Suspension Help! (1 Viewer)

[peacesells63]

Thanks man. The 1HDT weighs pretty close to a 1FZ but the bumper and winch add up.

So, can you fit a playing card between your dead coils or are they fully compressed? I can't quite tell from the pics.

They are fully compressed with no gap until after the spring diameter steps up.

 

[Lumpskie]

They are fully compressed with no gap until after the spring diameter steps up.

I weighed my rig the other day. With my family of 4 in there, as well as tools, I came in at 6580 pounds. So, empty I might be around 6000ish? I'm on intermediate springs as well. Do you think that might be part of the difference? Either way, it's weird that your fronts are taller than mine, given that we both have bumpers, winches and identical springs.

 

[peacesells63]

I weighed my rig the other day. With my family of 4 in there, as well as tools, I came in at 6580 pounds. So, empty I might be around 6000ish? I'm on intermediate springs as well. Do you think that might be part of the difference? Either way, it's weird that your fronts are taller than mine, given that we both have bumpers, winches and identical springs.

The front springs are the same part number between intermediate and heavy, so spring rates shouldn't have anything to do with the front.

My heavy rear springs and lighter weight are definitely why the rear of my truck is taller than yours, which is what I was going for on that end.

Hoping to get this sorted out soon, as I leave for a 13 day camping trip in a few weeks and Id rather not have to put the OME springs back in.

Kevin at EHO offered to send 50mm springs, but my worry with that is that those will legitimately be 50mm lift springs and my front end will be 3" lower than the rear.

 

[AutoCraft Aus]

Definitely not suggesting that the height spec of the springs were changed. From what I'm seeing, these front springs are taller than the 75mm springs box rocket (and many others) have, which I would guess were from a different production run.

The rears are perfect, but the front is too tall.

The rears feel like a heavy rate spring. Someone would have had to mislabel both rears with the wrong part number for that to happen.

All off the dead coils are touching. I am out of town at the moment, I'll take some pictures when I get back.

Different production run would make no difference waht so ever.

Our coils use the same mandrel and have to come off the mandrel within spec or they get scrapped.

We scrap at least 10% of every production run for this reason as we dont allow re tempering to change the height as that causes sag over time.

Every coil sits the same height for the same weight.

The only way it sites higher is less weight.

 

[peacesells63]

Different production run would make no difference waht so ever.

Our coils use the same mandrel and have to come off the mandrel within spec or they get scrapped.

We scrap at least 10% of every production run for this reason as we don't allow re tempering to change the height as that causes sag over time.

Every coil sits the same height for the same weight.

The only way it sites higher is less weight.

Different production runs make all the difference. That's why there are lot/batch numbers on the tags. Your manufacturer may have used slightly different or the wrong steel formula - tooling wears over time - the normal guy that runs QA might have been on vacation/sick/drunk - who knows, but that's part of the reason batch/lot numbers exist - to track production issues.

"Within spec" means nothing to me unless you share the what all of the specs are and I have a way of accurately measuring them myself.

I removed my front bumper and winch today, the front lifted exactly 1/2". The bumper/winch weighs about 170lbs, so that tells me that the front springs are just barely into the heavier spring rate portion of the spring with the bumper on.

In my first post of this thread I noted that with 250lbs hanging off of the front bumper (not over the axle) the front end compressed 1/2". That tells me that the front spring rate is roughly in the general range of the stated 260lb, though likely heavier.

Based on that roughly 260lb spring rate and the logic at the end of your quote, my front end is somehow 1170lbs lighter than lumpskie's and 650lbs lighter than box rocket's. By that same math and assuming his truck has compressed the light rate portion of the spring, Greenbriar's front end is 1560lbs lighter than lumpskie's. I don't think any of those are the case.

If you have no interest in entertaining the possibility that there could be a problem with your product, i'd gladly take a refund and move on.

 

[Lumpskie]

I'd be careful using a linear calculation for spring rate in relation to ride height on this one because we know that these are dual rate springs. So, at some point, the spring transitions from the 160 lb to 260 lb rate. I got curious to see whether the transition point was identical with our setups. I was also curious to see if your transition began in coils that were intended to be "dead" rather than "live".

So, I made an attempt to compare your springs to mine. In your pic, I counted 3 coils fully compressed at ride height.

Here's a shot I took of my coils this morning. I count 4 coils fully compressed at ride height (note that, at the angle of my picture, one of the coils is almost totally obscured by the coil bucket with 3 totally unobscured):

So, I would say that the transition between your dead coils and live coils is happening at a different point. I notice that my dead coils are all the same wire diameter with the transition coil thickening in diameter. Can you measure yours to see if your transition coil is the same diameter as your dead coils?

Another thing we can do is measure coils spacing of the live coils.

