To UCA or not to UCA (1 Viewer)

[ayaws]

Hopefully someone who is more educated will respond but I can't imagine really adding any additional benefits to a stock-height truck. You should probably just consider selling them to me.

 

[CoffeeGeek]

the suspension is called BP-51, for ByPass(internal bypass valving similar to fox) and 51 for the 51mm pistion size. 51mm equates to 2" so no it is not speculation. the new ARB will be a 2" piston. not a 2.5 like radflo, king or fox.

Maybe they will introduce a 61.7mm...not holding my breath. But it was developed first for the 200 and the hilux. Great to get some 200 love from ARB. They must have looked at a larger piston and economics as well as performance resulted in the 51.

 

[vabluefish]

Hopefully someone who is more educated will respond but I can't imagine really adding any additional benefits to a stock-height truck. You should probably just consider selling them to me.

One benefit may be that, due to the design of these aftermarket UCA's, there is more clearance between them and the tire over a stock UCA. This can allow for the use of chains up front. Believe that clearance issue is why most of the time a manufature will say not to put chains on up front. So, if you ever plan on using chains, there's that.

 

[Climbingnut]

Resurrecting this old thread. I'm looking at getting 2"-2.5" from a BP-51 install later this year. Being in southern Africa, I have to plan ahead in regards to UCA's. I know there are a number of companies who make them, IE. Total Chaos, SPC, etc. What I'd like to know is, what are the pro's and con's of each different type of UCA? Some, like the SPC have a factory style bushing, whereas others use a poly. They all claim to be 100% rebuildable. How often (how many miles) until a rebuild would be necessary? Has anyone rebuilt their ball joints in their aftermarket UCA's?

I live in Angola SW Africa, and my 200 will see lots of off-road use. Even the 'paved' streets have big pot holes and such. Off-road driving will not be racing, but will still be 40-50mph over heavy corrugated dirt road, as well as some technical cross axle driving and the occasional river crossing or muddy road. One thing is for sure, there will be lots of dirt and dust. Which UCA should hold up the best/longest and be the easiest to rebuild and get parts for.

I'm looking forward to some first hand experience here! Thanks in advance!

 

[Markuson]

Resurrecting this old thread. I'm looking at getting 2"-2.5" from a BP-51 install later this year. Being in southern Africa, I have to plan ahead in regards to UCA's. I know there are a number of companies who make them, IE. Total Chaos, SPC, etc. What I'd like to know is, what are the pro's and con's of each different type of UCA? Some, like the SPC have a factory style bushing, whereas others use a poly. They all claim to be 100% rebuildable. How often (how many miles) until a rebuild would be necessary? Has anyone rebuilt their ball joints in their aftermarket UCA's?

I live in Angola SW Africa, and my 200 will see lots of off-road use. Even the 'paved' streets have big pot holes and such. Off-road driving will not be racing, but will still be 40-50mph over heavy corrugated dirt road, as well as some technical cross axle driving and the occasional river crossing or muddy road. One thing is for sure, there will be lots of dirt and dust. Which UCA should hold up the best/longest and be the easiest to rebuild and get parts for.

I'm looking forward to some first hand experience here! Thanks in advance!

I have SPC's and they are excellent. However...they have issued 2 revisions within the last year or so. So if you go with SPC's just make sure you are buying the latest revision. I'm running them with BP-51's and 35's, and they allowed enough adjustment during alignment to squeeze these big tires in with excellent tracking. Would never have been able to do that with stock UCA's.

 

[Climbingnut]

I have SPC's and they are excellent. However...they have issued 2 revisions within the last year or so. So if you go with SPC's just make sure you are buying the latest revision. I'm running them with BP-51's and 35's, and they allowed enough adjustment during alignment to squeeze these big tires in with excellent tracking. Would never have been able to do that with stock UCA's.

Do you recall what the revisions are about? Is there an improvement on the manufacturing process or design? How long have you had your SPC's? Do you know of anyone who's had to rebuild the ball joint? Thanks for your input Markuson!

 

[Markuson]

Do you recall what the revisions are about? Is there an improvement on the manufacturing process or design? How long have you had your SPC's? Do you know of anyone who's had to rebuild the ball joint? Thanks for your input Markuson!

The revisions invalid the ball joint. I've had mine for about 2.5 years, and just had the revision installed 2 weeks ago at Slee.

