Tomh4x4

ok thats what i thought thanks. I think I'm going to do that along with pp springs in the rear, a locker for the rear, 4.88 gearing with 33s, arb bull bar and winch. Then I should be set unless yall recommend some other things.
Thanks for yalls help

Victor

You'll need Sway a Way 25mm torsion bars to overcome the weight of the bullbar and winch. Other than that it sounds like a decent combo. Rather than get a winch right away maybe you should get a locker in the rear as long as you are regearing?

Robinhood150

Hehe, I just realized thread should be in the off road section.

doink

speaking of 25mm torsion bars. where would be the cheapest place to get those nowadays. my stock ones are brutal now after having my arb and winch on for a while.

Corey

iTrader: (1)

The cheapest place I have seen so far is Perf.
http://www.toyotaoffroad.net/tando/yotatech/saw.jpg

They have gone up $8.
I paid $99 for mine last year.

I could not imagine driving for as long as you have with the winch & ARB on.
I was bouncing up & down real good from the stock bars.

Robinhood150

Why pp springs? Most people use the downey 1.5 HDs like you said earlier. Plus the downeys come with the bpv bracket and a longer ss brake line.

upndair

I'll stick my opinion in here as well.

You do not do rock crawling with a rig that has an IFS front suspension and a 4 link coil rear suspension. Besides the limited capability, you'll break lotsa stuff. If you put a 3 or 4" suspension lift on the rear, you'll need to gusset the upper control arm brackets on the axle housing. The coil spring system also causes a rear wheel steering effect when it flexes.

The IFS will perform just fine in most of the trails that a 4Runner will go on, if it's locked or has an LSD. The IFS is completely useless for rockcrawling, especially without a locker. You simply cannot get close to the performance of an SAS with any IFS system.

Raising the COG is a killer for roll over potential. I have to be very careful with 8+ inches of lift on 37" tires with a very soft suspension.

Someone mentioned using a stiffer suspension for rock crawling. This is completely incorrect. A stiffer suspension is not designed for a rock crawling rig and in fact, will make the vehicle more difficult to keep rubber side down.

The correct way to gain clearance for bigger tires is to remove sheet metal, not raise the body. I've done both to fit the 37s, even but I still pucker when I hit 45 degrees, even though I know that I can go farther.

I think the idea of being a rockcrawler may actually have been misstated. My guess is that what he really wants is to build a good trail rig. You can run a pretty good 2nd gen trail right with a 4" suspension lift and a little modification to keep things together, a small body lift, GOOD tires, a locker rear and LSD front. You'll run all of the sane trails.

BTW, a good winch and some trail armor will be required.

Darren

So the 2 folks that I know of (I'm sure there are others) with a 2000 and 2001 4Runner (with 33's no less) should not have done the Rubicon and the like? Or is the Rubicon not considered to be in the rock crawling genre?

Glad I caught this now before I get into a real mess. And to think I was planning on doing a couple 9/4.5 rated trails this summer.

44Runner

I don't really agree with either of you completely. But the rubicon is as hard as you make it. Those rigs could not do all the "good" lines. You say 33s like that is impressive.....its not. I mean you do realize 33 is the ABSOLUTE smallest tire that can actually be considered a real tire for 4 wheeling.

Darren

No, I never heard of that. I'm saying if IFS shouldn't be on the rocky stuff because it isn't capable, then 33's are just magnifying the case. Get it?

Oh, and if you think that all the easy lines, or the rest of a substantial trail like that would be cake, or just a dirt road, well okay, sure. Riiight.

Robinhood150

Nevertheless, I think you'd have to agree that the rubicon is rockcrawling, even if you take all the bypasses. It's just at the milder end of the spectrum of hardcore rockcrawling.

I think what darren is saying, regarding the 33s, is that they did the rubicon despite having the 33s. Not trying to sound impressive.

Steve

upndair

A talented driver can make up for a lot of of vehicle limitations. Per the first response to this question, just because someone ran the Rubicon certainly doesn't mean they ran the hard trails, although it certainly is rock crawling. If they ran the rubicon in an IFS rig on 33s, they were playing around on the little stuff there.

Don't forget that the original post was in reference to a 2nd gen 4runner which has a little stiffer suspension and even less articulation than a 3rd gen.

Generally speaking a rock crawling rig will have 35" or larger tires.

I hope the following example makes sense. (BTW, before I converted my suspension, I thought the same thing that many others of you do. Now that I've done the conversions, I realize the errors in my judgement. I'm certainly not trying to say that anything I do is superior, I'm just trying to help other people learn from my mistakes.) The first shot is an IFS suspension with 35s and I had a LSD in the rear. You can see the tire pop on the right and the body angle on a very flat situation. http://209.20.253.189/_EvansCreek003.jpg When rock crawling this is not the kind of thing that you run into once in a while, you will end up with tires in the air all the time resulting in decreased traction, more dangerous situations, and likely more damage.

