I'm running 6.5mpa front, 6mpa . Rear i have no choice, it's either 7.5 normally or 6.5 with the 30mm spring shim. The ride is great, and it puts less strain on my globes prolonging its life i hope.
Builds The Story of Blue (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter ClassyJalopy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- build thread lx470
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
I noticed a significant difference adjusting from 5.9 to 6.9 when I did my front t-bar turns (I over torqued when leveling before I had techstream).... so, IMO you have some more plush to unlock especially in the rear. I was surprised it could make that much difference until I realized one MPa is 145 PSI.
IndroCruise
SILVER Star
AHC updates:
Both front sides are dead equal at 19.75" (approx.). I unplugged the AHC temp sensor and got fresh AHC readings.
Front is 6.0 mPa and rear is 2.1 mPa. Looks like 30mm spacers on top of the LC springs are not really needed.
Should I worry about the slight difference in the front height sensor readings (right -0.1 vs. left 0.2)? Should I try to increase the front pressure to get it above 6.4? Would running the truck with really low rear pressure going to hurt anything?
special thanks to @IndroCruise and @suprarx7nut for hand-holding so far. The new globes have completely transformed the ride and I might even try to take the LX out for a quick trip this weekend!
View attachment 2774745
Great story, great work very well done and great improvement, as described in this long thread -- and on AHC matters you are down to the fine tuning!!
As mentioned above by @suprarx7nut and others, bringing Front AHC pressure up a bit and bringing Rear AHC pressure up a lot should yield even more improvement.
Just looking at your equivalent of the "pencil test" of the old 'globes', the depth measurements seem high (external dimension of a Rear OEM 'globe' is about ~5 inches overall) but whatever, it seems that all nitrogen gas departed long ago from the old 'globes' with the membrane pushed to the back wall of the 'globe'.
In this situation when the old 'globes' were on the vehicle, several things were happening. (The pics attached far below may help with visualisation of some of the following statements in relation to the old nitrogen-depleted 'globes'):
(1) there is no 'spring effect' from the compression/decompression of nitrogen gas -- because the nitrogen has disappeared, there is only incompressible fluid in the 'globes' and there is no force to move this fluid;
(2) the Damping Force Control Actuators (to which the 'globes' are attached) now rely completely on the movement of fluid "pumped" through the Actuators by the up-and-down action (compression and rebound) of the 'shock absorbers' when the vehicle is in motion.
(3) there is no 'modulating' effect of fluid flow in and out of the 'globes' -- which are now 'dead',
(4) unlike conventional shock absorbers, AHC 'shock absorbers' in themselves provide very little, if any, damping,
(5) in this condition, damping is very poor, way less than the 'as designed' condition -- and so 'ride quality' is poor, very 'springy', sometimes likened to a pogo-stick (meaning all spring, little if any damping). The purpose and meaning of 'damping' is the control of the speed of the up-and-down movement (compression and rebound) of the suspension,
(6) in this condition, the overall combined 'spring rate' of the suspension components is no longer 'as designed', because the 'gas springs' (the nitrogen gas behind the membranes in the 'globes') are not working -- they are non-existent without their nitrogen charge,
(7) earlier posts in this thread discussed the different effects of the increased spring rate of KING KTRS-79 Rear springs (when new: about 130 pounds per inch of deflection) compared to about 95 pounds per inch for OEM AHC coil springs and compared with OEM non-AHC coil springs (when new: about 170 pounds per inch of deflection). The difficulty with conclusions at that time was that overall 'globe' condition had not been reported via difference in graduations at AHC Tank between "HI" and "LO" heights. It turns out that the 'globes' were 'dead' at that time. Their likely contribution was between zero and negligible. The comparison of the different coil springs at that time with 'globes' in that condition may be misleading.
All of which can be fixed by installing new 'globes', in effect re-instatement of the 'gas springs' (now done already) and by suspension adjustments and 'fixes' (intended -- soon to be done) which can bring the AHC pressures and damping responses back into the preferred ranges.
The newly posted Techstream read-out shows Height Control Accumulator pressure as 0.0 Mpa. Usually this simply means that the reading has been taken too quickly -- before the AHC Pump has had time to recharge the Accumulator after the raise "LO" to "N" has finished. This should be around 15 seconds after the green indicator light has stopped blinking and the suspension has settled -- but best to allow around 60 seconds just to be sure -- and good to listen to the AHC Pump and record its operation time because slow raise times may be indicative of other problems.
