Lifts on Expedition Vehicles

[limey]

Okay, I'm sitting here in Guatemala City, just back from a quick trip to the ruins at Mixco Viejo. On the drive back I was pondering the necessity of lifts on expedition vehicles and I thought it would be interesting to open the debate here.
As we took the narrow winding roads back into the city, I tried to remember any time I had ever felt the need for bigger tyres or more clearance on a vehicle dependent trip. I have an OME HD lift and 235/85/16 BFG AT's on my Disco I, which I fitted after sustaining some light quarter panel damage on a trip to the Uwharrie National Forest in North Carolina. However other than that, and other recreational 4x4 trips the majority of my expedition style trips rarely if ever required much in the way of additional clearance. Granted, my only experience with aftermarket suspension upgrades is on my present vehicle, however I have seen a loss of fuel efficiency, highway stability and power after the lift. While some of this can be mitigated through gearing changes and stiffer suspension components. It can cost quite a bit of money, money that could be used to get off the couch and start a trip! Not to mention that a better fuel efficiency reduces trip costs and the amount of fuel that needs to be carried.
So, what do you gentlemen/women think? Have you encountered situations while on an expedition where the extra clearance saved the day? I understand a minimum clearance is necessary for rough/older roads and fording. I would place that minimum around 9" which would seem to warrant 31" tyres on most 4x4s. How does that sound? I know some will reply that they recreationally wheel as well and that a modest lift is a good compromise but sticking within the realm of an expedition truck I would love to hear your thoughts and experiences,
Cheers,
Mat

 

[Nullifier]

Honestly for most trips a 31" tire would suffice unless you live in areas with a lot of deep nasty mud or are climbing huge rocks. I have done almost all of tellico on 31" tires in my Tacoma back in the day. Although fitting larger tires is definetly a help in offroading, I see lifting as more of adding to the vehicles stable carrying capacity. The exception is long wheelbase rigs where high centering can be an issue.

Except for a few trips to Richloam's muddy trails I have seen little benefit out of my 255/85/16 tires over the 31x10.50x15 tires I have previous. I know that a day will come when I will be glad I had them but for the most part your right big tires are not "needed". I would bet most of the Portal crowd would say upping to the largest tire you could fit stock and then a mild lift is the way to go. I think that is relevant for the typical terrain that most of us cover. Its funny I was thinking today that I really could have stayed at 31" tires and just added lockers. It would have saved my about $1800 when factoring in the 5 new tires and rims plus the cost of regearing to 4.88. That $1800 would have taken me on a 2 week trip atleast.

I think that is why all the threads like the "under $15,000 expo rig" and "What makes a vehicle expedition ready" are so great. They help reel us gear heads back to reality.

 

[Scott Brady]

For a high-clearance, stock wagon or truck, a lift is not required for 90% of expedition routes. However, a suspension appropriate to the load is.

What is required is a change in spring RATE, not necessarily spring LENGTH.

1-2" of additional spring length with the appropriate rate is a nice modification, as is changing from a 75 series to 85 series tire of the same width as stock (or about the same width).

On a discovery, fitting a 1-2" OME suspension of the correct rate and a 215/85 or 245/75 tire with an aggressive all-terrain tread is a nice enhancement for rugged tracks and bad roads.

I have been on several expedition routes where a small lift and slightly over-sized tires were an advantage. It all depends what type of challenge you are looking for.

Most importantly, suspension and tire changes should be mild overall IMO

 

[Overland Hadley]

This is an interesting topic. I am looking forward to seeing what other people's ideas are.

 

[madizell]

Personally, I think lift is not, or should not be, an end to be achieved all by itself. Most off-road vehicles need only to have traction and ground clearance to succeed.

Ground clearance is achieved through taller tires, not vehicle lift, since the lowest point of metal to ground is generally the axle differential which can only be "lifted" by use of taller tires. Center clearance is usually enhanced through suspension lift, but unless you have a particularly low center section, clearance in this area is not often a problem except in rocky terrain or deep mud. Good underbody armor, in my opinion, is of more value than an attempt to avoid ground contact through lift because no matter how you lift your vehicle, you will always be able to find a rock somewhere that you can high-center on.

