Suspension/tires for 100-series

[JBro]

Howdy all-

I'm new to the site and just picked up an '04 100-series. I'm currently getting rid of my '95 80-series with OME and 285/75/16 BFG ATs for a few reasons.

- The 80-series was getting up in miles and a little worn for the family
- I need something viable in the city (Seattle) and have gotten tired of not being able to get into parking garages! (the fact that my wife uses the rig with kids contributes to this as well...)
- Need a little better mileage that my 11 city/hwy.

As a purist, I'd love to go full OME with aggressive tread but it just isn't in the cards for now. So, I'm looking for any tips on tires AND especially suspension that will not lift the rig but still give me improved flat ride and a little better articulation than the stock. Maybe it's not possible. But, I'm curious. Is there a no-lift OME option? I've heard decent reviews of the Billsteins...

For tires, I'm thinking I'll go BFG AT 285/60 (or 65)/18. I like 'em, they wear well, and the triple-ply is good for some of the flyfishing trips I take in Montana/Idaho/etc. where I'm on fireroads with rocks, etc.

Any tips would be much appreciated! And, it's great to find this site.

Cheers,
- Jeff

 

[macneill]

Welcome. And what, you don't want to lift?

I hear you on that front. I can't park anywhere indoors in New York City with the lift and rack. I don't mind it, but it pisses my wife off sometimes.

Not familiar with suspensions that firm up the ride, but I'm sure others do.

Good luck.

 

[pint]

I've heard the Bilstein shocks give a much nicer ride. Don't know about more articulation?

 

[3rd Cruiser]

JBro, Sounds like you have already decieded on which tires to get. I like the Bridgestone revos, especially in the rain. But they don't have as strong of sidewalls as the BFGs.

Regarding a no lift suspension option. Go with the Bilsteins. Much better hadeling then stock or OME shocks. They eliminated the mushy side to side motion for me but better yet, no more front end dive while braking or going over rough terrain at speed. Extended there isn't all that much difference between the OME and Bilsteins in overall shock length. Not sure if that means you will get some better articulation or not over stock.

The Bilsteins will firm up the ride over stock. Somewhat noticable at slow speeds but not at hiway speeds. Much better ride then the OMEs all around. If I could get reasonably priced Bilsteins for my lifted turck I would do so in a heart beat.

Hope this helps, and welcome.

 

[Travis351]

I would go with the 2 inch medium kit from Sleeoffroad.

You can minimize the lift to about 1 inch on the front, just with adjustments...add a bumper, dual battery or winch and you'll be real close to stock hight.

As for the back end, see if Slee has a spring a little softer for the rear. Leave the 3rd row in there (I also understand that back bumpers are on sale.) and again, the lift would be minimal. When you change your mind in 6 months or so, all you have to do is crank up the t-bars and replace the rear springs with the 866s and you are golden.

How low are the garage ceilings where you are? I haven't had a problem with the 2 inch lift anywhere around these parts.

 

[JBro]

Thanks all. Great stuff. I've heard good things about the Billsteins - a friend with a 4Runner had them and liked them a lot. I've loved my OME but... they may not be the right tool for this scenario.

3rd Cruiser: great insight. I'm thrilled with the new righ. Not happy with the mush that the OMEs fixed with my 80-series. Billsteins sound good. I can see this also being nice on mountain passes. I used to hate my factory 80-series roll when descending curves at speed... a little dicey.

Travis351: re: garage height, my office garage is about 6'6". With the 80-series, the rack would scrape and I had to angle the factory cross bars so that the height bar (in the garage) wouldn't whack them as hard. Not ideal. I sort of worked out a deal with the garage staff. And, street parking is not an option. Otherwise, in downtown Seattle, there are about 3 garages I can fit into.

Also - this rig is going to serve a different purpose. More family use, kids in and out of the back, skiing, etc. I want to make sure it handles better and can accomodate nasty stuff I'm sure to come across a few times each year but... it's just not going to be the go anywhere/ARB/OME/etc. rig I used to have. Oh well...

Any thoughts on the tires? Particularly on size... I'm thinking of going a little wider (285) and taller (65) from the stock (60) and I hope that the taller profile doesn't look strange with the 18" wheels.

I have to admit it... After having an aggressive looking rig, I kind of like the low-pro look on the 18" wheels. Never thought I'd say that but... well... there you have it. I must be getting soft in my older years.

