kyle_22r

if you want to make a rock crawler, go for an '86 or later truck. much easier to find, usually cheaper(85 owners usually think they have a gold mine ), and they have a bunch of parts you'd want anyway. the only real difference in SASing an 86 and converting an '85 to crossover steering which you'll want for a crawler is that with an SAS you need to make some spring and shackle hangers in the front

as for the dune jumping discussion, it's a shame ford went to A-arms on the ranger and f150. i really liked that ttb suspension

deathrunner

Personally, like most of us weekend warriors, my beater needs to be a daily driver. A arms just seem to align better and when you're cycling travel they stay straight. Granted the Ford's get awesome travel, but I think it is kinda sloppy. Just my 2 cents. I think the new A arms Fords have a lot to offer and when more mods are available it will be more apparent.

˟˟˟˟ if I had all the money in the world, I'd love to make a V8 Dakota prerunner, and those have A arms.

pinnacle

yes, with the I-beam or ttb suspension there is a lot of camber change throughout the travel. But it is cheaper to get l/t for the i-beam than a-arm rangers.

Man and we just sold an '87 4runner, but it did have some tranny problems. I've looked around and the trucks are usually around 3-4 thousand, the 4runners are almost impossible to find.

And as for front vs rear travel they are both important. If you have a lot of front travel but not a lot of the rear will have a tendency to buck, and the same vise versa. With mine I will have around 16" in the front and 18" out back.

oh and 1 dakota prerunner:

deathrunner

Sweet Dakota. How much travel do those things typically get??

I used to have a 94 (1st gen) Dakota xcab with the 318 V8, it sure moved quicker than my 22re.

I guess as far as travel is concerned a good setup would be equal front and back.....or maybe a little more in the back. Right?

pinnacle

I really dont know how much it has, the guy lives in escondido. Those pictures are from the rialto offroad raceway. It's a small track over by the rialto airport. That truck is a one off totally custom job.

A little more travel in the rear would be good. Just to keep the power to the ground.

RedRunner_87

Hopefull I will be running 13" in the front, and 18" in the rear. I would like more travel in back, for power reason.

deathrunner

Good ideas. Here a question.

I assume you plan to get 18" in back with the 62" deavers.

I want a set of springs that will fit my stock hangers. I want a soft and level ride to match the front. How much travel do you think some 3-4" lift springs will travel?

Currently I have ultra stiff skyjacker 4" springs, but I'm thinking Deaver or Nationals.
Why would I want one over the other?

pinnacle

Well the springs he are going to use require you to mount them under the axle, then he will also be using probably an 18" stroke shock. I'm pretty sure that deaver or national make a good replacement pack. You would be looking at around 13-15", depending on how long of a shock it used.

4cedRunner

For the record, TC will be releasing a coil-over compatible 1st gen IFS long travel setup soon if not already. There is nothing wrong with a cheap straight axle truck that is slapped together and wheeled hard, but that is a different creature than a nicely built IFS retained versatile 4x4 truck. I can speak from experience on both ends. We have a TC LT equipped Tacoma and it rails corners like a sports car, can jump high and believe me it wheels just fine, in fact it has so much droop that it almost doesn't need lockers because it almost never lifts a wheel. We have tested it hard and this past weekend we took it out with our V8 CJ-7 on D60's with 39" swampers etc and the Tacoma wasn't far behind. Of course the 33" tires limited the Tacoma in the rocks but if you were to compare a mildly modified Rubicon with our Tacoma (with lockers) I promise the Rubicon wouldn't go anywhere the Tacoma couldn't. He asked about mounting coil-overs to a 1st gen. truck, lets please post what we know about that. Not just say "hey you should SAS that thing and ditch that crappy IFS" that is only one way to look at it. I plan to put a 4-link SAS under my 4Runner with 14" coil-overs but if we didn't already have an IFS Tacoma, I'd most likely keep my IFS. We will also be building a coil-over 1st gen. IFS 4Runner, in fact we are picking it up tonight. Both are viable options with pros and cons...some say tomayto, some say Tomahto. I say do what you want to your truck based on your criteria, not someone elses. JD fab does good work so does TC, you can't go wrong either way, one nice thing about IFS LT kits is tha added width makes the truck a lot more stable on a side hill. To see how we got almost 14" up front and almost 18" in the back link here...

http://www.trailslesstraveled.com

RedRunner_87

With the ESB, my track width will be extended 7" over all. I hope to get 13" up front and 18" in the rear. ESB has a kicka$$ Tacoma they built. How do you like your sway-aways? I have heard some good and bad things about them.