 

[Greenbriar]

I sat down last night to respond to this thread, and was trying to think of a sensible, logical way to respond to the dismissive comments from @AutoCraft Aus above, and the more I tried to formulate a constructive post, the more agitated I got. I did the same math @peacesells63 did above, and came to the exact same conclusion a month ago, based on putting 500lbs on my bumper. I wanted to keep going and measure the rate properly over a longer stroke, but ran out of places to hang weight on the flimsy stock bumper. Weight difference between rigs hasn't got a thing to do with what we are seeing. But then again, if you make springs for a living, or if you know much about how they are made, you know that the dimensions off the mandrel are only a tiny part of the equation that gets you the rate you're looking for. Arguably, the alloy (and it's consistency lot to lot), the heat treat (lot to lot as well), and then the tempering process (again, lot to lot) have even more bearing on the final product than small variations in wire diameter or coil spacing. I think the product, as designed, required knowledge of all this, and I believe it's one of the best ones out there (as designed). What we're running up against isn't a design flaw, but a refusal to acknowledge that something out of spec (other than the coil dimensions) made it out of the shop, and the dismissive nature of the responses is frankly insulting. I'm guessing this might be part of the reason Kevin isn't listing the parts anymore (and for the record, he did everything he could to straighten this out for me, including the 50mm coils, which I didn't install for the same reasons as @peacesells63 ). I appreciate all of the effort the community has put forth to try to help us sort this out, and honestly I feel bad at this point for any further effort you guys are going to expend...
If @AutoCraft Aus wants to publicly post an intended rate curve for these fronts, then I'll do my best to find some scales and figure out how to mount up a pair of 55gal drums to the front of the truck and post a curve for the springs I have. Until then, you guys have fun...

 

[Lumpskie]

I'm owning up to my dislike on the above post. @Greenbriar I get that you are upset but that post doesn't help anyone. You haven't posted any pictures of your springs in this thread, but you want a vendor to publicly acknowledge a deficiency in a product, base on your experience? That's not realistic. Your comment that weight difference between rig hasn't got a thing to do with what your seeing is unfounded. And, asserting that the root cause of the height difference is caused by poor quality control or out of spec manufacturing is baseless.

I understand the frustration of having an aftermarket part not provide the characteristics that you hoped for. Instead of venting frustration, why don't you grab some good pictures of your coils and post them up? I'd be curious to see if you have 3 or 4 dead coils at ride height.

 

[AutoCraft Aus]

I sat down last night to respond to this thread, and was trying to think of a sensible, logical way to respond to the dismissive comments from @AutoCraft Aus above, and the more I tried to formulate a constructive post, the more agitated I got. What we're running up against isn't a design flaw, but a refusal to acknowledge that something out of spec (other than the coil dimensions)

This is the type of frustration you run into when you want to interject in a conversation and dont have all the details.

So by P.m we requested some images and details.

We didnt get those, and we didnt get any technical information to help us decide if this one set of coils were in fact a unicorn from the mandrel of manufacturing, or not.

I also believe there was an offer from the seller to supply 1" lower coils, but the person declined that offer.

So I see no denial they can be not to spec, but I have seen no data to be able to work on resolving the issue I requested either.

But I did think it was fair to explain the manufacture process, given it was being questioned.

And that out of the thousands of coils out there, this hasnt been an issue with any others.

So data is key, on the coils in question, to make any proper determination at this point, rather than conjecture.

 

[peacesells63]

This is the type of frustration you run into when you want to interject in a conversation and dont have all the details.

So by P.m we requested some images and details.

We didnt get those, and we didnt get any technical information to help us decide if this one set of coils were in fact a unicorn from the mandrel of manufacturing, or not.

I also believe there was an offer from the seller to supply 1" lower coils, but the person declined that offer.

So I see no denial they can be not to spec, but I have seen no data to be able to work on resolving the issue I requested either.

But I did think it was fair to explain the manufacture process, given it was being questioned.

And that out of the thousands of coils out there, this hasnt been an issue with any others.

So data is key, on the coils in question, to make any proper determination at this point, rather than conjecture.

You requested details in your PM that are in my first few posts of this thread. When you asked, I replied to you via PM and told you where to find all of the details and pictures you requested, IN THIS EXACT THREAD. The only response I got is that its not possible for there to be a problem with your springs.

I feel like i'm arguing with my wife about why wearing a mini skirt in a snow storm is a bad idea.

 

[AutoCraft Aus]

"Within spec" means nothing to me unless you share the what all of the specs are and I have a way of accurately measuring them myself.

You do, and as with any coil, the free height is the determining factor.

All of the data to study the issue has not been provided.

But there are some issues with your math currently, hence why the data sent to us will be much easier to put together where the issue lies, to be honest.

So as per the P.M I will say this again for you a third time, we dont engineer this on a forum, you have to send me the details.