Tape-measured hub-to-fender heights and Height Control Sensor readings all look reasonable in the Techstream read-out. These measurements and readings suggest that the raise "LO" to "N" was completed, even if the Accumulator was not recharged. It would be best to check for consistency with multiple tests.
If Rear AHC pressure reading at 2.1MPa is reliable (done three times?), then it is way below the FSM-indicated range of 5.6 to 6.7 Mpa (without sub-tank) under FSM-specified conditions. It means that the Rear is way over-sprung or under-damped. At this pressure, the new Rear 'globes' won't be doing much, and damping and ride quality will be way worse than it can be.
On the numbers, it seems doubtful that the high spring rate of non-AHC springs are a good match, now that the new 'globes' are in place -- but that may depend on what further weight is to be added to the vehicle??
It seems that the 30 millimetre spacer could come out -- but most IH8MUD reports suggest that by itself this will make only a small difference. Some tweaking (lowering) of the Rear Height Control Sensor could be considered to raise Rear AHC pressure but this effect also will be small.
Post #6 at the following thread by @LndXrsr assembles some useful reminders garnered from various earlier IH8MUD sources:
The ABCs of AHC - How to Measure, Flush, and Adjust all in one place
forum.ih8mud.com
In summary:
Rear AHC pressure adjustments in order of magnitude:
- Adding weight over rear axle: ~1.0MPa/210lbs
- Rear sensor lift 1": +0.6MPa
- New OEM AHC springs: -0-0.3MPa depending on how worn the current springs are
- 30mm spring spacers: -0.3-0.6MPa reduction
- King KTRS-79 Springs: -3.0MPa reduction
- OEM non-AHC springs or used 80-series springs: YMMV, >3MPa reduction likely
Front AHC pressure adjustments:
- Front AHC pressure at 6.0 Mpa also is below the FSM-indicated range of 6.4 to 7.4 Mpa. Torsion bar adjustment bringing this pressure into the lower end of the range should further improve damping and ride quality.
Overall observation:
To make the good results achieved so far even better
- to achieve better Rear AHC pressures, it may be worth considering a return to KING KTRS-79 Rear springs plus 30 millimetre spacers (or instead of spacers, airbags inside Rear springs, if significant extra loads are only occasional).
- actual AHC pressures chosen are a somewhat personal thing because judgement about ride quality is a personal thing. For the health and longevity of the AHC system, AHC pressures in the lower end of the range are suggested.
- when AHC pressures are within FSM-indicated range, suggest check that all is well with the new 'globes' -- check difference in graduations at AHC Tank between "HI" and "LO" heights, expecting around 14 graduations with new 'globes'.
[As an aside, it is worth keeping in mind that the great results achieved by maintaining the AHC system constantly in its operating range always involves compensating (but not over-compensating) additional weight with higher spring rate springs. The limitation is that the damping range remains unchanged (because the AHC/TEMS design and characteristics are fixed) but the new spring rate and increased vehicle mass (or weight) are very different. This means a considerable departure from the original overall suspension design. Consequently, there always will be some performance penalty. A suspension designer would not do it this way. Instead, different components would be specified which better match mass (weight), springs, damping range, other vehicle features and required suspension performance. However, in the LC100/LX470 AHC/TEMS suspension, the conservative original design is very forgiving and accommodates reasonably well many of the changes described on IH8MUD -- even though these changes were never contemplated nor acknowledged by the vehicle designers. So far, so good!!].
Gas Chamber (a.k.a. 'globes' or 'spheres') internal details:
Gas Chamber (a.k.a. 'globes' or 'spheres') and Damping Force Control Actuator:
AHC Hydraulic Circuit, in motion straight ahead, Gate Valves open, Levelling Valves closed until inputs from Height Control Sensors cause ECU to direct auto-levelling, and initiates AHC Pump to raise Front and/or Rear, or, releases fluid to tank to lower:
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #324
First of all this was a great read! Went perfectly with the first cup of coffee this morning. Cheers for that!Great story, great work very well done and great improvement, as described in this long thread -- and on AHC matters you are down to the fine tuning!!
As mentioned above by @suprarx7nut and others, bringing Front AHC pressure up a bit and bringing Rear AHC pressure up a lot should yield even more improvement.
Just looking at your equivalent of the "pencil test" of the old 'globes', the depth measurements seem high (external dimension of a Rear OEM 'globe' is about ~5 inches overall) but whatever, it seems that all nitrogen gas departed long ago from the old 'globes' with the membrane pushed to the back wall of the 'globe'.
