Which 100 spring?

[spressomon]

wngrog:

You deleted your original thread just as I posted a response...anyway:

Either the 865 or 866 sound like the spring to use to accomplish your lowering goal. With my rig and load the 866 didn't work out for me plus I am not a fan of "progressive spring rate design" but there are others here that like them. FYI: I ran the 865's for a short time when I had the AO drawer system with all the gear but with the factory rubbermaid bumper and the 865 was fine (until I added the Slee rear bumper with tire carrier). You may, for trailering, need to add air bladders to either of these springs...

 

[wngrog]

Unlike Schotts, when I have bad info out there I don't want it up to confuse the world

Seriously, the 863s are too tall.

USCS
OME Part # Spring Rate (lbf/in) Bar Dia. (in) Free Height (in) Gen Application

OME 850 220 .669 19.49/19.88 80 Series
OME 850J 220 .669 20.67/21.06 80 Series
OME 851 220 .669 18.70/19.09 80 Series
OME 860 220 .709 18.90/19.29 80/100 Series
OME 861 220 .630 18.90/19.29 80 Series
OME 862 240 .669 18.11/18.50 80 Series
OME 863 250 .748 18.90/19.29 80/100 Series
OME 863J 250 .748 20.08/20.47 80 Series
OME 864 320 .787 18.90/19.29 80/100 Series
OME 865 220 .709 18.11 100 Series
OME 866 240-300 .709 18.31 100 Series

According to the chart, if I went from 863s to 865s the spring rate would drop from 250 to 220 lbf/in and then lose a minimum of .79" to a max of 1.18"

866's would keep the same rate but lose .59"

865's sound like what I want.......

 

[calamaridog]

I think what you want are custom springs with the ride height of the 865's and slightly more load. If I was towing I would upgrade to a spring with more rate than my 865's.

866 are progressive and don't interest me at all.

Call Deaver Spring in Santa Ana, CA and see how much $.

 

[yooper]

What don't you guys like about progressive springs? I'm asking out of ignorance, not being argumentative. I am about to pull the trigger on a Slee kit and I was tentatively planning on 866's, as progressive progressive deal sounds good to me - just right under normal loads and a little extra when I tow my heavy trailer....

 

[spressomon]

What don't you guys like about progressive springs? I'm asking out of ignorance, not being argumentative. I am about to pull the trigger on a Slee kit and I was tentatively planning on 866's, as progressive progressive deal sounds good to me - just right under normal loads and a little extra when I tow my heavy trailer....

Based upon use of the 866 on my rig the progressive design IMO limits full use of a given spring: It is a compromised design IMO. Normally when the load is lighter the spring is essentially utilizing only the 'softer coils' which represent a portion of the overall spring height/coils; when more spring rate is required the spring 'ramps' up non-linearly (for lack of a better term) into the stiffer coils. When you have a heavier load the softer coil section collapses and thus the spring is once again only working from a portion of its overall coil structure...then in a situation when the rear end unloads the softer once collapsed coils get 'ramped' wildly into action for rebound (over "whoops" or undulating terrain for instance).

The resultant effect for me on-trail was a sensation of erratic coil compression and rebound...didn't like it at all. I much prefer the more linear response of a spring with consistent rate/coil structure...

Keep in mind I am not a suspension expert...only making judgements from actual use on my rig...

 

[wngrog]

OK, maybe I should clarify my needs. This 100 series may see 1% trail duty, 15% tow duty and 84% ride around town use.

The progressive coils sound good to me for that usage.....seeing that the main negative characteristics come on the trail.......

Thoughts?

 

[yooper]

Mine is probably 5% trail, 15% tow, 80% road, pretty similar...tough decision.

Kinda leaning toward 865's and air bags right now...

Keep the input coming guys! thanks!

 

[Greg B]

I too have run the 866's and I like them best of all. I have not had the same affects as Spresso on the trail. I think the 866's always feel right.

When unloaded, they are smooth on the road and use the lighter part of the spring. This for me is ideal as I am on road 90% of the time anyway. They yield right around 2 inches of lift on a stock 100 and you can always add some height with packers if you need to.

Once you load them up with a cargo area full of gear, they have a reserve in the spring that handles the extra weight better. This doesn't cause you to lose as much height when fully loaded like an 865 would.

For towing, I would think the 866 would be the best spring available. It would give you the smooth ride when unloaded (most of the time) then it would give you a stiffer spring to handle the weight of the trailer without bags. Christo uses these springs on his turbo's 100 for this reason I believe.

I am currently running 863's and have a set of 866's in my garage. I am planning on putting the 866's back in once I come up with some upper spring retainers to keep the N74L's under there too.

 

[dclee]

Progressive rate coils are really better for on-road use (where most of our 100s reside). They allow a more comfortable ride for most load and road conditions, using the "softer" portion of the coil. However, I agree with most that for more off-road duty and for better load carrying, a constant rate coil is better. That said, I will probably be going with 865s and air bags for our mild lift and mostly on-road truck. We want just a bit of lift, better handling, and some mildly better load carrying, without giving up too much in terms of ride comfort. And for extreme loads we'll also have the air bags to supplement when the softer 865s can't keep up. Absolutely no rock-crawling for this rig!

My $0.02,

 

[Pskhaat]

Let me know if you want to sell those 863s...

 

[spressomon]

You might contact DMX84...I think he might be using air bags/bladders but I can't remember for sure.

 

[LEXUSBEN]

I have 866's under mine and just added packers for an extra inch. I like the 866 for the reasons gregb stated. Mostly on road use they are soft enough to not shake out teeth, and loaded up for camping or towing no problem when they get into the stiffer spring rate. If my majority was wheeling then I probably would opt for the 863, but this is a nice compromise for on road.

Nolen - the only way you're gonna know is if you try them in your specific circumstance. So many opinions on this board can sometimes cloud your judgement. Input is good, but sometimes "too many cooks spoil the soup"

my $.02

 

[wngrog]

Let me know if you want to sell those 863s...

I will sell them as soon as I decide what I am gonna replace them with.

I am leaning toward the 865's though for the least amount of lift.

If I have to take out my El Cheapo drawers I will, I just want the car to drive and look better.

 

[Pskhaat]

As I always say, my wife packs for armageddon (with two youngens) even out about town, so I'm thinking the 863s will work well on the Hundy as the 864s worked perfect on the 80. Let me know, cheers!

 

[calamaridog]

I have not tried the 866 but based upon past experience with progressive rate coils vs. constant rate coils I prefer constant rate coils.

I like the 865, but when I add some more weight, I'll opt for a custom constant rate coil that is not as tall as the 863.

I agree with Lexusben that too much input is sometimes a bad thing so I'll shut up now

 

[spressomon]

Too much is just right More is good and s'more is even better

 

[yooper]

 

[wngrog]

Well I got the 863's out and the 866's in. I could not be happier. I am 1/2" higher in the rear now. No more stink-bug look. The Cruiser rides much better too.

Very pleased. Very.

1 set of 863's F/S!

 

[C-dog]

Slee put 860's on my LC. They're PERFECT. I got almost 3" lift and smooth ride

 

[wngrog]

This is the best pic I have of the cruiser now, I will get a better one of the full side to show how it sits later.