen to be run at a lower pressure, which translates into less wear. I couldn't find the specs to confirm the diameter, but I believe the "51" in BP-51 means its 51mm, which = 2.0".
• Maintenance schedule: The maintenance schedules vary. Twintubes are meant to be completely replaced when they wear out. Monotubes are meant to be rebuilt anywhere from 25k miles to 60k to... whenever it no longer works.
• Post-Sale Customer Service: Some brands have notoriously nonexistent service, while others will bend over backwards to make sure the customer is happy.

Below are the usual suspects. I'm happy to share my personal opinion on customer service and maintenance schedules - just send me a DM.

Monotube options

• King
• Icon
• Fox
• Radflo
• OME BP-51

Twintube options

• Tough Dog (foam cell)
• Ironman (foam cell)
• OME Nitrocharger

Great info and thought process ... I'm also going to assume that the further I go down the flow chart, the more dollar signs?

 

[PaulC]

Great info and thought process ... I'm also going to assume that the further I go down the flow chart, the more dollar signs?

[deleted]

 

[linuxgod]

FYI the 41mm Tough Dog are similar to OME Nitrochargers but the 45mm Tough Dog have adjustable compression knobs. So it's possible to have adjustable compression without adjustable coilovers.

The longer I own them the more I really like the TD 45mm adjustables

 

[psnyman]

Just wanted to leave a shout out to the folks who contributed to this thread, amazing how newcomers like me tackle so much of the same in this circle of LC200 life

 

[jefo13]

@Beams37 I just went through this whole process of selecting suspension the last 5 months. I'm sure there are folks who are more knowledgeable than me, but if I had to flowchart the decision making process for me, it would be something along the lines of:

1. The first fork in the flowchart is whether to go "monotube" (more oil) or "twintube" (less oil to dissipate heat)? Plus most monotubes use an "internal floating piston" to prevent the oil and nitrogen (emulsion) from mixing like in a twintube (though some of the twintube foam cells attempt to mitigate).
2. If "monotube," then do you use "coilovers" (adjustable height) in front or simple shock (not height adjustable)?
3. If "coilovers" in front, then "reservoir" (more oil) or no reservoir (less oil)?
4. If coilovers with reservoir, do you also opt for "bypass valves" (position sensitive dampening) and/or compression adjusters? IMO, these are overkill - I suspect most folks end up in step 3 of the flowchart above (a coilover system, regardless of whether it had reservoirs or not).

Two other factors that don't lend themselves to a flowchart are:

• Extended travel vs OE travel
• Tube diameter: The larger the diameter, the more oil the shock can hold to dissipate heat. My understanding (which may very well be wrong) is that a 2.5" diameter shock is comparable in performance to two 2.0" diameter shocks. ...and a 2.5" with reservoir is comparable in performance to two 2.5" shocks without a reservoir. Plus the reservoir allows the nitrogen to be run at a lower pressure, which translates into less wear. I couldn't find the specs to confirm the diameter, but I believe the "51" in BP-51 means its 51mm, which = 2.0".
• Maintenance schedule: The maintenance schedules vary. Twintubes are meant to be completely replaced when they wear out. Monotubes are meant to be rebuilt anywhere from 25k miles to 60k to... whenever it no longer works.
• Post-Sale Customer Service: Some brands have notoriously nonexistent service, while others will bend over backwards to make sure the customer is happy.

Below are the usual suspects. I'm happy to share my personal opinion on customer service and maintenance schedules - just send me a DM.

Monotube options

• King
• Icon
• Fox
• Radflo
• OME BP-51

Twintube options

• Tough Dog (foam cell)
• Ironman (foam cell)
• OME Nitrocharger

Need to add Bilstein

 

[LCtoLX]

Hey,

Planning to a bit of lift for the wife's 200. Needless to say, it will spend 90% of its life going to the grocery. So, I want to make sure it doesn't lose its handling abilities when I do the lift. I've been looking at multiple options ... OME, OME BP-51, Tough Dog, Icon, Etc. ...

Can people share the setup they have and the changes they saw on-road? Also, any other insights or thoughts?

Thanks,

JB

Did you settle on something?

Personally, and thinking about my wife and her GX, I wouldn’t lift it. Not that she doesn’t know how to drive. I’d just be concerned about something unexpected like an idiotic driver forcing her to take quick evasive action, at speed. With a higher COG, we are already at a disadvantage. Raising it some doesn’t help.

That said, I wouldn’t mind lifting one of the other wagons in our family and will soon do so (for more off-roading fun). But it would be one of the ones I or our sons drive, not my wife’s DD.

 

[Beams37]

Did you settle on something?

Personally, and thinking about my wife and her GX, I wouldn’t lift it. Not that she doesn’t know how to drive. I’d just be concerned about something unexpected like an idiotic driver forcing her to take quick evasive action, at speed. With a higher COG, we are already at a disadvantage. Raising it some doesn’t help.

That said, I wouldn’t mind lifting one of the other wagons in our family and will soon do so (for more off-roading fun). But it would be one of the ones I or our sons drive, not my wife’s DD.

We sold it. LOL

Now she has a 2020 4Runner TRD Off Road. That has a great stance from the factory and we have no plans to lift as of now. Maybe one day, but not today.

 

[LCtoLX]

Nice!