Wheel travel numbers
- Thread starter Bear80
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
So 25" front and 27" rear?! I have to find out how they are measuring!
IU posted this before though I've forgotten. Toyota/Four Wheeler published it I think. About 9 and 12" I think.
It is amazing how much travel the New Range Rover has with IFS and IRS. Wild.
- Thread starter
- #9
About isn't good enough I want a creditable source that I can quote. This for the purpose to compair to the highly (sometimes overly) held 80 series, which is 8.1" front and 8.9" rear stock. If it is the same or more then I for one put the 200 series above the 80 series on my list.
LC200 front suspension travel = 9.05" (4" on jounce stroke and 5" on rebound)
Rear suspension travel = 9.45"
Source: Automotive Design & Production
P.S. Probably stating the obvious but it is important not to confuse wheel travel with articulation.
Rear suspension travel = 9.45"
Source: Automotive Design & Production
P.S. Probably stating the obvious but it is important not to confuse wheel travel with articulation.
- Thread starter
- #11
All I can say is WOW. For IFS and 9" of stock wheel travel that is awsome. The 80 is still my all time favorite but the new 200, looks aside, is way more vehicle. The only down side I find with the 200 is the loss of almost 2" of ground clearance. I'm sure this isn't close to the breakover area of the frame but more up front due to the IFS.
The lockers of a stock 80 most likely would not get it very much further than the traction control on the 200. I've also found that the most common situation when a stock 80 needs to engage the front locker is on a climb. The locked axle almost 99% of the time causes the front to slide laterally. Which could put a novice driver in danger of barrel roll. Traction control would keep climbing without ever putting the driver in that kind of danger. Stock to stock I still can't find a reason the 200 isn't one of the best put out by Toyota. Now lets just get the body designers on track.
I really dig those new sway bars too.
Now where are those approach and departure numbers....
The lockers of a stock 80 most likely would not get it very much further than the traction control on the 200. I've also found that the most common situation when a stock 80 needs to engage the front locker is on a climb. The locked axle almost 99% of the time causes the front to slide laterally. Which could put a novice driver in danger of barrel roll. Traction control would keep climbing without ever putting the driver in that kind of danger. Stock to stock I still can't find a reason the 200 isn't one of the best put out by Toyota. Now lets just get the body designers on track.
I really dig those new sway bars too.
Now where are those approach and departure numbers....
New Range Rover is
10.5 front and 12.5 travel.
Ground clearnace on the 200 is down to 8.9 from 9.8....less than one inch.
10.5 front and 12.5 travel.
Ground clearnace on the 200 is down to 8.9 from 9.8....less than one inch.
Toyota Land Cruiser - 2008 Performance & Specifications
Angle of approach/departure/breakover (degrees) 30/20/21
Angle of approach/departure/breakover (degrees) 30/20/21
Ya, those are weak #'s. Need to modify ASAP for the trail.
- Thread starter
- #15
This is one reason I'm still curious why Toyota didn't go with an IRS on the 200. The only thing I see extra is factors with alignments.
As for the angles, the 80 series is 33/22 which is not far off. I doubt those few angles will be the differene in making an obstacle or not. It's more likely how bad will the bumpers be scraped. 21* is a pretty good break over, I don't have the 80 series number though.
the retention of a solid rear axle is something of a mystery—to everyone, that is, but Toshihiko Kanai, assistant chief engineer, Product Planning Div., Toyota Motor Corp. “Longevity under harsh conditions is very important to our customers,” he says, “so a live axle was the only solution.”
THis is from the other article posted about the SRA.
https://forum.ih8mud.com/200-series-cruisers/205349-lc200-semi-technical-article.html
THis is from the other article posted about the SRA.
https://forum.ih8mud.com/200-series-cruisers/205349-lc200-semi-technical-article.html
WOW! Did u read all the problems people are having with RR's?
Only one u joint on front drive shaft. I don't think I'll buy one of these cars.
...
Only one u joint on front drive shaft. I don't think I'll buy one of these cars.
...
21* is a poor breakover angle IMHO. For example, pretty much all stock Rover wagons used to come with a 29*-30* breakover angle. I think the new Range Rover might still be in the 30* ballpark as well. At least Toyota finally tucked the undercarriage bits into the frame rails and provided a smooth underbody.
Or did Toyota just lower the frame rails?