Lifts on Expedition Vehicles

[spencyg]

I carried 130 gallons of water, 60 gallons easily of fuel and a lot more.

Where did you put all of that fuel and water?

Spence

 

[alaskantinbender]

Great looking FJ55. I have always liked the looks of those.
My grand dad had an old 2 wheel drive willys wagon that went absolutely every where.
It carried everything including the kitchen sink. He could just about rebuild the truck with what he carried inside. Specially built chuck boxes and storage bins. I still have the canvas water bag he would hang on the front bumper.
He drove west from Minnesota to Washington State in the late 40s and never looked back. Back in those days it was wheel placement, speed and momentum. He never did get a 4x4 although he contemplated an international 800 with a v8 for some time. The last truck he had was a long wheel base jimmy that towed his camping trailer and grandma all over the western half of the US.
I think most of us are spoiled with the lifts and larger tires. But they sure do look neat.....


Regards,

Jim

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

Where did you put all of that fuel and water?

Spence

As it was a hauler this trip we had the rear seat down... So basically between the tires for the most part, inside. The fuel was the OEM tank (25 gallons) plus I think 8 or so fuel jerry cans. The point was to run biodiesel the entire trip there and back. I had most on the roof but some in the cab near the tailgate... I had about 400lbs on the roof easily but found the bulk of the weight as low as possible in the cab counter balanced the roof very well. I was also able to hit very high speeds (80mph, faster) with no issues either despite high winds, etc, for the majority of the trip...

 

[alaskantinbender]

however it is my opinion that very few consumer vehicles available new today can be taken seriously as an off-highway platform as equipped from the factory. I don't blame the manufacturers for neutering their vehicles,

I agree in general. But some of the newer teck the last 10 years or so has improved off road manners in many rigs. Its not all lift and clearance but flexibility and keeping the wheels on the ground over the rough stuff. Older is not necessarily better and new is not all bad.
The change from the old Hotchkiss suspensions has improved the Fords and Jeeps greatly. My 05 F350 with OEM overload springs and snowplow kit can cruse and climb over rough terrain with ease at speeds that would have torn up my old F250, cruiser or cj5.
It also takes 35X12X18 BFG mud terrains stock and looks like 38’s will fit.



Regards,

Jim

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

That's great Shovel Mine were in 5 gallon bags in cardboard boxes left over from an event earlier that summer. Did not end up using most of it even with a whole bunch of us....

 

[Grim Reaper]

Least lift needed is my route. I managed to jam a set of 33x12.5 under a totally stock 86 4Runner with nothing more then abut 10 minutes with a hammer and a set of shears to trim the fender liners up. I did add some helper springs to cure the 4Runner sag in the back and add weight capacity for cargo.

I would have put 33x10.5 but ran across a smoking deal on the 12.5's that was just too good to pass up (4 nearly new and 2 50% or better spares for $350).

On a IFS truck if you start lifting you start changing the load angles on the suspension mounting points. On my Model truck I have seen pictures where the mounting brackets were tearing off the frame with 3 inches of lift and 36's. The IFS lifts often need the front dif lowered to keep the CV angles in check so you end up not gaining any lift at one of the lowest parts of the truck. I did some modifications to prevent the brackets from tearing off including adding a lower control arm mounting bracket brace where there was none from the factory. If I do ever put lift on it it will be in the form of a long travel suspension kit that nets 2 inches of lift with 12 inches of wheel travel. It gains the lift without a lot more leverage on the suspension by the use of longer control arms so it does not make a CV angle change. The front Diff stays in the stock location.

Wheel selection was also something I gave a lot of thought to. While "Steels" are what most people want for rock crawling I really feel that I was better off with a set of Aluminum with my plans for this truck. The big reason is weight. The factory stock chrome steels and a set of 235x75 x15 that were on my truck when I bought it weighed 62lb each. With the Dealer option AR wheels in a 15x7 and the 33x12.5 BFG A/T's each where weighs 68lb.