In this situation when the old 'globes' were on the vehicle, several things were happening. (The pics attached far below may help with visualisation of some of the following statements in relation to the old nitrogen-depleted 'globes'):
(1) there is no 'spring effect' from the compression/decompression of nitrogen gas -- because the nitrogen has disappeared, there is only incompressible fluid in the 'globes' and there is no force to move this fluid;
(2) the Damping Force Control Actuators (to which the 'globes' are attached) now rely completely on the movement of fluid "pumped" through the Actuators by the up-and-down action (compression and rebound) of the 'shock absorbers' when the vehicle is in motion.
(3) there is no 'modulating' effect of fluid flow in and out of the 'globes' -- which are now 'dead',
(4) unlike conventional shock absorbers, AHC 'shock absorbers' in themselves provide very little, if any, damping,
(5) in this condition, damping is very poor, way less than the 'as designed' condition -- and so 'ride quality' is poor, very 'springy', sometimes likened to a pogo-stick (meaning all spring, little if any damping). The purpose and meaning of 'damping' is the control of the speed of the up-and-down movement (compression and rebound) of the suspension,
(6) in this condition, the overall combined 'spring rate' of the suspension components is no longer 'as designed', because the 'gas springs' (the nitrogen gas behind the membranes in the 'globes') are not working -- they are non-existent without their nitrogen charge,
(7) earlier posts in this thread discussed the different effects of the increased spring rate of KING KTRS-79 Rear springs (when new: about 130 pounds per inch of deflection) compared to about 95 pounds per inch for OEM AHC coil springs and compared with OEM non-AHC coil springs (when new: about 170 pounds per inch of deflection). The difficulty with conclusions at that time was that overall 'globe' condition had not been reported via difference in graduations at AHC Tank between "HI" and "LO" heights. It turns out that the 'globes' were 'dead' at that time. Their likely contribution was between zero and negligible. The comparison of the different coil springs at that time with 'globes' in that condition may be misleading.
All of which can be fixed by installing new 'globes', in effect re-instatement of the 'gas springs' (now done already) and by suspension adjustments and 'fixes' (intended -- soon to be done) which can bring the AHC pressures and damping responses back into the preferred ranges.
The newly posted Techstream read-out shows Height Control Accumulator pressure as 0.0 Mpa. Usually this simply means that the reading has been taken too quickly -- before the AHC Pump has had time to recharge the Accumulator after the raise "LO" to "N" has finished. This should be around 15 seconds after the green indicator light has stopped blinking and the suspension has settled -- but best to allow around 60 seconds just to be sure -- and good to listen to the AHC Pump and record its operation time because slow raise times may be indicative of other problems.
Tape-measured hub-to-fender heights and Height Control Sensor readings all look reasonable in the Techstream read-out. These measurements and readings suggest that the raise "LO" to "N" was completed, even if the Accumulator was not recharged. It would be best to check for consistency with multiple tests.
If Rear AHC pressure reading at 2.1MPa is reliable (done three times?), then it is way below the FSM-indicated range of 5.6 to 6.7 Mpa (without sub-tank) under FSM-specified conditions. It means that the Rear is way over-sprung or under-damped. At this pressure, the new Rear 'globes' won't be doing much, and damping and ride quality will be way worse than it can be.
On the numbers, it seems doubtful that the high spring rate of non-AHC springs are a good match, now that the new 'globes' are in place -- but that may depend on what further weight is to be added to the vehicle??
It seems that the 30 millimetre spacer could come out -- but most IH8MUD reports suggest that by itself this will make only a small difference. Some tweaking (lowering) of the Rear Height Control Sensor could be considered to raise Rear AHC pressure but this effect also will be small.
Post #6 at the following thread by @LndXrsr assembles some useful reminders garnered from various earlier IH8MUD sources:
The ABCs of AHC - How to Measure, Flush, and Adjust all in one place
In summary:
Rear AHC pressure adjustments in order of magnitude:
- Adding weight over rear axle: ~1.0MPa/210lbs
- Rear sensor lift 1": +0.6MPa
- New OEM AHC springs: -0-0.3MPa depending on how worn the current springs are
- 30mm spring spacers: -0.3-0.6MPa reduction
- King KTRS-79 Springs: -3.0MPa reduction
- OEM non-AHC springs or used 80-series springs: YMMV, >3MPa reduction likely
Front AHC pressure adjustments:
- Front AHC pressure at 6.0 Mpa also is below the FSM-indicated range of 6.4 to 7.4 Mpa. Torsion bar adjustment bringing this pressure into the lower end of the range should further improve damping and ride quality.
