I have search however I cant find exactly what I want to know. All my life I have been building Jeeps and have finnaly decided to go with a Toyota! The vechical of choice is a '95 Toyota truck, 4wd reg. cab short bed, 22RE, 5speed.

Search wise, this is what I have concluded thus far:

I want to run 33x10.50's on it, I under stand this could be done with no lift kit, however I would like to gain atleast 1.5-2" of lift some how.

My first thought was OME torsion bars up front and greasable, longer, shackles in the rear with Bilstine shocks. Then I found out about ball joint spacers, I figured COOL. Ball joint spacers + relaxed OME torsions should give me plenty of flex out of the IFS. But now Im starting to find that the majority of people are against changing the torsion bars.

My question is,

What is the ideal set up for 33x10.50's? I dont want to crank the t-bars. I dont want any type of drop bracket lift, and I cant afford a L/T kit.

Any thoughts or ideas, along with pictures would be greatly appreciated.

Also please keep in mind that a SAS is totaly out of the question for a few years atleast. As dumb as it may sound I WANT a well built IFS rig that can run just about any trail.

BTW the rest of the truck is getting 5.29's Detroit rear, ARB front, Marlin Crawler bumpers+sliders, M8000 winches front and rear, bud built skids and maybe, maybe dual cases (might have to wait until my tax return for that)

 

welcome to YT regegade.

Glad to see youve searched most of the things that you need. The set-up that you have described to us sounds REALLY good. Since you will be going with the aftermarket bumer with winch, i would def go for the OME torsion bars, but do not go with any other brand, they are too heavy. I would def put in the BJ spacers, maybe look at www.downeyoff-road.com and check out their leaf springs for the rear of your truck (theyre a great price).

check one of these out too - https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f116...grades-184936/

Besides that, you sounds like youre good to go and know exactly what you need.

EDIT: got pics of your truck and your past jeeps?

 

Leafs and balljoint spacers or just body lift. or both

 

Bj spacers up front, bigger springs in back. Or you could just throw on a body lift for cheap. 1, 2, or 3''.

 

Cool, thanks

Sure do have pictures of my Jeeps. None of my truck just yet!

This is my old YJ (sure do miss it)



And this is my current JK

 

Nice I just helped my bro put D44s from an old ford under his yj. I like the front fenderwells did it come like that or did you add them?

 

If you're going with a Marlin front bumper, the OME torsions might not be necessary. Although, I don't know the weight of a winch, so you may still want them.
Could probably try it without first, and if you're bottoming hard then get 'em..

 

Couple of things to think / realize, meaning there are different ways of fitting larger tires: suspension lift or body lift. Both have their advantages and disadvantages.
Suspension lifts raise the frame higher, thus allowing larger tires. The downside to any suspension lift is the fact that the frame is raised, and when you realise the frame is a large portion of the weight of the vehicle, lifting the frame can significantly affect the hadnling of the vehicle.
However some methods of lifting via suspension mods will allow larger tire 'at rest' but do nothing to keep the tire from hitting the body when the suspension flexes. Ball joint spacers are one such sort of suspension lift that will let you ride on larger tires but if you hit a good bump or whoop, the tire will most likely hit the body. The reasoning behind that is that our trucks have two 'stops', one which limits how far the upper arm droops and one which limits how far the lower arm compresses. BJ spacers push the knuckle and lower arm down but do nothing to limit how far the lower arm travels upwards. So maybe a larger tire will fit (since the hub / knuckle is being forced down by the spacers) but nothing is keeping the tire/wheel from travelling upwards any more than the stock wheel/tire would.
I don't mean to say anything to the detriment of those selling BJ spacers- they do have their purpose but I wouldn't rely on BJ spacers to give me the ability to run larger tires: I'd use them so I could have more travel. Stock IFS has about 6-7" travel so any travel you gain helps you stick to the road. BJ spacers are, in my opinion, a function over form option- done properly they allow your wheel(s) to move vertically more than stock. Keep the tire in touch with the ground, and you've gained some advantage, particulary with appropriate differential mods.
Then you have 'bracket' type lifts which will raise the frame (and body) higher, and allow larger tires, but only because they move the rest of the truck higher. You're basically stuck with stock suspension characteristics but can mount larger tires.. but the larger tires run less of a chance of contacting the body than they would with BJ spacers.
Finally, body lifts.... If all you want is larger tires, do a body lift. It'll get you clearance for larger tires and won't significantly raise the center-or-gravity nor alter handling all that much.