My last truck ran 35x12.5 muds on a 15x10 steel rim. They weighed 92lb each. That extra weight is just as much a problem with acceleration and braking as the extra diameter. That extra weight is also a HUGE part of breaking parts.

My truck has more ground clearance then a stock Rubicon Unlimited and not any taller. So far I can follow that Rubicon anywhere he has gone.

I do think I may end up putting on a 2 inch body lift. Not really for tire clearance but to make a few additions easier. Rock sliders with a 2 inch body lift are straight out from the frame where with it stock I actually loose clearance. Bumpers are the same deal. The rear bumper on a 86 4runner is actually attached to the body not the frame. Due to the tail gate that 2 inches makes rear bumper fabrication easier. I can also move the engine up 2 inches and make a customer cross member to support te transmission and gain almost 6 inches of break over clearance (and if I put a 1Uz in it I will need the extra room on the oil pan Muuuu HAHHHhaaaaa). I can also move the fuel tank up 2 inches and gain clearance there.

The rest of drive train and suspension upgrades was regear to 4.88 to get the motor back in its stock power band with the bigger tires. I also added a Toyota TRD electric locker in the rear axle. The truck happily runs down the hwy at 70mph with an accurate speedometer getting 22mpg.

 

[gjackson]

Lifting a serious overland vehicle should be done with care and due consideration. Get something that is built and tested for overlanding, NOT for rock crawling! I have a 3" lift on my truck and the parts we had the most problems with so far have been the aftermarket suspension components. Safari Gard makes a killer rock crawling setup, but overlanding knocked the *&it out of it. Small design flaws are magnified, and failures will result. If you stay stock, you can be sure that the factory has tested their design pretty heavily and it will most likely last if handled well, the same cannot be said for all lift kits.

Having said that, I think OME does a pretty good job with their still in this regard.

cheers

 

[Redline]

In general, I agree as well.

The current generation 4Runner is a very good example of your point. It is very low and is truly limited by its 'low-rider' stance when stock. But with a mild OME lift, 32 or 33-in tires, and aftermarket armor, the platform works very well.

There's a point of diminishing returns, and a point at which lifts become a handicap... however it is my opinion that very few consumer vehicles available new today can be taken seriously as an off-highway platform as equipped from the factory. I don't blame the manufacturers for neutering their vehicles, it's a natural compromise given what their buying customers want and what those customers are willing to pay. As an example, independent suspension (with short little arms) is one of the most cost effective ways for the manufacturers to give customers a low-center-of-gravity vehicle with a low hood that's easy to see over, a low & wide load deck in the rear, and a low risk of dynamic rollover when the driver drives like drivers drive (carelessly).

To answer the topic most directly, I believe suspension tuning and improved tires are almost mandatory adjustments for any vehicle intended to be used off-highway any significant amount - even just dirt roads - and this is simply because roadworthy vehicles come from the factory optimized for pavement where they're likely to spend 99.9% of their lives.

 

[Bergger]

In general, I agree as well.

The current generation 4Runner is a very good example of your point. It is very low and it truly limited by its 'low-rider' stance when stock. But with a mild OME lift, 32 or 33-in tires, and aftermarket armor, the platform works very well.

I've got an 03 TRD with a mild lift, 2-3", and 32's and my neighbor has a stock 06 4Runner Sport. I am simply amazed at how his truck has performed following me, even with his stock all season tires. There have been a few places that, even with my locker engaged, have given me minor problems and he has cruised right through. I credit that to the amazing traction control the truck has. He has scraped the underside a few times but simply add some armor and problem solved. The new gen 4Runner is really an awesome truck.

 

[Carlyle]

I have a mild 2" spring lift on the front of my F350 for the main reason that it takes the rake out of the vehicle. Before this, the camper was always tilted to the front on level ground and had to be corrected with the camper jacks. Now I am level and 305-75-16's Nitto's fit w/o ever touching.