Overall observation:
To make the good results achieved so far even better
- to achieve better Rear AHC pressures, it may be worth considering a return to KING KTRS-79 Rear springs plus 30 millimetre spacers (or instead of spacers, airbags inside Rear springs, if significant extra loads are only occasional).
- actual AHC pressures chosen are a somewhat personal thing because judgement about ride quality is a personal thing. For the health and longevity of the AHC system, AHC pressures in the lower end of the range are suggested.
- when AHC pressures are within FSM-indicated range, suggest check that all is well with the new 'globes' -- check difference in graduations at AHC Tank between "HI" and "LO" heights, expecting around 14 graduations with new 'globes'.
[As an aside, it is worth keeping in mind that the great results achieved by maintaining the AHC system constantly in its operating range always involves compensating (but not over-compensating) additional weight with higher spring rate springs. The limitation is that the damping range remains unchanged (because the AHC/TEMS design and characteristics are fixed) but the new spring rate and increased vehicle mass (or weight) are very different. This means a considerable departure from the original overall suspension design. Consequently, there always will be some performance penalty. A suspension designer would not do it this way. Instead, different components would be specified which better match mass (weight), springs, damping range, other vehicle features and required suspension performance. However, in the LC100/LX470 AHC/TEMS suspension, the conservative original design is very forgiving and accommodates reasonably well many of the changes described on IH8MUD -- even though these changes were never contemplated nor acknowledged by the vehicle designers. So far, so good!!].
Gas Chamber (a.k.a. 'globes' or 'spheres') internal details:
View attachment 2775120
Gas Chamber (a.k.a. 'globes' or 'spheres') and Damping Force Control Actuator:
View attachment 2775123
AHC Hydraulic Circuit, in motion straight ahead, Gate Valves open, Levelling Valves closed until inputs from Height Control Sensors cause ECU to direct auto-levelling, and initiates AHC Pump to raise Front and/or Rear, or, releases fluid to tank to lower:
View attachment 2775127
Secondly, there are quite a few good suggestions here - let me make sure I got them all. I need to increase the front pressure but backing off the torsion on TBs. Then for rear, I should try the Kings springs again to see if that would bring the pressure in line with specs by themselves.
Anything else?
Everybody so nice up in this forum, go over to the BMW forum, douchebags galore, totally different breed of creatures.
Mud is pretty cool.
ramangain
Clarksonian disciple
It's because they suffer from lead poisoning after drinking their used 10W-60 motor oil from rod bearing wear.
- Thread starter
- #328
I swapped out the rear springs again today. Went from LC springs with 30mm spacers to King springs with 30mm spacers. The rear pressure went from 2.1 to 7.2 
Other important parameters: Temp sensor disconnected, full 40G of fuel, with bike rack etc. on the rear.
So now I have tried these combinations so far:
Just LC springs: 5.4 mPa
LC with Spacers: 2.1 mPa
Just the King Springs : 8.0 mPa
King with 30mm spacer: 7.2 mPa
Ride in the rear improved considerably with the Kings+spacer set up but now I am concerned about the longevity of the rear globes. What do the experts suggest I should do here? Run the LC springs without spacers (5.4mPa) to protect the globes and just live with very slightly imperfect ride?
Also, I have a rare day off this Saturday (I am usually busy with work and school 7 days a week!). Would I hurt anything if I go out for mild wheeling with 7.2mPa rear pressure?
Other important parameters: Temp sensor disconnected, full 40G of fuel, with bike rack etc. on the rear.
So now I have tried these combinations so far:
Just LC springs: 5.4 mPa
LC with Spacers: 2.1 mPa
Just the King Springs : 8.0 mPa
King with 30mm spacer: 7.2 mPa
Ride in the rear improved considerably with the Kings+spacer set up but now I am concerned about the longevity of the rear globes. What do the experts suggest I should do here? Run the LC springs without spacers (5.4mPa) to protect the globes and just live with very slightly imperfect ride?
Also, I have a rare day off this Saturday (I am usually busy with work and school 7 days a week!). Would I hurt anything if I go out for mild wheeling with 7.2mPa rear pressure?
ramangain
Clarksonian disciple
You'll be a-ok at 7.2
IndroCruise
SILVER Star
I swapped out the rear springs again today. Went from LC springs with 30mm spacers to King springs with 30mm spacers. The rear pressure went from 2.1 to 7.2
Other important parameters: Temp sensor disconnected, full 40G of fuel, with bike rack etc. on the rear.