That said, taller tires will often require some degree of either lift or fender trimming to achieve clearance between tires and body. Here is where lift is of the most use. Starting with the tires of your choice, determine just how much clearance you really need and how much of that clearance can be achieved through fender adjustment. Then, add lift as needed to provide only so much clearance as you need to eliminate contact between tires and body.

Personal experience has taught me that extremes in suspension lift do not equate with off road performance in all situations. Increase in lift height without increase in track width for example will produce a vehicle that tips more easily than a stock vehicle. (I have rolled my Jeep twice now, both times at a walking pace in steep terrain, and I have about 9 inches of suspension lift.) In competition, I did not do well against vehicles with less lift when in rugged, off-camber terrain because of that tendency to tip over. The problem was aided somewhat by an increase in track width of 3 inches over stock, but such changes do not come cheaply.

So I would suggest using lift in an expedition vehicle only if needed to clear the tires you will be using for the purpose, and only then if fender clearance can not reasonably be achieved through trimming or removing flares, inner liners, and such first. I would even be willing to accept light tire/body contact in extreme articulation situations as long as the contact is not detrimental to tires, because for the most part, such situation arise rarely in expedition driving. If you can fit a 32 inch tire without lift, I would consider it a done deal.

 

[Hunter]

Well, I admit, while enjoy the "expo" way of life, I still have some hardcore 4wheelin blood in me. So I openly admit, I am coming from a different perspective.


Here is a page out of my book of Life.....Enter Joe Blow, braggin about his all decked out Whatever 4x4 and his big lift and fancy tires. He attempts to compare his Whatever 4x4 to one of mine.

He asks. "You ever get stuck?"
"Of course I get stuck. It happens." I reply.
"Ha ha, I never get stuck in this bad boy!" he responds.
"Oh, I see. Then you must not be trying very hard."

:sport_box


Now, I know not everyone shares my logic of farther, faster, etc. I am one of those guys who likes to to go 4 wheeling on occasion for the sake of the challenge. By nature of that, you will test the limits of vehicle.

And I admit, I am content with my 33" tires on my Dodge and Land Cruiser. But I have gotten stuck, wished I had more and a few times, made very good use of my body armor.

When outfitting a rig, a lot has to be considered in the condtions you plan on being in, and how hostile a terrain you will be covering. I truly belive there in no universal average for everyone, so what works for someone here, could be far short somewhere else.

Also, one needs to take into consideration of the vehcile. A great example would be a short wheel base Jeep, such a YJ or a TJ. Stock lift and 31's will work the same but a Cherokee or Toyota, might need 31" or 33" and a 3 inch lift to keep up because of the extra length.

As Exped West stated, most trails of the expedetion type, 31's would be fine. There is always that chance though of a wash out, enlarged ruts or just making a mistake by getting a bad line in a techincal section. But even then, most that could be taken care of with some recovery gear and a shovel. Which could off set the need for more money spent on a lift and bigger tires.

 

[PhulesAU]

As with the others, it depends on where you want to go. I've got 4" lift on 35's on a Jeep LJ. it is a standard short arm kit, that has served well. to me the most important part is keeping the tires on the ground, if you've got no traction it matters not what lift or tire size you run. A flexable suspension, good tires and lockers are what will get a good driver thru some really tough terrain. He /She will have the tools to pick from and apply.

 

[Alaska Mike]

For me, it's a question of intent.

Expedition wheeling is all about reliability and sustainability. Large tires do not always allow for that, as there is an increased wear on vehicle components. The key is finding a balance, and no hard and fast tire size is going to fit all vehicles. What's perfectly fine on my CJ-5 may be woefully undersized on a Suburban, given the size and weight of the vehicle.

For the vast majority of the wheeling community, trips are usually limited to single-day outings, where the consequences of a broken vehicle may be less severe. Tow it home or fix it on the trail. You can err on the side of overbuilt and challenge more extreme obstacles, since this will not be your primary residence and lifeline. You don't have to carry the extra weight (food and water, camping gear, refrigerators...), and a small cooler will usually suffice.

Like I said- a matter of intent.