 

[4gotalot]

My SPC UCA's still will not allow for clearance for tire chains on stock rims with 60mm offset and 275/65-18. I am still looking for cable type traction devices but still running into clearance issues. I think the only way to make room for chains would be to adj wheel offset with new wheels and minimize tread face width.

 

[gaijin]

My SPC UCA's still will not allow for clearance for tire chains on stock rims with 60mm offset and 275/65-18. I am still looking for cable type traction devices but still running into clearance issues. I think the only way to make room for chains would be to adj wheel offset with new wheels and minimize tread face width.

Manual says chains on rear only:

Thoughts?

 

[Markuson]

Manual says chains on rear only:

Thoughts?

Pretty sure that instruction is due only to clearance issues.

 

[gaijin]

Pretty sure that instruction is due only to clearance issues.

I guess that's my point.

With stock tires, on stock rims, there is a clearance problem. Add larger tires and aftermarket wheels and it is hard to imagine a scenario where MORE clearance is obtainable - all suspension components as well as fenders, fender liners and mudguards must have clearance.

Admittedly, being able to run chains on all four wheels would be best, is it possible on our rigs?

 

[Markuson]

I guess that's my point.

With stock tires, on stock rims, there is a clearance problem. Add larger tires and aftermarket wheels and it is hard to imagine a scenario where MORE clearance is obtainable - all suspension components as well as fenders, fender liners and mudguards must have clearance.

Admittedly, being able to run chains on all four wheels would be best, is it possible on our rigs?

Right. Just mention it because I think that is the ONLY issue (thought perhaps some might assume there was some other mechanical reason). So if a particular setup offers enough space (some will), -nothing wrong with running chains up front. So many combinations out there, so no secret formula...

I had the same barrier on my 100 series, even with just 32.5 KO's. I could get chains on the front, but had to be super careful not to flex much. In the end, I stopped using chains in front, and actually skipped chains altogether except in deep, icy stuff.

 

[4gotalot]

I agree, it is a clearance issue. Some kind of cable system is what I would like to find for ice on logging roads. Chains on the rear tires do not help for steering.

 

[Climbingnut]

@gaijin, have you had your UCA's changed?

 

[gaijin]

@gaijin, have you had your UCA's changed?

No. My suspension is 100% stock.

HTH

 

[Climbingnut]

No. My suspension is 100% stock.

HTH

Gotcha. I'm surprised there've not been more responses. With all the build threads I've read, I know there are quite a few people running aftermarket UCA's.

From everything I've read, it's not a matter of whether or not you'll need new UCA's with a 50mm lift, it's which one's will you buy. C'mon people, I need more feedback!

Thanks Markuson and Gaijin for your input. It's much appreciated! I'm leaning towards the SPC's because of the factory style ball joint, but would love to hear from people running the TC UCA's and other brands.

 

[Tremek]

I just ordered suspension this month (not installed yet) and was on the fence about UCAs mostly because if there's a chance they're unnecessary, why spend the incremental money? But as I'll have a trusted shop do the installation, I chose to pay for the labor once and be safe rather than gamble on whether the truck would be able to go back into factory caster spec with the OEM UCAs post-install and during alignment. At least this way I can be confident it can be aligned properly and not have nervous steering or poor return to center characteristics post-lift. PS, I ordered SPCs but naturally have no feedback on them as they're not even here yet.

 

[TonyP]

Gotcha. I'm surprised there've not been more responses. With all the build threads I've read, I know there are quite a few people running aftermarket UCA's.

From everything I've read, it's not a matter of whether or not you'll need new UCA's with a 50mm lift, it's which one's will you buy. C'mon people, I need more feedback!

Thanks Markuson and Gaijin for your input. It's much appreciated! I'm leaning towards the SPC's because of the factory style ball joint, but would love to hear from people running the TC UCA's and other brands.

In my situation, my lift was minimal to the point of UCAs not being needed to keep it in spec.

 

[Mogwai]

I went w/ TC UCAs, mid-20s alignment tech using computer had no issue getting the truck alignment back to stock specs. Have not had them long enough to comment around rebuild but plenty of interweb posts and bushing/ball-joint replacement kits for the UCAs I went with. I don't have any squeaks yet, but again only about 5k miles so far.

 

[Climbingnut]

@Tremek, @TonyP and @Mogwai, thanks for your responses. Mogwai, why did you choose the TC UCA's over the SPC's or other brands? How about you Tremek? Any specific reasons why you went with the SPC's versus the TC's or other brands?

Thanks again guys!