 

[Redline]

Not to highjack the thread, but in the context of lifts adding capability for expedition vehicles:

I agree Bergger, the current generation 4Runner is a real 'sleeper'. After test drives last Thanksgiving in an FJ Cruiser, Tacoma, & 4Runner, I thought I wanted a Runner, but was concerned it was possibly too much of a 'mall crawler'. I read, then reread Scott Brady's review of the ARB 4Runner, as well as lots of 4Runner web info.

After my purchase I waited a few months while my OME lift sat in my garage, while waiting on my front bumper (stiff front springs needed weight). While waiting for the bumper I took the Runner out a few times and was also impressed with its abilities. The stock traction control does work very well. Also, the 110-in. wheelbase, shorter than many Tacomas, is an advantage. But the stock 'skid plates' are very thin and often I was not able to hear the contact and denting. Very capable stock, but also very limiting if pushed. Now with OME lift and full armor I have little concern about where I can drive the Mall Crawler. Its capability has been improved at least two-fold.

I think a shorter wheelbase rig that doesn't have things hanging down in the center (like my '05 LJ Rubicon did) have much stock capability as an overlander. The new JKs their their stock 32, should clear narrow 33s (255/85R16) without a lift and do very well! They need to put a CRD diesel in that car

I've got an 03 TRD with a mild lift, 2-3", and 32's and my neighbor has a stock 06 4Runner Sport. I am simply amazed at how his truck has performed following me, even with his stock all season tires. There have been a few places that, even with my locker engaged, have given me minor problems and he has cruised right through. I credit that to the amazing traction control the truck has. He has scraped the underside a few times but simply add some armor and problem solved. The new gen 4Runner is really an awesome truck.

 

[Colorado Ron]

I think if you need to lift an overland rig, suspension might not be the best choice. My suburban got a body lift. By doing this I kept the reliability of the factory suspension, but still cleared bigger tires. I did a little body trimming too. All the while I kept the heavy parts in factory position. The result was 35s with untouched suspension and minimal increase to tippy ness? Is that even a word? Getting late and I cant think of the word. Sorry but I think you get the point.

Also I think anything bigger than 35s and its getting real hard to find tires. I was surprised to see 35s in a couple S. American tire shops without much trouble. Anything bigger and forget it.

 

[Redline]

Good point for a heavy-duty vehicle. I have kept the springs stock on my F350 yet still have 33s on it (they clear). I had a custom T-case skid plate made and put aftermarket exhaust up higher and have less to hang-up on.

However, in the case of lighter vehicles (4Runner) I not only wanted a little height but also needed different springs to support the considerable weight that was added to the car. The stock springs would not have done the job.

I think if you need to lift an overland rig, suspension might not be the best choice. My suburban got a body lift. By doing this I kept the reliability of the factory suspension, but still cleared bigger tires. All the while I kept the heavy parts in factory position. The result was 35s with untouched suspension and minimal increase to tippy ness? Is that even a word? Getting late and I cant think of the word. Sorry but I think you get the point.

 

[Colorado Ron]

Good point for a heavy-duty vehicle. I have kept the springs stock on my F350 yet still have 33s on it (they clear). I had a custom T-case skid plate made and put aftermarket exhaust up higher and have less to hang-up on.

However, in the case of lighter vehicles (4Runner) I not only wanted a little height but also needed different springs to support the considerable weight that was added to the car. The stock springs would not have done the job.

I see your point on lighter vehicles. Cant you get springs to hold the weight without lifting the vehicle though?

 

[Redline]

Good question, I don't know but would guess not. I image they would have very little demand for them depending on the application. OME might be the exception.

In my case, I’m very pleased with how well the lifted, modified 4Runner drives on-highway. Yesterday I made an emergency swerve on the freeway after slowing to about 40-50-MPH when some idiot decided to stop on the freeway for no apparent reason partially blocking the right lane.

Very little body roll and I could tell there was much more capability available. This is with the rear sway-bar removed.

James

I see your point on lighter vehicles. Cant you get springs to hold the weight without lifting the vehicle though?