Here's a video of me on a rock pile that we built. This is not a difficult rock pile. No offense to your friend who did the Rubicon, but he would not have made it over this without a lot of horsepower, damage or a winch. http://207.202.208.243/faithwheelers/122902_03.htm

Here's a shot in a similar although much more severe situation. http://207.202.208.243/faithwheelers/DSCF0018.jpg An IFS right would probably have rolled if this line was tried. The solution, take a different line, yes, I know that. In rock crawling, you don't always have that option and if you always choose the easy, it kind of goes against what rock crawling is all about.

There are three critical requirments (that I see) to a rock crawling vehicle 1) Large tires - the most common size is 35" or 37" 2) low gears - typically a final drive ratio of 200:1 or more and 3) lots of articulation - probably equal to ramp scores of 750 or above, the good ones will ramp over 1000. 1 and 2 can be done in an IFS second gen 4Runner, 3 will never happen.

Bob Williams has a nice write up on this, http://www.off-road.com/toyota/featu...c99/index.html

I don't recommend that most people do an SAS or rear leaf conversion but this post started about wanting to build a GOOD rock crawler, not a trail rig. A typical trail rig doesn't require this extensive of an upgrade, a GOOD rockcrawler does.

Darren

#3 has been done (unless you're referring to a 30 degree ramp).

upndair

I don't believe it. A 2nd gen 4wd with IFS ramping even 750? Show me a pic of that rig cause I don't think it can be done.

Darren

No, a 3rd Gen.

Yes, I realize the topic starter has a 2nd Gen, but some of your points were IFS in general.

I have no idea what some 2nd Genners can ramp.

upndair

"Nevertheless, I think you'd have to agree that the rubicon is rockcrawling, even if you take all the bypasses. It's just at the milder end of the spectrum of hardcore rockcrawling. "

Running in the Rubicon is impressive because of the types of trails scenery, etc. Taking all they bypasses is NOT what rockcrawling is about.

Again, let's go back to the original question. He wants to know what it takes to make a good rockcrawler. A GOOD rockcrawler does NOT take all the bypasses. A good driver recognizes the limitations of his vehicle and takes the bypasses when appropriate and yes, can get through a trail, but I don't think there's such a thing as the mild side of hardcore? That statment just doesn't make sense to me.

From a previous post I did a LONG time ago, I defined what I thought was 4 wheeling vs exploring and a lot of people realize that what they are really doing was exploring (this was back on a topic about wheeling alone). Just because you drive over rocks may not meet the definition of rock crawling. If you look at Rods chart on trail difficulty, IMO GOOD rockcrawling trails would be 4+ and 5s (over rocks of course). Lower than that - again, just my opinion) would be trail riding/4 wheeling, not rock crawling. Much of this thread might be a mute point if there was a common definition that we all agreed upon, but then, what fun would that be????

Last point on this post, you can do the Rubicon and not do what many would call - rock crawling. However, if you want to do rockcrawling at it's finest, the Rubicon is the place to go. So, you're friend's version of doing the Rubicon may not be what rockcrawlers call "doing the Rubicon."

upndair

I think the 3rd gens are more flexy. I did as much as I could with my 2nd gen before tearing everything off the bottom. My best score ever was 550. When I was at that level I kept tearing tulip joint apart. (I later solved this but modifying the differential drop brackets that came with my lift kit.)

I can't really speak for a 3rd gen as I've never driven or even seen a built one (other than bumpers, a small lift, tires and a roof rack). I know they're out there, I've just not seen one.

I'd still like to see a pic of a 3rd gen ramping 750 or above.

upndair

Darren, I didn't say that the rest of the trail would be cake or a dirt road. If I did, I wasn't supposed to sound that way. There's no doubt that a well driven, locked IFS rig can do a lot, but if you're going to make a GOOD rock crawler, it makes a lot more sense to spend your time and money on a SAS that a fancy IFS lift.

Again, I speak primarily of 2nd gen since that's my area of experience. Keeping that in mind, I've seen stock Jeep Cherokees with MT tires do better on trails that locked and lifted IFS rigs of all sorts. Why? Cause all their tires in contact with the ground. and the body stay more centered with the drivetrain moves underneath instead of pulling the body along with it.

44Runner

And I'm even posting in the same thread. Weak...

upndair

What year is that rig of yours?

It looks 3rd gen, in which case I've now seen one :o)

BTW, I see that you decided that the IFS wasn't the way to go :o)