So now I have tried these combinations so far:
Just LC springs: 5.4 mPa
LC with Spacers: 2.1 mPa
Just the King Springs : 8.0 mPa
King with 30mm spacer: 7.2 mPa
Ride in the rear improved considerably with the Kings+spacer set up but now I am concerned about the longevity of the rear globes. What do the experts suggest I should do here? Run the LC springs without spacers (5.4mPa) to protect the globes and just live with very slightly imperfect ride?
Also, I have a rare day off this Saturday (I am usually busy with work and school 7 days a week!). Would I hurt anything if I go out for mild wheeling with 7.2mPa rear pressure?
View attachment 2776670
If it was me, I certainly would go wheeling with 7.2 Mpa Rear AHC pressure on my Saturday off!!
I would try and keep any additional weight down, knowing that the Rear AHC pressure rises over my test weight by about 1 Mpa for 210 pounds additional over the Rear axle.
I would “just do it”. I would see this as a ‘test drive’ while I was trying to figure out what is going on with the different test results. Anyway, 7.2 Mpa Rear AHC pressure is not that far from the FSM-indicated range.
A day outing is not going to kill anything in the AHC system. At the most – and this seems very unlikely on a one-day run – maybe and only maybe -- the beginnings of a slight weep (dampness not a full-on leak) at the Rear shock absorbers might be possible depending on the actual touring load and actual pressures -- but I think you would have seen this already if that was happening. If a weep were to commence, it means that the shock absorber seals are at their limit. Weeping would stop when AHC pressure is reduced.
The practical test is whether or not the vehicle will at least stay at “N” (not drop to “LO”) when you are ready to set off, even better if it can raise to “HI”. That tells you how well the AHC system is coping. In that way, the AHC system is your built-in weighbridge.
As shown in the Techstream read-out attached to your Post #317 and mentioned in my Post #323 and thinking about your last Post #328 and latest Techstream read-out, there is something strange going on in the numbers which I don’t understand.
For some reason, 30 millimetre spacers seem to make a HUGE unexpected difference of 3.3 Mpa in Rear AHC pressure with LC100 non-AHC springs (5.4 MPa without the spacers, 2.1 Mpa with the spacers). I did wonder whether the 2.1 Mpa reading at Post #317 was reliable because the Height Control Accumulator pressure was 0.0 Mpa in that reading – meaning that the Accumulator had not filled.
The 30 millimetre spacers seem to make a normal difference of 0.6 Mpa in Rear AHC pressure when used with the KING KTRS-79 Rear springs (8.0 Mpa without the spacers, 7.2 Mpa with the spacers). This difference is reasonable, as expected.
Why are the ‘spacer results’ so different with the different springs? I don’t get it. Something else has to be happening – I have looked through your thread but I cannot figure it out.
Anyway, on the numbers, I would suggest go for LC100 non-AHC springs without spacers at 5.4 Mpa) when you have the time and energy for a final change-out, if you are happy with the ride with that arrangement.
In my own case, I have much less attached weight than I can see in the pictures and lists for your vehicle in your earlier Posts – but I have enough weight to necessitate KTRS-79 Rear springs. When the vehicle is empty (but carrying its full 141 litres = 37 US gallons of diesel fuel) my Rear AHC pressures are around 5.1 Mpa. The ride is a little firmer than stock when driving around town in this empty condition but it is not unacceptable. I usually put the second spare wheel and a bunch of tools, recovery gear, etc, back in the vehicle and I have done a small Rear ‘sensor lift’ which all bring the Rear AHC pressure up a bit, to around 5.6 Mpa. This gives quite good ride quality for ‘daily driver’ duties. The ride is very sweet when loaded with the unbelievable amount of ‘essential’ (?) stuff which somehow seems to be necessary for touring!! When loaded, Rear AHC pressures would be somewhere around 7 Mpa. I have airbags inside the Rear springs (Firestone Coilrite) which can be used if needed to take some load and pressure off the Rear AHC system.
Where you wheeling at?
Non-expert here but did you cross level the front with your tape measure? I would sleep like a baby at 7.2 in the rear with a full 40 gal tank. Now let's talk tire pressures.....
