sas'd and 6" of lift? ^thats too tall imo i dont thinktheonein the video isthough thedriveris just a dumbass

 

i love when stockers try to hate grow balls and go deep lots of wheel flex is a good thing a lot of us love livin on the edge the adrenaline is great jeeps by the way has coil spring suspension cannot compare it to a leaf spring suspension research and learn a thing or two get off flat roads

 

From the looks of it, I would say has has the Bilstein shocks on there, but I'll bet they are valved way too soft. I used to get lots of body roll like that on my 1st gen even w/ 3.5" of lift and 33s with some KYB shocks, they were great on the road but just did not damp well at very slow speed stuff. I have a few dents in the body from the body swaying into a tree or rock beside the trail. Same thing happens with my current Rancho 9000s on a low stiffness setting. But when I have them up at 4 or 5, they hold the body nice and steady.

 

Unfortunatly UKmeyers is right and wrong. Just because most 2nd gens are too tall after sas doesnt make it right. Since the day I sas'ed my truck Ive been trying to get it lower.

YES LOWER IS BETTER, cant beleive people are debating this crap.

After sas 36's(too tall)



Current 37's (23" frame height)



EDIT BTW yes my wife suck at video
Duals also make huge difference in controling body body roll. These videos are of the same piece of the same trail before and after duals, its not a difficult trail but...you get the idea

Before duals

http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...t=MOV02809.flv

After duals (going so slow because a 40 is in front of me having some trouble, you can hear his PS pump)

http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y13...t=MOV03444.flv

 

Im not sure where to start... At no point did you even come close to making a rational thought. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul...

 

so in that case, john for the sas on your 4rnr, would you have gotten a lower kit? you went 5" right? do you feel you should have gone 4"?

sorry if i don't have the exact numbers.

im not getting into a debate, just want to observe peoples thoughts

 

im sorry if you cant understand iwas giving my opinion we all work hard to build are rigs you always have 1 bystander tryin to put down another which usally dont even have nothin better to show for

 

Well did 4"/5".

Im not sure I would go different because the leafs have settled 2, 3, maybe more inches... Not sure what I would do...

 

man that doesn't help!

im considering doing an sas one day later on, and i also have a 2nd gen. so idk yet. i wanna wheel the piss out of the ifs first. Well unless i find a score on a sfa, then i might jump into it.

 

I'm not trying to be a mediator by any means, I don't really think there is a right or wrong on this debate. I think the rig in the video and some of the other pics posted on this thread are probably not very safe rigs for some folks out there. However, for the owners of the rigs and anybody else at that skill level, they are perfectly fine. I'm sure Matts rig is perfectly suitable for his needs and its not fair to bash him and claim that he doesn't wheel it. On the flip side its not fair to assume that a lifted rig on 35's with a little body roll is unsafe. Different rigs for different goals and skill levels. Just my two cents.

 

in my oppinion if its a sas trail rig you should be aiming for the most articulation at the lowest height. i think the vehicle in the video is slightly too high, but suffers more from far too soft suspension. i think if the 4runner had larger tires to accomodate that much lift along with slightly stiffer springs or better shocks it would work out.

i stand by 4rnr in that a vehicle should be as low as possible. id rather cut fenders and smash firewalls back to run big tires and keep my center of gravity low than lift it copiously and risk a flop at every bump. im fairly sure i could have run almost every single obstacle in that video in my tacoma without a second try, that stock jeep dominating the crack in the second video was a good example.

 

Well its tough, I would say get 3" springs but then in a year or 2 your draglink will be in your oil pan and frame. If you do 4/5 you will be tall and tippy (I was very uneasy with it) at first but will later settle to an excellent feeling suspension...

I guess go with the 4/5's but try to keep it low, think out where you mount the hangers and shakles. the more shackle angle the lower and softer you ride. If you move your rear axle back (I did 3.5") you will also be lower because your hanger will be mounted farther up the arch of the frame....

Also a sway bar will help alot, and a wider track width will also do wonders wether it be wider tires, or wider axles (fj80/t100 etc...).

This pic is a good example of the kind of body lean I used to have, its more unnerving than the pic looks

 

very good speach hows the decision on you sas have you made any decisions yet

 

Oooh heres another pic i found...looow

 

when you say 4/5 do you mean 4" in front 5" in back?

 

yeah. these spring were all designed for pick ups so us 4unner guys, especially 2nd gens, need the extra 1" for our fat ass.

 

IMHO, flex is overrated. The goal should not be travel numbers or an RTI score. The goal should be a suspension that works well with your rig, driving style, and terrain. A rig with proper spring rates and shock damping will outperform one with messed up factors but more travel. And a rig with lockers will outperform either EVERY time.

Someone posted a picture of a Jeep buggy flopped on it's side due to the low spring rates. I'm sure it flexed like mad, but in this offcamber situation, there it was on it's side.

Maybe YOU need to do some research ... nobody in their right mind would say leaves are superior to a properly engineered and executed link setup. The ONLY advantage to leaves are they are simpler to design and install.

As to the OP - I think it's a combination of lots of things:
- high tire pressure (I didn't see any flex in the sidewall)
- spring rate/damping rate
- poor line selection
- improper gearing
- perhaps inexperience with the manual transmission - looks like he might be throttling it because he's scared of stalling it.

 

i do apoligize thats what i was trying to say the coil spring has a much more articulation than leafs thats why the jeep makes it more simple to acheive some opsticals you are correct on you statement iwas saying that you cant compare the 2

 

maybe too high, but still looks cool. to me, thats all that counts. if it can offroad like that too? AWESOME.

 

Take it easy on the poor fellow, he can't even compose a full sentence. Besides, the full expression, right out of Dublin, is "May God have mercy on your miserable gas-sniffin', orphan-beatin' soul."

This originally was meant to spur on a discussion on over-lifted rigs (ie: huge lift before lockers, armour, gears, etc) without thought to proper damping, good steering setup etc DRIVER SKILL etc. This wasn't intended as a p!ssing contest. Go prove your "manhood" elsewhere. And remember: