Suspension question

[Greg B]

Well, the 100 is going back to stock for the most part. It's being relegated to the family hauler and my wife is going to be driving it most of the time. I'm taking off the front ARB bumper, rear Slee bumper, and setting the suspension back to stock height. The Slee step sliders are staying on it and I'm leaving the 295 AT's on it.

I want to be able to switch the suspension from stock height to the standard 2" OME lift easily. I'm going to leave the OME shocks and T-bars on the front, but lower the t-bars so they ride at stock height. On the rear, I'm going to put back on the stock coil springs but was hoping to put the OME N101's back on. Basically, I will have a stock height OME suspension except for the rear coils.

With this setup, I can crank the t-bars up and switch the rear coils to 866's very easily to get a 2 inch lift. After a quick front end alignment, this will make the 100 pretty versatile for daily driving for the wife and the occasional offroad camping trip. This leaves me with two questions:

1. How do you think the stock coils will ride with OME N101's instead of the stock shocks? The only other option I can come up with is cutting down some OME coils to stock height. I'll probably just have to put the stock coils on and see how it feels after I drive it a bit.

2. With it at the stock height, do you think the diff drop kit will hurt anything? Since we're only talking an inch I'm thinking it won't matter, but I'm not sure; thoughts?

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Are you shopping for another 100? If not...what will you do with your bumpers? So the wife doesn't like the added height/stuff? Man, you had the best shock setup in the US! N74L and 33's for more articulation than even me. I'm puzzled by this GregB.

With stock height coils and OME shocks will you bottom the shocks?

And by the way...I've regretted not buying your 100. I've finished the LX450 and may end up selling it for another 100 after all. Not sure yet. A properly modifed 100 can do almost anything an equally modified 80 can. I'm sick of 80's. http://shottscruisers.smugmug.com/gallery/1928333

 

[kitkraft]

Greg:
Are you gonna sell your bumpers?

 

[HOJU]

I'm looking for a 100 to replace my 4runner, do you plan on selling your bumpers? or are they already spoken for?

thanks-

 

[SALEH]

Greb

i think u will be fine with Slee Slider with Stock Coils i suggest ome 860 then adjust the Front T-bar height but i think front t-bar without bumber or winch its firm u cannot keep it stock height with 295 tires maybe it will run

 

[bwbski26]

im very interested in your front bumper, please pm me.

 

[DMX84]

How about taking those silly step sliders off….& trade me for my factory running boards!

 

[hoser]

1. How do you think the stock coils will ride with OME N101's instead of the stock shocks? The only other option I can come up with is cutting down some OME coils to stock height. I'll probably just have to put the stock coils on and see how it feels after I drive it a bit.

2. With it at the stock height, do you think the diff drop kit will hurt anything? Since we're only talking an inch I'm thinking it won't matter, but I'm not sure; thoughts?

Whatever you do, don't cut down the OME coils. The spring rate will go up and you'll likely have a bouncy ride. Maybe look into getting the OEM 80 series no-lift rear coils (862?). I doubt leaving the diff drop in there would hurt anything. IIRC, it is actually a 20mm drop.

 

[Greg B]

Greb

i think u will be fine with Slee Slider with Stock Coils i suggest ome 860 then adjust the Front T-bar height but i think front t-bar without bumber or winch its firm u cannot keep it stock height with 295 tires maybe it will run

Thanks for your thoughts on the stock coils. I'm going to try that first and see how I like it.

The front t-bar work well with the stock bumper; I drove it this way for a while and it was not too firm. Also, 295's will fit on a stock 100; others have done this with good results.

 

[Greg B]

Are you shopping for another 100? If not...what will you do with your bumpers? So the wife doesn't like the added height/stuff? Man, you had the best shock setup in the US! N74L and 33's for more articulation than even me. I'm puzzled by this GregB.

No, I'm shopping for a new Roush Mustang.

I'm not sure what I'm doing with the bumpers yet. I'll probably sell them but I'm not shipping them. I would have to have them packaged and shipped by a trucking company and I doubt anyone is willing to pay for this. If I do sell them, it will have to be to someone that is willing to pick them up.

The wife agreed to drive the 100 as long as it looks stock. She doesn't mind the Slee step sliders but she doesn't like the bumpers or the suspension lift.

With stock height coils and OME shocks will you bottom the shocks?

This is a good question, I believe the OME shocks are about an inch longer than the stock ones. However, I doubt it will ever go offroad without me switching to the 866's.

And by the way...I've regretted not buying your 100. I've finished the LX450 and may end up selling it for another 100 after all. Not sure yet. A properly modifed 100 can do almost anything an equally modified 80 can. I'm sick of 80's. http://shottscruisers.smugmug.com/gallery/1928333

I considered putting the 100 up for sale to get this Mustang, but I can't go without an offroad vehicle in the family. So, instead we're selling my wife's Mercedes and I'm getting the best of both worlds since my wife is going to drive the 100.

 

[Greg B]

Whatever you do, don't cut down the OME coils. The spring rate will go up and you'll likely have a bouncy ride. Maybe look into getting the OEM 80 series no-lift rear coils (862?). I doubt leaving the diff drop in there would hurt anything. IIRC, it is actually a 20mm drop.

Thanks for the advice Hoser. Good to know on cutting the coils; that's not something I've ever done before. The 862 idea may work too; I'm going to try the stock coils first and if those don't feel right, I may try the 862's. Thanks again,

 

[alkaline747trio]

You know those bumpers will protect your wife and your 100 far better than stock bumpers.

 

[dclee]

You know those bumpers will protect your wife and your 100 far better than stock bumpers.