I removed my front bumper and winch today, the front lifted exactly 1/2". The bumper/winch weighs about 170lbs, so that tells me that the front springs are just barely into the heavier spring rate portion of the spring with the bumper on.

In my first post of this thread I noted that with 250lbs hanging off of the front bumper (not over the axle) the front end compressed 1/2". That tells me that the front spring rate is roughly in the general range of the stated 260lb, though likely heavier.

Given the image that shows your coil not compressed as per the other coil, you are on the progressive part of the coil so the rate change in that section means your math isnt correct, due to the weight vs rate in that exact height the vehicle sits, for the weight added or removed.

Based on that roughly 260lb spring rate and the logic at the end of your quote, my front end is somehow 1170lbs lighter than lumpskie's and 650lbs lighter than box rocket's. By that same math and assuming his truck has compressed the light rate portion of the spring, Greenbriar's front end is 1560lbs lighter than lumpskie's. I don't think any of those are the case.

You are basing this on being on the firmest rate, which the image you posted here shows you are not, so these numbers are not correct. The rate will be closer to the 160 to begin, so halves any differences in weight.

Same for any lower rate between the firmest and softest components of the coil.

This is why we dont do public reverse engineering of an issue on forums and request the details by email or P.M, because none of the other "guesses" from others are either helpful, or gain a solution.

Especially when they dont have all the details either.


I made a request to have the details to be able to look at the issue, and as the images in this thread show, there should be a height difference, which looks to be weight related. Guesses on production techniques, incorrect math on rates and weight, and people weighing in about being frustrated are all just diversions here, and dont help. There are better ways for these things to be handled, and I have requested for a better way for this to happen. And I still am waiting for the details.

I stand by the request for details, and the option to investigate this issue, by email or P.M.

I dont think I can be any fairer under the circumstances.

The only response I got is that its not possible for there to be a problem with your springs.

This again is incorrect.

What you got 2 weeks ago was a request for information, and follow up for information.

Once you send me the information we can then determine the issue.

You P.m ed me to ask my assistance, and I responded with the details I needed to be able to do that.

Nothing has changed.

 

[AutoCraft Aus]

I note you have chosen to request refund, rather than work through the issue or supply the information required to determine the issue, or use a 1" shorter coil.

For clarity.

 

[toyota guy]

I note you have chosen to request refund, rather than work through the issue or supply the information required to determine the issue, or use a 1" shorter coil.

For clarity.

What other information did you ask for? Just curious what else you need that hasn’t been stated already. These springs look identical to my Dobinson springs that’s why I’m wondering. Mine are the correct height though.

 

[peacesells63]

I note you have chosen to request refund, rather than work through the issue or supply the information required to determine the issue, or use a 1" shorter coil.

For clarity.

This is true. After the PM session with you, I have no interest in having your parts on anything I own. I feel like I lost a solid 10 IQ points arguing with you today.

Once again, all if the info that you requested via PM has already been provided in posts #23, #26, #31 and #38. I told you this multiple times and sent you a PM each time I added a post. I even provided a link for you to click on, but you refused to read the info unless I email or PM it to you. You didn't ask for free height until 2 hours ago, which would require me to pull the springs. ill post that up here before I send them back.

 

[Greenbriar]

*For Clarity*
My agitation stems not from the product, but from this post:

Different production run would make no difference waht so ever.

Our coils use the same mandrel and have to come off the mandrel within spec or they get scrapped.

We scrap at least 10% of every production run for this reason as we dont allow re tempering to change the height as that causes sag over time.

Every coil sits the same height for the same weight.

The only way it sites higher is less weight.

It is definitely not helpful in any way, other than to say "it's not the springs, end of discussion". It doesn't ask for more data, or images, or offer any direction to @peacesells63 .
I would think that if offline discussion was going on outside of this thread that you wouldn't continue discussion here along a different path. Maybe a quick "hey, we're waiting on some measurements from this guy. We'll get this sorted" would have been better than your above post.

You stated on multiple occasions that this is the only set of coils that present this way (see below)

And that out of the thousands of coils out there, this hasnt been an issue with any others

if this one set of coils were in fact a unicorn

When I started this thread, I presented data that was very similar to @peacesells63 data, which is why he stated he was going to add to this thread instead. That makes this at least two recent sets that may have a problem.

I also believe there was an offer from the seller to supply 1" lower coils, but the person declined that offer.

We both declined this offer for exactly the same reason, detailed earlier in the post... In fact, I tried really hard to source a set of 50mm rears to go with the 50mm fronts. I was offering to purchase more product. I got a one sentence re-direct to your distributor, who couldn't for some reason get any (which I already knew and had detailed in my original e-mail, hence the direct request).