 

[Ruffin' It]

I'm constantly amazed by how far my stock disco on 29" AT's and patiences will get me, even when heavily loaded. Of course I am usually on the trail for the experience and the view, not to rock crawl. I, personally, am not prone to travel trails rated higher than a 3.5 or so, especially alone. I do plan on a 2" OME lift with slightly larger tires, but once that is done, I don't think I'll be on too many trails where that isn't enough for me.

 

[adventureduo]

We built our rig for expedition type travel. That in mind we went for a smaller tire and a mild old man emu lift. I promised myself i would never go any bigger, due to the fact that we simply DO NOT need it. Our rig will go anywhere we point it with a 33" tire and lockers. Once you go bigger things start to break, gears need to be swapped and gas mileage suffers etc. The plus was the suspension lift created more comfort offroad and enhanced spring rates enabled us to carry larger loads for fuel and gear. The tire size soaks up more bumps and gives us a bit more ground clearance. Another important thing.. is that it's much easier to source a smaller tire out on a trip than say a 37" MTR somewhere that may have to be special ordered.

Coming from rockcrawling and already have participated in the bigger is better scene.. i've found it just not necessary for what 'we' do.

IMHO it's all about keeping it simple and reliable.

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

The big issue is use and weight of load and intended usage. I do not think there is a universal. These days even on heavy wagons I run a 4-6" lift and 35s and even fully loaded it is very stable. This is big but I think it goes a long way and most importantly is its off road capability.

I understand and respect and plan to particupate in the expedition aspect but the bottom line is here where we live the American style from the last 5 years or so, 33-35" tires on average, does seem to make sense and increase overall wheeling ability, massively. This discussion reminds me of the late 90's on the Land Cruiser Mailing List when, gulp, 33's were big and 35's were unheard of/massive.

I was never into "rock crawling" either and have always considered myself a traditionalist, but the difference between 29" and 31" and 33" and 35", in off-road ability, is absolutely massive. With 35's you can literally get over anything, and almost everything a 37 could handle or larger. 32-33's I think are more practical, but I personally do not ever plan to run a vehicle on 31's or smaller for anything other than mild dirt road driving and relatively minimal wheeling. It is simply too difficult and involves scrambling. I see the videos and photos of Overlanders pushing their trucks through all sorts of stuff, using sand ladders over mild logs that you could drive over with 33's, and it simply makes little sense to me. Again, we are in the Southwest or whereever, Overlanding is great but again we are no longer seeing massive expanses of untamed land and most of us simply are going out off-roading... That said I am strongly considering downsizing. I plan a 4" lift this time. I am forced to use 35's for optimum gearing for my conversion, but I may simply abandon them and run my vehicle at a lower top speed for daily driving. Here are photos of my vehicle from Cruise Moab last year. More photos at http://metaltech4x4.com/cruisemoab06/index.htm. The last simple little rock would make for a hell of an obstacle for any vehicle on 31" tires...

Cheers,
Andre

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

Here is a photo of the vehicle completely loaded, more than I would ever need for any expedition with smart loading. My vehicle was the gear hauler for the trip. I carried 130 gallons of water, 60 gallons easily of fuel and a lot more. I believe I had 2000-2500 lbs of gear if I remember correctly... Most of the infrasturcture (temporary buildings) for our group for a week, It was not unstable in the slightest and would be fine in most off camber situations. This was a 12 hour trip on dirt and paved roads...

 

[007]

You will notice the advantages of a 33" tire and mild suspension lift every time you off road. You'll barely notice the disadvantage at the pump and on the highway.

I like having the confidence that my vehicle will out perform the masses in times of need, natural disaster, severe storms etc....

Its just money, money well spent.

 

[cowboy4x4]

I'm a 33's guy I think that is an all around good tire size actually 33/12.50
I like the flotation of this size in sand and gripping ability on rocks.
I know some people prefer skinny tires but I like what I have good all around tire.

 

[1leg]

I went with 255/85 for 1 reason adding Ground clearance without a lift. Southwest deserts are full of rocks. You can't go anywhere without driving over a few. The new Jeep JK should take a 255/85 with out a lift. I will be testing it this weekend. I may still add a small 1.5 - 2 inch lift.