i have a 90 4runner with coil springs in the rear,and am wondering what the general consensus is about keeping them or going with leaf springs. Yes I did a search, but I am wondering just what are the points about each that are good or no good. This rigs' intention is to be the best "all aorund" offroad vehicle it can be, so it has to stay capable as a highway driver and still crawl rocks, plow snow, forge over creeks, etc. Cost is not too much of an issue, and I have access to a truck rear axle housing that had leaf springs, so I could save myself some time in that respect. I've driven and ridden in plenty trucks with 5" or more of lift with leaf springs, but how will coil springs feel (I would use fj80 springs=~5" lift) I've talked with a couple of local guys and they weren't very helpful-should've come to you guys in the first place

 

Stick with coils. They ride better on-road and if done correctly flex much better than leafs. Go with the Tall-saide FJ-80 coils which should get you the 5" you wanted. If need you can get longer upper and lower links made at www.spidertrax.com I think that with heims on both ends of the upper and lower links and the tall-side FJ-80 coils that it would flex like mad!

 

I'm using www.AllProoffroad.com rear links with OME 860 coil and both Ap and Downey pan hard rod bracket to bring up the rear to match my front SAS. so far, it's working perfectly except that the drive shaft is hitting the gas tank. I think with leaf spr , it will still do that. I'm working on gettng a smaller drive shaft.
I'll get some pics up later for you.

 

I would stick with coils.

I would not, and I mean no offense to those who have, stick with coils in the stock form. I really feel at the limit of the stock dimensions with 3.5" or lift and stock length arms.

The grapevine says that two separate places are working on rear ideas that keep coils but replace arms. Shafer's in Nevada already has a 3-link that looks good.

 

Got any pics of that proto type?

 

There are pics of the Shaffer kit on PBB. I was looking at it closer today, perhaps the scale was off, but it looks like a simiar result could be gainedom the keeping the driver's side upper and both lower link attachments at the axle, get longer links and move frame mounts, then jockey with the panhard as one sees fit.

The other is supposed to be done in the Fall.

Bruce has eyes on a third set-up.

Anthony, I forgot to mention it in the other thread, I said your truck looks tall, but I did not say it looks good and it must feel good to be done with the swap.

 

Ironically, I was chatting with Mike Shaffer about my idea......

 

Well guys, I had to chime in sooner or later. I went out wheeling this past weekend and took a friend with me on this trip. It wasn't real tough, but I gotta tell ya all, the leafs are the bomb.

Everyone has to make thier own judgements by the seat of their own pants, however, I can tell ya all, I absolutely love my leaf springs. My ride is AS soft, if not softer than the coils. Granted I have my shackles at a pretty good lean, but I desigened it that way to give a nice supple ride. Cruising down the dirt road with ruts and washboards, and then onto the rocks, it was absolutly heaven. When I flex it out, the Woody driveshaft doesn't hit the gas tank or skid plate, and did I say it rides like a dream....... I'm lovin IT!

 

i have coils on my rig, i do have a lot of flex in my rear end, my 33's will rub againts my frame when im fully flexed, i went to little moab a couple of weekends ago, my truck didnt do to bad for having open diffs and no lockers. i would say coils arent bad for all around use.

 

So um...got a link?

hey, so you didn't say it looks good ...that means it's butt ugly then?... :cry:





























What can I say.....I'm sensitive...

 

The biggest problem with running heim joints on the upper and lower links is suspension bind during flex. SteveO found this out on a trail when he broke one of his upper link bolts. Because of the geometry of the 4-link and the inclusion of a panhard bar, you have binding issues during flex, which the stock rubber joints will compensate, but heims won't. To make the suspension work properly, the panhard bar needs to be removed, but then you'll have nothing to hold the axle in alignment. I think I've got a design that will cure this problem, but until I fabricate a prototype and test it, I won't know for sure. The easiest way to solve the problem is do exactly what SteveO did and swap out to leafs, but personally I don't like the higher ride height. If this idea doesn't work, I will go to a double triangulated 4-link design. Either which way I'm still gonna design and build the 4-link system sometime this year.

 

When Steve broke that heim, I think it was on compression and contact with the cross member, not bind. It was just abusive to everything.

Anthony, that came out wrong again. I meant to say I failed to say it looks good, and that is what I mean. It looks good and wide with the swap.

 

I can't see how the upper link could come in contact with anything, there's nothing there for it to hit. If you take your stock suspension and articulate it without springs, you'll see what I'm talking about. Installing the heim uppers, causes undue stress on the mounts when flexed. The bolt could have very well broke during compression, but the flexing would have caused the fatigue that lead up to it.

 

No biggie.....( do people still use that? )
I'm just messing with ya.

 

Well, I don't know I broke it, but I know I broke a 5/8" bolt in two in the Rock Garden going up Iron Chest. The broken bolt was mounted to the upper controla arm, on the frame side. Maybe it happend when Carole was driving...... Probably so, I mean, I drive so smoothly and carefully, nothing breaks, right....

I did the entire Iron Chest trail with the Right upper control arm and the two lowers still intact.

 

the upper links are the ones that dictates the pinion angle and prevent "axle wrap". Maybe the torque was too much for the link?

 

here's the pics of my rear coil setup..
http://home.earthlink.net/~audiorat1...p/rearsusp.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~audiorat1.../rearsusp1.jpg

http://home.earthlink.net/~audiorat1.../rearsusp2.jpg

 

Anthony, thanks for the clarity.

SteveO, perhaps it was another issue you mentioned, but I thought in lengthening your uppers, you had compression clearance issues. Sorry for the mistake.

Bruce, I hope what you have in mind is promising. I still cannot see in my mind's eye how to get 4 links with the stock tank or how using stock length or near stock length arms will flex well. I am however, partially retarded when it comes to this sort of thing though. My stock lowers are at 22" IIRC while the Shaffer kits is 38". That fact alone appeals to me. Obviously some mount points are different which impacts length, but you get the idea.

 

Pretty nice, however can you explain this one to me

 

no biggie, were just all having fun.