Okay. Sorry. Apologize for hijacking your thread. Will do.

Thanks!

 

No worries 1stTimer. I'm wondering if any other YT members have followed my lead and made the modifications for a clean install.



Or is it just another hack job?



Compare my modified UCA to an unmodified stock UCA.

 

thanks for the writeup, great info. Was thinkin bout bj spacers and didnt know much about the cutting process, but your job def looks cleaner and strong, way it should be. Im adding this to the list, have to do new arm bushings anyways. So with the bj spacers and larger stops is there any height added? thanks

 

Not really any added height with BJS compared to just adjusting the torsion bars for a higher ride height.

 

^cool thanks BlazeN8

 

Very informative thread, thanks for taking the time to post all this useful info and pics! I had a question, if I were to modify the UCA the correct way as you posted to accept the ball joint spacer, what if I were to make a plate, similar to your UCA extension bracket, not to extended out, but to reinforce that pocket area to help prevent the bolts from distorting that area?

◆◆◆EDIT◆◆◆ The more I think about it this is probably a bad idea, I would just be adding another part to be clamped in between with those long bolts, and also adding another friction surface into the equation.

 

I don't understand the appeal? BJ spacers compromise the strength of the Upper Control Arms. BJ spacers decrease the usable travel; from 8-3/8" down to 7-3/4" BJ spacers reconfigure the geometry and can cause damage to CV axles, Outer Tie Rod Ends, and Upper Ball Joints. BJ spacers don't work with the available shocks.

 

Hi all

Being my first post, i thought i would start by saying that im from Australia, i own a 97-05 hilux that is very similar to the IFS toyotas in the states. From pictures some of the chassis brackets seem to me further reinforced but most of the suspension appears to be the same. (and we get diesels!)

Researching the toyota torsion bar IFS has taught me alot as to how it works and has given me a greater understanding of the components and their role in the system. One of the biggest hurdles that i face is the laws around vehicle modifications in oz. Such as being limited to a 2" suspension and 2" tyre diameter increase and a 2" track width increase all from stock. This can be negotiated by having the modifications engineered at substantial expense yet still remains limited to the full extent of how far you can go. My goal is to increase usable travel without increasing ride height or track width.

I have completely determined that moving to a long arm suspension is the only way to achieve increased suspension travel of any reasonable scale (greater then 20mm). Taking inspiration from this thread and relaying trust in the measurements that Nate has provided, I made some further calculations to determine the potential suspension travel available without moving to longer arms.

Noting that all of my measurements are in millimeters, I apologize to those who are accustomed to the imperial system however IMHO, the SI system is here to stay.
I have also included center of hub to guard measurements. This seems to be the standard way to determine ride height with this generation of Hilux's.


I feel that i have added some additional measurements that may provide useful, they are far from precise however they do provide a conceptual picture as to what may be possible.
If anyone (including BlazeN8) has more accurate measurements, please feel free to add them and I am happy to edit my spreadsheet. And Nate, if this is not inline with what you feel should be in this thread, please let me know i am happy to move it elsewhere. I do feel as though that it complements the information in the thread nicely for those interested in increasing travel.

I personally have decided to simply run the low profile bump stops, gaining a full 3" of travel (2.5" however being up travel) and maintaining good operating angles and reliability. The long travel kit i feel is ideal to improve travel as it maintains much of the stock geometry, however it does not work with the laws i have to live with.


One other point to add is that torsion bars have an inherently linear spring rate. This can compromise small bump compliance to maintain enough spring rate for heavy impacts.
Hydraulic bump stops may provide a solution to increasing spring rate on harder impacts yet retaining good small bump compliance as well as slow speed wheel travel when rock crawling.

 

If it helps people figure out something I don't mind. Yeah, being in metric it is a different language. Even stuff I wrote about on here takes some effort to understand its been so long ago.

 

So where would I buy those extensions that you fabricate? I will be buying 33's for 91 Pickup in the next few weeks, and am currently researching the best way to accommodate those tires. I will not be doing any serious wheeling, but it's more for long distance commutes to a construction site. I was about to pull the trigger on a spacer before I read your post, and now I'm definitely gun shy buying that setup. However, I still need that price point.

 

The Blazeland UCA Extension Brackets are sold with the Long Arm Kit or with the DIY Weld up kit. The UCA E.B.'s cannot be used stand alone as they increase the length of the upper control arm by something like 3-1/2' and in doing such you would need to lengthen the lowers by a similar amount. I hear Wall Mart is selling BJ Spacers now for $49. This could be hearsay? If you were to use the BJ spacer for lift and to relieve torsion bar crank; then use the thicker droop stops to limit the down travel, I guess it has some use? I feel like I am "beating a dead horse" every time I go over this.

 

Bump on this thread. Good to see the PhotoBucket pictures re-appearing.

 

Subscribed and looking forward to getting my own set off LT control arm system, I didn't want to remove my current control arms but found some great cores at the local U-Yank-It-Apart from a 86 4runner, mine is a 89 4runner v6 manual.