If what I wanted was:
- larger tires- body lift...
- mid-frame ground clearance- suspension lift...
- articulaion- BJ spacers...

Torsion bars are a totally separate discussion which depends on how much weight you foresee the front end carrying... and maybe some consideration of terrain- desert running may be a good candidate for stiffer bars, for instance. A little more weight because of a heavier bumper could probably be handled with good shocks. A big bumper made from 1/4" steel and a winch and... yeah, maybe uprated bars would be in order.

 

So with all that said abe.
The best option would be to ball joint spacer and body lift. That way you get the little more articulation from the spacers and a little bit more fender clearance from the body lift to have room for the extra articulation. Right?

 

I would hold off on the torsion bars untill you have your winch and stuff in place. Then see how the stockers hold up.

Otherwise, sounds good! I suggest an Idler arm brace, those things hate big tires and lift...

 

Is this at gold mountain in Bigbear, Ca ?

 

Depends on how you define "best" ... for me, stock height has been best - I have had WAAAAY less steering issues than most people I know. Keeping the angles stock is the strongest way.

I can tell you that 33x10.50 stock height locked front/rear has been plenty of rig for some of the hardest trails in Colorado and Moab. My desire to avoid body/glass damage limits my trail selection FAR more than the front suspension.

 

^^ yeah, but the addition of big wire mud tires on rims that are spaced out farther, put MUCH more stress on the tweaked steering angles then a 10.5" all terrain on a stock rim would...

 

It also depends on how sagged and worn out your springs and torsion bars are.
You might need to crank them a bit to get your truck away from the bump stops.
My truck is sagged pretty equally, front and rear. My plan is to throw in a couple leaves from a 3/4 ton truck or van to pick up the rear and crank the torsion bars a bit. This should get me back to stock height.

 

I doubt they are that saggy. The lower a arms should just able be inline with the frame. Flat.

Cranking torsion bars is never a great idea...

 

Lower a-arms should be angled down, with the outside end slightly lower than the inner end, with about the same amount of travel to the respective bump stop. This allows the shocks to do their proper dampening on compression / jounce and on rebound to help prevent bottom/topping out.

Having re-read the OP, I think that when considering the desired tire size, a body lift of sufficient size (2" maybe) will be enough to clear the tires. As well, the larger tire, all by itself... when considering a 28" stock tire to the desired 33" tire... will result in approximately 2.5" lift to the frame without any other mods since the tire is 5" larger in diameter. If the truck had 31" stock, then going to a 33" means 1" lift by tire alone... and 1.5 BJ spacers up front (without a t-bar crank), a 2" body lift (I would say 1" BL, but... we have to allow for travel from the BJ spacers), along with appropriate mods to the rear leafs should take care of it.

I'm tired, having been up for almost 24 hours now, so I may have made error(s). I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Lockers are going to be the best bang for your buck over lift as tc said.

 

I agree. Lockers with a quality tire are your best moves. I second the notion that cranking t-bars is a bad move. A little tweak to level the truck from sagging maybe ok but, cranking them to gain height wreaks havoc on front end parts.

 

If you choose the BJ spacers make absolutley sure your front axles do not bind when the tires are in full droop mode. Jack it up so the suspension flexes fully and grab each tire and rotate. If you feel ANY resistance you will either need to decrease the size of the spacers or use a diff drop. If you don't check you run a big risk of ripping up the shaft when your out wheeling.

As for opinions they are many and varied. It all comes down to two things, pocket book and what you really want to do (vs what you really want). I will agree with many that you want to limit your lift as much as possible, higher center of gravity of course means lesser roll over angles. Flex or tire travel can be very important if you are working in rugged country, if only mud or sand, not nearly as much. Ground clearance is a huge plus.

My wish list includes a SAS with lockers front and rear. I would ask for a mild lift ONLY so I could gain wheel travel. I would also like to switch out the rear coils for springs, again to gain wheel travel. I would prefer to cut the sheet metal to run larger tires to gain ground clearance and limit lift. Then of course the other bolt on hardware. Again pocket book and being realistic with what you want to do will dictate where you go...

 

I would just stick with the OME bars up front and whatever you want to do in the back to get it to match.

I'm a fan of the "lift as little as possible, as much as necessary" philosophy.