Originally Posted by nakman
UB: so you rotated the angle by lengthening the upper control arms? That seems pretty painless, now that I've got Christo's threaded arms.. but I'm not sure I want/need to do that since I wheel like a
and pick easy lines...
so if I keep the upper control arms the same it sounds like I could raise the back up a tad more and not have any issues, agreed?
Mike: yes, just looking to get a little more in back pretty much all the time, with all my tools, jack, heavy Toyos, fridge, etc. it's a little lower than the front, then when I load up for a trip or hook up any trailer it's worse. I'd prefer a tiny bit higher in back, then go camping and it's level.
I am almost positive your 864's have a higher spring rate than the Slee 4's, in fact IIRC the soft to stiff continuum would be FOR's are softest, then OME J's, then OME comp's, then Slee 4's, then 864's, then a wooden 4x4. someone correct me if I'm wrong though
It's not about soft, it's about consistency of spring rate throughout the load bearing range.
Pic 1: FOR with nothing onboard except the 3rd row seats.
Pic 2: FOR with 300 lbs of gear and kids in and behind the 3rd row plus a 3,500 lb trailer hooked up.
FOR stated rates are comparable to OME J (227 fr / ~254 rr).
A perfectly level suspension (same hub to flare measurement front to rear) on the 80 has a visual rake. My rig is 23" hub to fender on all four corners unloaded (that means about 150 lbs of gear in the back and spare on the roof). You can see the visual rake in the first pic where all four corners measure equal - it looks level visually 3/4" down in the rear in the second pic with 300 lbs added plus the weight on the hitch (~300 lbs more at a point of max weight leverage).
To the point, adjustable rear uppers will take care of any vibe issues, whether you want a DC shaft or not on ~4" of lift is purely preference. On 6" your u-joint angles will be enough to substantially shorten u-joint life, making a DC an attractive option.
I'm not posting this to suggest that you get FOR springs (if you even can), just to show an illustration that I think the 80 looks right visually at normal load with front and rear perfectly level from a hub to flare measurement as the visual design makes a loaded setup look level. You have to drop the rear >1" to make an 80 look like the rear is sagging.
To get an 80 to look in the first pic below completely loaded means the rear will have to look jacked up unloaded. I say you go level with an excellent load bearing spring unloaded and you'll look level loaded. No additional lift required.