@Lumpskie I appreciate where you're coming from, but I think you may have at least partially misunderstood my post. Yes, I did aggressively refute an almost ridiculous dismissal of "things that couldn't go wrong", but the intent wasn't to so much say that they had, but to bring to light the stonewalling with incomplete facts that I was seeing. I didn't want or ask for a public admission of a problem. What I was asking for was a public description (the rate curve) of what these springs were supposed to be, and I offered with that, to measure the rate on the set that I had, so we could compare.
Reading through this post from the beginning would show that nothing I said is either "baseless" or "unfounded".
As far as further contribution, prior to today, if anybody had asked for specifics, I'd have jumped back in with whatever I could provide, and I've done my best to do that whenever I feel it is beneficial to this community, however with this issue in particular, I felt that my involvement would be kinda like dogpiling the guy. I put my data in on the front side, peacesells put his in later. I didn't see any reason to re-iterate my case, as peacesells had done it for me with a near carbon copy of what I was seeing.

As far as contribution today, the below is what I have, and will be all I'll add to this, so make of it what you will, as it's no longer worth arguing over. I'm ok with where my truck sits.

Without further ado:

15,000 miles on the springs, almost exactly, as of today
25 5/8" hub to flare now (front, didn't measure the back today)

Here's what 1014 lbs of everybody I could drag away from the loading dock at work looks like... (certified postal scale just inside the door there...)

The front dropped right at 2" (putting me at 23 5/8 hub to flare) The calipers aren't right on the line in the pic because it was a little hard to hold and photograph at the same time. This was verified with a tape on the hub/flare as well...

Here are the coils. The deads are seated hard in some places, and in others they're not, all the way up the stack.

Take what you will from this, but I personally don't see how 1000lbs added to the front of one of these trucks could be normal, nor do I think that's what @Lumpskie has got on the front of his at his 23" (call it 23.5 for arguments sake) measurement. I don't know where the problem lies, and frankly, at this point I don't care. Like I said, I'm ok with where it's sitting. All I know, is that the springs are the only thing holding all that weight up...

 

[Lumpskie]

^Not to further this non-tech discussion, but sounds like your are bent out of shape because of the "tone" or "shortness" in communication by a vendor. If you get upset by terse responses like "for clarity", you need to get a thicker skin. As for my comments, I stand by them.

1. Saying that weight applied to a spring will not affect it's length is wrong. K=L/T

2. You accused a vendor of using poor quality control when you asserted that design was correct but implementation of that design was incorrect. You desired acknowledgement for that statement. That would be an implicit admission of fault on the vendor's part. You did not provide any hard data to support your assertion. That is the definition of a baseless claim.


Ok, let's get back to actual trouble shooting.

Dropping 2" with 1000 lbs added to the front tells me that the secondary spring rate is about right. The point that you are missing is that these are dual rate springs. So, you can't just look at the change in height when you throw your buddies on the front of the rig... that only gives you the effective rate from ride height into further compression. You need to consider the first (lower) spring rate as well as the transition between the two. Possible faults there could be either the initial rate is too high, the transition occurs in the wrong place or the transition length is incorrect. That is why I was asking peasesells to post up specific information. His springs do not appear identical to yours or mine in the pictures. His picture makes it look like he has only 3 dead coils rather than 4. That makes me wonder if the transition occured at the wrong post on his setup. (He even mentioned that his springs haven't settled into the second rate.) I'll let him continue to troubleshoot or bow out at this point.

In your picture, I can see 4 dead coils, so I think your transition is happening a similar location to mine. Your dead coils aren't fully compressed at ride height, but they seem close. Also, your weight test indicates a spring rate of 253.5 lb... that's pretty close to the advertised 260. My guess is that there is a little travel in the initial rate, then the rest of the travel is probably right at 260 lb. Did you measure free height on your springs before installing?

 

[junior80]

This might be a stupid question and it’s getting late and I’m tired, but can @peacesells63 trim a bit off the bottom of the front springs to bring them down to whatever the desired height is? Would doing this allow the springs to still work as they’re designed to? Just, at the correct spot

 

[Lumpskie]

This might be a stupid question and it’s getting late and I’m tired, but can @peacesells63 trim a bit off the bottom of the front springs to bring them down to whatever the desired height is? Would doing this allow the springs to still work as they’re designed to? Just, at the correct spot

Yes, he can cut coils out of the spring. But, I believe that @AutoCraft Aus suggests cutting the "dead" coils out from the top. @GW Nugget cut a dead coil out of his rear heavy springs, I believe.

 

[peacesells63]

FYI, autocraft told me in a pm that 75mm lift is when the vehicle is at gvw. Never heard this before, nor does it say that anywhere on the website.

 

[toyota guy]

FYI, autocraft told me in a pm that 75mm lift is when the vehicle is at gvw. Never heard this before, nor does it say that anywhere on the website.

If that’s the case everyone else has bad springs except you and the OP!