I concur, and here's some proof to show your wife:

https://forum.ih8mud.com/showpost.php?p=481756&postcount=22

BTW, crash protection is EXACTLY how I justified sliders and front bumper to my wife.

 

[Tinkerer]

I concur, and here's some proof to show your wife:

https://forum.ih8mud.com/showpost.php?p=481756&postcount=22

BTW, crash protection is EXACTLY how I justified sliders and front bumper to my wife.

I would expect an OEM energy-absorbing front end & bumper to better manage impact energy from hitting something rigid & heavy/immoveable, but the heavy structural steel type front bumper to be better when impacting something like another vehicle (at least, better for the vehicle with the heavier steel bumper - in fact worse for the other vehicle).

The pix & writeup of the LC that hit the heavy crane may illustrate one undesirable result of a heavy structural steel front bumper, when hitting something rigid & heavy: The vehicle apparently pivoted forward upon impact and therefore also impacted the A-pillars and windshield with lots of energy, crushing them inward into the cabin. This undesirable result might have been reduced if the vehicle had been equipped with the OEM front bumper, because the OEM bumper is designed along with the rest of the system to absorb impact energy and direct remaining energy & resulting deformations into specific paths that somewhat avoid the passenger compartment shell. With an OEM bumper, the vehicle might have pivoted forward less, leaving the cabin shell less deformed, and impacting passengers with less energy.

Hard to say for sure without a crash test to duplicate conditions again, or computer simulation using FEA etc.. But I wouldn't assume that the rigid structural steel front bumper is better in a crash in all conditions - at least as far as crash energy management and passenger safety is concerned.

Now, side and roof reinforcements - that's a different story.

 

[Greg B]

Thanks for the concern. In my situation, it's not up for discussion with my wife. She doesn't want them on there and the 100 will be her primary vehicle. Honestly, I believe the 100 is plenty safe with or without the steel bumpers and feel 100% confident that my family is safe.

 

[alkaline747trio]

I would expect an OEM energy-absorbing front end & bumper to better manage impact energy from hitting something rigid & heavy/immoveable, but the heavy structural steel type front bumper to be better when impacting something like another vehicle (at least, better for the vehicle with the heavier steel bumper - in fact worse for the other vehicle).

The pix & writeup of the LC that hit the heavy crane may illustrate one undesirable result of a heavy structural steel front bumper, when hitting something rigid & heavy: The vehicle apparently pivoted forward upon impact and therefore also impacted the A-pillars and windshield with lots of energy, crushing them inward into the cabin. This undesirable result might have been reduced if the vehicle had been equipped with the OEM front bumper, because the OEM bumper is designed along with the rest of the system to absorb impact energy and direct remaining energy & resulting deformations into specific paths that somewhat avoid the passenger compartment shell. With an OEM bumper, the vehicle might have pivoted forward less, leaving the cabin shell less deformed, and impacting passengers with less energy.

Hard to say for sure without a crash test to duplicate conditions again, or computer simulation using FEA etc.. But I wouldn't assume that the rigid structural steel front bumper is better in a crash in all conditions - at least as far as crash energy management and passenger safety is concerned.

Now, side and roof reinforcements - that's a different story.

Almost soley for the sake of arguement, I believe that the frame is the reason it pivoted, the ARB was pretty well thrashed it just didn't deform quite like OEM would. The frame is the most rigid part of the system and was probably the suport for the pivot.

 

[Tinkerer]

Almost soley for the sake of arguement, I believe that the frame is the reason it pivoted, the ARB was pretty well thrashed it just didn't deform quite like OEM would. The frame is the most rigid part of the system and was probably the suport for the pivot.

Indeed, but: The lack of an energy-absorbing front bumper structure meant that there was more kinetic energy transferred to the pivot action, causing the vehicle to pivot higher than it would have otherwise.

An energy-absorbing bumper system would have soaked up some of the kinetic energy at impact, resulting in less net pivoting action.

Might have been a significant difference in this case, might not have been. But my point is that a rigid structural steel bumper is NOT always better for averting passenger injury in a collision. In some collisions it might help, but in other collisions an energy-absorbing bumper system would better preserve the passengers. (Believe it or not, the entire system is designed to absorb some impact energy and direct remaining energy specifically to protect the passenger compartment, in a collision. Re "crumple zones", etc. The front bumper is the first crumple zone.)

Although, in all cases, the energy-absorbing bumper will sacrifice itself, whereas the structural steel bumper can brush off minor impacts with little or no damage.

 

[dclee]

Indeed, but: The lack of an energy-absorbing front bumper structure meant that there was more kinetic energy transferred to the pivot action, causing the vehicle to pivot higher than it would have otherwise.

Maybe, depending on the vectors of the impact force and the design of the front frame members, cargo load distribution in the vehicle at the time of the accident, etc. ad nauseum. For us armchair Toyota engineers, I don't think there is a reliable way to say either way for sure.

For the 80 bumper in the referenced link, I might tend to agree with you about increased energy being transmitted to other parts of the vehicle (including the passenger cabin), as the 80 Series ARB bumpers are not designed with crush rates and airbag deployment in mind. However, in the case of the 100 Series bars such as what Greg has, they are. I just wanted to show a horrific acident where the ARB may have played a part (in Doug Miller's referenced post, he talks about why he thinks the bumper in this particular case was a safety aid, not a hindrance, and I believe Doug worked for Lexus engineering in his first career).

Anyway, my $0.02,

 

[dclee]

Honestly, I believe the 100 is plenty safe with or without the steel bumpers and feel 100% confident that my family is safe.

But it's not as kewl...

 

[wngrog]

Man my wife loves driving my Cruiser because it DOESNT look like all the rest of them.

That is the pits.

Drag your feet on de-moding it and see if she even cares.