Thanks,
- JBro

 

[JBro]

BTW - one additional question: which Billstein is the one to go with? the 5150 or 5125?

thanks,
- JBro

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I've had a number of comob's using various lift parts. My truck never rode better than when it had only the OME lift and front ARB. I would bet that lift-only and no ARB front bumper the ride would be similar (which some have reported). You'll get about 1.5" front and 1 3/4" rear. That's pretty close to stock though it road and handled great. Way better with some folks inside.

 

[spressomon]

I've had a number of comob's using various lift parts. My truck never rode better than when it had only the OME lift and front ARB. I would bet that lift-only and no ARB front bumper the ride would be similar (which some have reported). You'll get about 1.5" front and 1 3/4" rear. That's pretty close to stock though it road and handled great. Way better with some folks inside.

John...sorry to point out the obvious but at the time you only had the ARB front bumper and stock rear bumper you complained you didn't like this set-up because (excerpts taken from your build link)...

"One negative thing we experienced (and often) since adding the front bumper...it was front heavy. This came into play when decending steep and off-cambered hills. The 100 was a wheel-lifter. While we never got ourselves into trouble we sure were thinking of a rear bumper to balance the weight out. (More on that to come)"

"We also wanted the rear bumper to even out the weight between the front and rear. This would add stability because the nose wouldn't want to "dive" any longer when going down the hills."





"

 

[gjh]

I'm running the Bilsteins & 285/16 Revos on my otherwise stock 2000. The ride is much tighter, maybe a little bit firmer, but still very nice. Much better handleing over the stock Michelins which are a great highway tire. First thing I usually do is upgrade the shocks & I had them on my'88 Range Rover and liked them on that too.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

John...sorry to point out the obvious but at the time you only had the ARB front bumper and stock rear bumper you complained you didn't like this set-up because (excerpts taken from your build link)...

"One negative thing we experienced (and often) since adding the front bumper...it was front heavy. This came into play when decending steep and off-cambered hills. The 100 was a wheel-lifter. While we never got ourselves into trouble we sure were thinking of a rear bumper to balance the weight out. (More on that to come)"

"We also wanted the rear bumper to even out the weight between the front and rear. This would add stability because the nose wouldn't want to "dive" any longer when going down the hills."





"

Taken out of context.

The on-road ride was superb. Much better than stock. This guy in this thread wants stock or near-to-stock ride height so he sure ain't going to run trails like I did where I'm lifting wheels 4 feet off the air. Now, we're back in perspective.....but thanks for reading my thread.

Now, if he decides he want to run traily trails later....this setup will be an improvement too, as it did for me UNTIL there was a rear bumper that worked for my needs. Once weight balanced the truck did better on the trails, but made NO different on the highway.

Two different scenarios.

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

I'm running the Bilsteins & 285/16 Revos on my otherwise stock 2000. The ride is much tighter, maybe a little bit firmer, but still very nice. Much better handleing over the stock Michelins which are a great highway tire. First thing I usually do is upgrade the shocks & I had them on my'88 Range Rover and liked them on that too.

Good advise...JBro you dont need OME for what you want to do.

 

[2003landcruiser]

just put michelin AT2's on my 03. it did lift my rig a little. but what a nice ride for a 10 ply tire! wife thinks its too hard to climb into anymore...(maybe this would discourage her from driving it too!)

 

[dclee]

I lifted an inch with the OME medium lift. Went with Bilsteins (not the 5100 series, got the standard HD shocks, no funky mounting issues that way). Suspension travel is the same as stock, so you don't gain anything there (though stock is just fine for what it sounds like you want to do). Ride and control are vastly improved, and the Bilstein is far and away a better quality, better built shock than the OME, plus it has a full lifetime warranty. If you blow one out (unlikely) they'll just send you a new one. OMEs (which are more likely to blow out on you) don't offer this.

Anyway, I figure if the quality of the Billies is good enough to be OE on Mercedes-Benz and Porsche, it should be good enough for my Cruiser!

 

[fzj]

I have an 03 with the 18 inch wheels and just picked up some new tires for my rig a month or so ago! I went with the Goodyear ATS 275-65 R18, the main reason I went with this tire is just because I got an awesome deal on them ($285.00 for all four installed, all four are brand new, pretty good deal) They ride super nice and are about an inch taller than my stock tires! If I had not gotten a deal on these tires I would have gone a bit bigger!