Flygtenstein

You were not pushing the limits of the 7 if 33's and IFS could keep up with it.

A Rubicon with 37's and a long arm lift would abuse any IFS Taco.

Fancy IFS lifts can gain travel, but you still have a 7.5" ring gear and CV's.

I thought we needed some new blood since it has been a trialogue mostly for the last week.

4cedRunner

Flygtenstein,

We were not pushing the CJ very hard because this weekend was it's first time out in a few years since the frame up re-build and we needed to fine tune the fuel injection etc. None the less the Tacoma is nowhere near done and much more capable than you might think. Right now the Tacoma is pushing stock gears (3.50's!) and open diffs. We will be adding a marlin, 4.88's a rear ARB and 35's. We are waiting on a rear Tundra/T100 width housing from FROR until we install the gears and locker. And as far as having a less than stout 7.5" ring gear up front that is true, but only for now...We are building this truck to be bullet proof and 100% versatile...and most of all IFS. It will most likely use Porsche 934 CV's and I'll let you guess the rest for now...

RedRunner,

I really like Sway-A-Way's we use all 2.5" shocks. They are less expensive than King or Fox and work very well. They are also easy to tune and re-valve. Now that we have them setup really well the truck is amazing! Here's a link to articles on offroad.com about our truck and Sway-A-Way shocks as well as TC kits etc.

http://www.off-road.com/toyota/proje...oma/intro.html

We have tons of info on the Jeep and the Taco on our website here:

http://www.trailslesstraveled.com

RedRunner_87

Thanx for the info. You Taco is kicka$$. I am going to try to make mine as bulletproof as possible(since I will be racing it).

Flygtenstein

Interesting developments.

You said the Taco was keeping up with the 7 on 40's.

Then you say you were not pushing the 7.

Then you say the Taco had open diffs.

To me, this smells of misunderstanding. The way it was phrased makes this not sound at all correct.

Keep up the good IFS work. That fancy stuff works well for going fast in the desert.

4cedRunner

Flygt,

There have been no new developments? Below is a quote from my first post in case you missed anything...

"it wheels just fine, in fact it has so much droop that it almost doesn't need lockers because it almost never lifts a wheel. We have tested it hard and this past weekend we took it out with our V8 CJ-7 on D60's with 39" swampers etc and the Tacoma wasn't far behind. Of course the 33" tires limited the Tacoma in the rocks but if you were to compare a mildly modified Rubicon with our Tacoma (with lockers) I promise the Rubicon wouldn't go anywhere the Tacoma couldn't."

So there you have it, I never said the Taco kept up with a jeep on 40's, I said it wasn't far behind, but it was limited in the rocks due to the tire size difference and lockers. I also compared the Tacoma to a mildly modified Rubicon, not a Rubicon with 37's, gears, etc. like you mentioned. 37's are a lot larger than stock tires for a Rubicon. There may be a misunderstanding but I don't believe it was due to anything I said, I think maybe you interpreted it differently. I never understand why people are either IFS or SAS people. I have always felt that both setups were awesome and fully capable if built right. There is no disputing the simplicity of a nice live axle off-road vehicle, they can be built super tough and relatively inexpensive. IFS will typically run you more but can be built virtually just as capable in the end and they will always be better on road (proven) which is where DD trucks spend most of their time. You are correct that "the fancy stuff works well for going fast in the desert" but what you will learn is that it also works great in the rocks. All things considered Steve Schaffer's truck is lightly modified and look how well he has proven the capabilties of a simple IFS setup. With all of the time and money he has spent on misc. mods don't you think he would have pulled that IFS by now if it was the weak link? I mentioned before that I plan to 4-link SAS my 4Runner this summer because I feel for my use it will be the best all-around solution, I will use FJ-80 axles front and rear for the increased width/strength but I will be building it in a Baja Jeep Speed style with dual 14" coil-overs (coil-carriers and bypasses) on each side up front and bypasses/ air bumps in the rear. My truck will blaze through the desert and crawl through the rocks. But with the SAS it will fall behind the IFS trucks in the whoops. Believe it or not there are a growing number of people who want a vehicle that can do both disciplines on very high level. SAS is proven in the rocks and it has also been proven to work well but not great in the desert. The limits have been explored, it is a closed case. What we are doing is proving that IFS can work very well in the rocks as well as high speed in the desert. There has been little research done for IFS in the rocks so until the facts come out, there is no need to take it personally or speculate too much. Time will dictate what theses rigs are capable of...stay tuned