- Thread starter
- #333
Ohv park at Tigerton WI
- Thread starter
- #334
18 psi is my goto for most stuff. We typically have smaller rocks, gravel, tree roots and mud around here.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #335
Man, I LOVE each 0ne of your posts.
The issue with my older reading where accumulator pressurewas 0.0 had me scratching my head too.
So naturally I was a little apprehensive when I saw the accumulator was still showing 0.0 today, after the spring change. No matter how long I waited, and how many times I moved from L to N, it stayed at 0.0!!
Then I plugged the temp sensor back in and took another reading, to my surprise the pressures all read the same as they did with the sensor unplugged but the accumulator read a nice fat 10.4
.Not really sure what to make of that.
As for the spacers with LC springs, I must confess the 5.4 reading without the spacers was before I replaced the globes - not sure of that has any bearing on the pressure readings.
Also, worth noting that LC springs are at least 3 inches taller than AHC or King springs, so perhaps additional height contributed by the spacers have a more drastic effect
The height accumulator won't charge with the temp sensor disconnected. At least, that's been my experience.Man, I LOVE each 0ne of your posts.
The issue with my older reading where accumulator pressurewas 0.0 had me scratching my head too.
So naturally I was a little apprehensive when I saw the accumulator was still showing 0.0 today, after the spring change. No matter how long I waited, and how many times I moved from L to N, it stayed at 0.0!!
Then I plugged the temp sensor back in and took another reading, to my surprise the pressures all read the same as they did with the sensor unplugged but the accumulator read a nice fat 10.4
Not really sure what to make of that.
As for the spacers with LC springs, I must confess the 5.4 reading without the spacers was before I replaced the globes - not sure of that has any bearing on the pressure readings.
Also, worth noting that LC springs are at least 3 inches taller than AHC or King springs, so perhaps additional height contributed by the spacers have a more drastic effect
7.2 is fine. Hopefully that's with most the load out you'd take on a wheeling trip. People get in trouble when they never check pressure and it's a whopping 8.5+ empty. Throw in some gear and a few friends and now it's 9.5 in N and it won't go to H and they swear AHC is the biggest pile of sh....
Anyways, I'd rock 7.2 for now. If you load up for a trip and check it and find it creeping further towards 8 I would opt for the LC springs at 5.4 and then do a little sensor lift to get that pressure back up. Just .25"-.5" or so.
If you've already adjusted sensors to give yourself a lift at that 7.2 reading, simply lower the sensor lift until you're happy with the pressure.
Remember, the vehicle should still function correctly with nearly 1000 lbs of additional payload. Armor and cargo eats up some of that payload, but even a big steel bumper and a ton of recovery gear will struggle to hit 500 lbs. If you're in the neighborhood on neutral pressures you'll be ok.
IndroCruise
SILVER Star
BFG 275/65R17 121/118S KO2 LT “E” Rated:
35 – 40 psi – fast travel, sealed highway
20 – 35 psi – well-formed gravel road
18 – 25 psi – long distance corrugations (washboards), rocky trails
15 – 18 psi – sand, mud (sometimes down to 12psi but very slow, careful on turns)
Deflator and compressor carried -- and two spares and maxtrax for when it all goes wrong!!
- Thread starter
- #338
Yesterday's outing was a blast. Truck had no problem whatsoever in staying in Hi mode the whole day. Wheel articulation was great. I will have to figure out how to limit the up travel on front wheels a little, they were definitely hitting the fender on full stuff.
I’d say 7.2 will probably give you the best ride both daily and off-road since that’s the reading you’re getting fairly loaded up. Worth rechecking as the springs settle and see how pressure evolve. At least you’ve set yourself up with plenty of options if your load-out ever changes significantly in the future.
- Thread starter
- #340
One thing I really disliked at our last outing was how every time suspension bottomed out, it resulted in a pretty sudden and strong jolt. The factory bump stops are not designed for comfort, they are mostly designed to protect the suspension parts. I have had pretty good experience with the wheeler off road bump stop in my 98 so I decided to try them on this truck too.
I did cut off about 1/2" from the front stops so they don't touch the control arms at normal height. One tip to make the front install easier is to super glue the bolts to the bump stop, then you can just turn the whole bump stop to screw it in, instead of fiddling with the L key!
I did cut off about 1/2" from the front stops so they don't touch the control arms at normal height. One tip to make the front install easier is to super glue the bolts to the bump stop, then you can just turn the whole bump stop to screw it in, instead of fiddling with the L key!
