QuadsBC's 05 Double Cab Tundra Family Expo Build
- Thread starter QuadsBC
- Start date
It prettymuch has been, with the stock control arms I need to do a body mount chop. It would rub slightly when we did the firewall chop but I didn't bring 3/16 plate to weld the body mount back together. So I left it as is, minor project for another day.
I do still have to figure out some sort of fender liner. And I ordered a land cruiser 100 series snorkel to remedy the stock intake location. I thought about internal snorkel but ultamately decided against it.
I do still have to figure out some sort of fender liner. And I ordered a land cruiser 100 series snorkel to remedy the stock intake location. I thought about internal snorkel but ultamately decided against it.
wrenchMonkey_
Adventurer
Been watching this for a while, guess I should say something. Always happy to see more love for the DC's. Looks great.
SO..... hows the fuel economy hit? Every time I look at tubing my 06DC for 35's or 255/85-16's (both would go on SCS F5's 3.50) I just don't want to imagine what the fuel economy hit would be. I get 15MPG on a good day with 275/70-17' BFG AT's (55lbs) or 265/75-16 Nokian LT2's (44.5lbs) Going bigger and heavier makes me cry inside.
We have 4.11 in our DC's, so like you've noticed, while that's better than 3.XX, 4.56s would be nice
SO..... hows the fuel economy hit? Every time I look at tubing my 06DC for 35's or 255/85-16's (both would go on SCS F5's 3.50) I just don't want to imagine what the fuel economy hit would be. I get 15MPG on a good day with 275/70-17' BFG AT's (55lbs) or 265/75-16 Nokian LT2's (44.5lbs) Going bigger and heavier makes me cry inside.
We have 4.11 in our DC's, so like you've noticed, while that's better than 3.XX, 4.56s would be nice
Well, this tank of gas included letting the truck warm up every morning, frequent cold starts and driving around town. I'm at about 240 miles and expect to put another 25-35 miles before the fuel light comes on. That would put me around 20.5 gallons consumed. Which puts city about 13-14 mpg uncorrected for larger tire size. My 35's and wheels weigh in at 84lbs, stock 17's and beat 265's were 73 lbs so the weight increase was marginal. Once on the highway I expect to get 14-16 depending on if I draft a semi. Overall, I expected a larger decrease in mpg but I'm happy with the current specs.
Went out to Baxter state park area with the family today. Traveled light, just brought the essential may break down or get stuck gear. Explored some logging roads, never aired down and still floated pretty good on the crusty snow. The roads out there are in rough shape, big frost heaves, pot holes, mud and ice. The icon coilovers were well worth the money, the rear shocks however, I'd like to throw them in the trash. They ate up any harsh pothole or frost heave without issue but when it comes to controlling a bounce coming out of a dip. They had a solid two and a half bounce after. Im pretty disappointed after less than 2000 miles of light use they almost feel blown. I'll clean them up tomorrow and inspect for signs of failure(which I don't think I'll find). I think the valving is all wrong and needs to be slower. Maybe I'll have to switch to fox if I can't get these to work for me.
Snow depth ranged from 12-24"
Snow depth ranged from 12-24"
Last edited:
thethePete
Explorer
^ I've had nothing but good experience with Fox, and I've run the 2.0 on other applications with great success. You should be able to spec your valving from whoever you buy the shocks through when ordering. They are rebuildable, so the valving can be changed. Tell them what you've got for weight and springs and a good seller should be able to help you get close with valving.