Flygtenstein

Now you are bringing Schaefer into this? I have wheeled with Steve in Colorado and in Arizona. My truck was right behind his. Now he has 35's, we shall see if I can follow him in less than a month.

Re-read what you posted. The contentious sentence is what follows:
"We have tested it hard and this past weekend we took it out with our V8 CJ-7 on D60's with 39" swampers etc and the Tacoma wasn't far behind."

Mostly I was entertained by this because you then said you were not pushing the 7 and further, the Taco was not locked. The sentence I quoted, read strictly and literally, places the Taco near the 7, a persumed off-roading beast, and the comparisson was made because the Taco was doing well.

Give me 3k dollars and a Rubicon. That will get it on 37's with a killer long arm suspension.

Give me 3k dollars and a Taco. I have barely covered one of these super bling IFS set-ups plus I have stock tires and open diffs.

Look at what Scott Ellinger drives. He was the last Toyota IFS holdout and how he has not one but two solid axle buggies. He used Porsche CV's and even a 9" Ford center section. Then he got with the program.

"Set-up right" a BLING IFS suspension empties your pockets and makes you too poor to get a solid axle when you break all of that crawling on rocks.

4cedRunner

For the record our Taco was bought for 8k so that leaves a lot money for mods. compared to a Rubicon with an additional 3k thrown at it. Please explain to me how you would get a Rubicon on 37's for 3K, does that include gears because you will need 'em? Anything more on this topic is beating a dead horse, in fact it's a horse that is so long dead it's already decomposed and pretty much just a pile of bones...

deathrunner

I think IFS is worth the money.

deathrunner

I really like yotatech. But this thread has been irritating at times. I assume we are all here because we have one thing in common. WE ALL LOVE YOTAS. That being said, there are many things to do to these trucks. And no truck will ever be the best at everything.

There is no need to take it personally if someone prefers IFS over SA or SA over IFS. People have different needs and goals. I think it is closedminded and rude to keep bashing on other people's trucks because they don't follow your exact construction rules. 4ced runner's Tacoma sounds pretty capable for the list of mods it includes and I'm sure it will be more capable in the future. I think the question to this post has been answered. Is there a coilover lift for first gens? YES Does it work well? YES Does Flygenstein approve? NO

It seemed more on topic to continue discussing long travel IFS trucks and their construction, rather than trying to sway well informed yotatechers to something they aren't interested in. Granted IFS lifts for toyotas are pricier than SA, but that goes for any truck. Check the price on lifting a Chevy or Dodge fullsize in the same way. More kits are made for yotas than most other trucks (Yeah Ford has a ton) so it is getting more affordable.

I would just like to see a supportive forum despite personal taste. Even though I'm more interested in LT I would bring up someone of the downsides and benefits of an SA, but still leave it up to them to decide.


That being said.... 4ced Runner how much lift did you get out of the kit??

Flygtenstein

I took offense to what read to me like flagrant lies, not to what sort of suspension you have on your truck.

I am not flaming or beating, I am dispelling myths.

Walk to a Toyota dealer right now, tell them I sent you and buy a brand new Taco. I will go to DC and get a Rubicon. YT will then give us each 3k bucks to mod the truck. I will end up with a double locked long arm suspended trail machine on 37's that can crawl. You will have a lifted fancy IFS truck on stock rubber because you blew the budget on the lift.

Following the Jeep on 40's, an open diffed Taco would be way behind and IFS would not be the sole culprit in that, the open diffs and baby tires would.

My first post in this thread was to add some new life, for the week it was a trialogue. Now others have started thinking.

You want IFS, get it and go fast.

You want to crawl rocks? Don't waste the time building IFS to do it and don't tell me it will end up the same.