Rising Sun Member Forums  

Go Back   Rising Sun Member Forums > Toyota 4x4 > General Tech Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 04-21-2006, 08:59 AM
nakman's Avatar
nakman nakman is offline
Rising Sun Commander
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: north side
Posts: 9,788
Default

Quote:
I guess my real question is, at this point...how may of you feel limited on the trails you are doing by your front flex?
Not I.. just twist the dial, point & shoot.
__________________
99 uzj100, 05 525EXC

www.gamiviti.com

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-21-2006, 09:26 AM
Uncle Ben's Avatar
Uncle Ben Uncle Ben is offline
Rising Sun Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Louisville, Colorado
Posts: 13,095
Send a message via AIM to Uncle Ben
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FJBen
good post...

I agree that the 36's are prolly gonna be overpowering the 4" suspension setup. 90% sure I'm goin' Trxxus. I know that the front ends are really the "stumbling" block so to say with the flex in the 80's.

I've been reading the thread in mud til I can't see straight about improving the flex in 80's...and my main question is....How badly do they need it???

Seems you have a few options:

A: 3 Link the front, prolly most expensive but by far solves all flex issues...

B: Pulling a bolt/hitch pin on one of the front control arm mounts...helps flex a little more, but at the expense of what? any deterioation of driveability? wear?

C. Flipping the arms to the top....not sure what this gains exactly, more clearance, possibly less bind if you build different brackets that allow more side/side/twist of the bushings....or add johhny joints/similar?

I guess my real question is, at this point...how may of you feel limited on the trails you are doing by your front flex?
Your asking yourself the right questions! 80's are extremely capable and can do most anything you can throw at them. Mine will never see suspension alterations on a large scale as it's not what I need it to do. I need a dual purpose rig that looks good, I can drive the family ANYWHERE in comfort, and fortunately it is more capable than I need it to be! (and yes it plays the hard core game just fine!) I also have my very modified 40 for the trails that I WILL NOT take my 80 on! If your gonna build an 80 as a hard core rig sacraficing some of its highway comfort then start with a 93 or 94 as it's much cheaper, has the lowergeared 442 tranny, no airbags and you can even find one with the econo cloth seat package! Just my
__________________
KUBN
Kevin
TLCA #3007
Northside!

Colorado Trail Patrol
Stay on the Trail!
I'm the God-fearing, gun-toting, American flag-waving, conservative you were warned about!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxleIke View Post
I need an FJ40....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Chili View Post
Cruisers are superior
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-21-2006, 10:03 AM
FJBen's Avatar
FJBen FJBen is offline
Hard Core 4+
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 893
Default

I think you've nailed it. My 80 will go many more places than my 55 would go. I'm not one for beating up/bashing a rig so I really don't take into account that I could smash my 55 up.

I got some ramp pics of my modded 55 and my stock 80 and they close to the same. (obviously the trail is a whole nother story) I'm sure my 80 will take me more places than I want to go. So i just need to strap on some tires and enjoy!

That little dial sure is fun...
__________________
TLCA#15530

96 285's OME 's ride
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-21-2006, 10:12 AM
Nay's Avatar
Nay Nay is offline
Hard Core 4+
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 809
Default

Don't read that Mud thread on travel. There is no useful information at all other than theory on what makes a suspension travel more, and about 8 pages of information on arm travel arc, all of which you would accomodate with adjustable arms.

I don't think it is worth messing with the front end on an 80, and that is not because it couldn't use more travel, and more importantly, a cure for the "unloading" that occurs on steep climbs with radius arms. I think the unloading gets worse on taller lifts...Robbie had posted that he was unable to get up the left line on the "waterfall" in his 6" lifted 80, and it wasn't because of clearance, but the unloading (felt as a "dropping out") of the front suspension putting all the traction requirement to the rear.

For me, it comes down to the suitability of the 80 on the kind of trails that need both dual lockers and that kind of flex. You run those trails, and you are gonna mangle the body over time. First you do the 3-link, and then you do an exo cage, and then you end up cutting off the top behind the 2nd row, taking 2 feet off the total length, and you've used an 80 platform as a buggy base and spent a fortune doing it.

The big advantage the 80 has is the ability to slap on big tires on a small lift. I'll be running 35's on a 2.5" lift...that's nothing but springs, shocks, shock eye adapters, and bumpstops for a dual locked rig on 35's, and about 4" up travel and 6" down (the front won't use all of that down travel). If you notice the bigger lift kits on the market...they really don't give you anything else but more lift (same shocks mounted in the same place means all the lift does is shift travel from down to up).

Nothing strictly wrong with this, but it points out to me that the 80 is a beast out of the box, but a difficult platform to grow substantially in terms of raw performance. In many ways, the 80 is what it is, and if you want to alter that, you are probably getting outside of the reasonable usage expectations (this is fundamentally true of most "SUV's" no matter how much $$$ we throw at them), which is why we have the most fun keeping it relatively simple and just wheeling.

Because of all of this, I am going to focus on gaining approach/depature angle clearance with bumpers built for this purpose, and trimming where I need it, rather than more lift or attempting to engineer significantly more travel. Once you take the plastic off on an 80 you realize that even on 2.5" of lift it has huge approach/depature clearance potential if you are willing to trim up the frame a bit...the body clearance is actually quite excellent. Breakover angle will just have to be driver competence and those bigger tires

That was a lot more than you were asking

Nay
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-21-2006, 10:21 AM
Uncle Ben's Avatar
Uncle Ben Uncle Ben is offline
Rising Sun Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Louisville, Colorado
Posts: 13,095
Send a message via AIM to Uncle Ben
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FJBen
good post...

I agree that the 36's are prolly gonna be overpowering the 4" suspension setup. 90% sure I'm goin' Trxxus. I know that the front ends are really the "stumbling" block so to say with the flex in the 80's.

I've been reading the thread in mud til I can't see straight about improving the flex in 80's...and my main question is....How badly do they need it???

Seems you have a few options:

A: 3 Link the front, prolly most expensive but by far solves all flex issues...

B: Pulling a bolt/hitch pin on one of the front control arm mounts...helps flex a little more, but at the expense of what? any deterioation of driveability? wear?

C. Flipping the arms to the top....not sure what this gains exactly, more clearance, possibly less bind if you build different brackets that allow more side/side/twist of the bushings....or add johhny joints/similar?

I guess my real question is, at this point...how may of you feel limited on the trails you are doing by your front flex?
Your asking yourself the right questions! 80's are extremely capable and can do most anything you can throw at them. Mine will never see suspension alterations on a large scale as it's not what I need it to do. I need a dual purpose rig that looks good, I can drive the family ANYWHERE in comfort, and fortunately it is more capable than I need it to be! (and yes it plays the hard core game just fine!) I also have my very modified 40 for the trails that I WILL NOT take my 80 on! If your gonna build an 80 as a hard core rig sacraficing some of its highway comfort then start with a 93 or 94 as it's much cheaper, has the lowergeared 442 tranny, no airbags and you can even find one with the econo cloth seat package! Just my
__________________
KUBN
Kevin
TLCA #3007
Northside!

Colorado Trail Patrol
Stay on the Trail!
I'm the God-fearing, gun-toting, American flag-waving, conservative you were warned about!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxleIke View Post
I need an FJ40....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Chili View Post
Cruisers are superior
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.