dieselcruiserhead
16 Years on ExPo. Whoa!!
Awesome I really hope/prey that sweet 55 comes with you!!!ChuckB said:
Which direction to go with my FJ62?
- Thread starter DBS311
- Start date
dieselcruiserhead
16 Years on ExPo. Whoa!!
This is funny.. I had this transition too, my 55 SOA became quite large too. This time I am keeping it smaller. There has been good discussion on te mud lately about SOA and the issue is there is a "threshold" meaning SOA (which is awesome) you have to have 6" of lift to have a healthy spring pack. Even if totally de-arched. Or a big SUA pack which has lots of drawbacks. Really this and gearing are the only issues. My 55 was incredibly reliable, totally custom, and I would take it on any expedition. Up in Alaska (Whatley, etc) for example they don't roll with you if you don't roll at least 35" tires. So there are benefits to big. I never felt mine was particularly unstable, especially once I got it dialed and the SOA tuned just right, but the issue is the size.
Here is my first SOA. On soft springs. I *do* think if you are smart you can build them small and take advantage of that SOA. But requires custom including possibly (gulp) shortening/running shorter leaf springs. This was with 33" tires (the grey 60 below).
Second pic shows my 55 in "most dialed" stage. I finally built this rig so it could lose none of its original LC characteristics (aka, haul a load) but still handle well with big tires and SOA (the 55 - almost identical to a 60). I also think 35" tires are the *max* you want to run. 37" are huge, open up a can of worms and it is frankly amazing what you can do and gut up and over with 35" tires and the limit of the "crawling" I would want to do...
I say reduce height as much as possible. Otherwise, your axles DO have value to them for people looking for a bolt on SOA. You could sell them and your leafs, buy OME, and buy a new set of axles. Really, there is nothing wrong with this at all. If someone made a decent 4" or 5" suspension that worked really well, I would strongly consider that too. That, with Ford shock towers and nice long shocks and I think you wouldn't loose too much. That and 33" tires and I think you are golden personally
Here is my first SOA. On soft springs. I *do* think if you are smart you can build them small and take advantage of that SOA. But requires custom including possibly (gulp) shortening/running shorter leaf springs. This was with 33" tires (the grey 60 below).
Second pic shows my 55 in "most dialed" stage. I finally built this rig so it could lose none of its original LC characteristics (aka, haul a load) but still handle well with big tires and SOA (the 55 - almost identical to a 60). I also think 35" tires are the *max* you want to run. 37" are huge, open up a can of worms and it is frankly amazing what you can do and gut up and over with 35" tires and the limit of the "crawling" I would want to do...
I say reduce height as much as possible. Otherwise, your axles DO have value to them for people looking for a bolt on SOA. You could sell them and your leafs, buy OME, and buy a new set of axles. Really, there is nothing wrong with this at all. If someone made a decent 4" or 5" suspension that worked really well, I would strongly consider that too. That, with Ford shock towers and nice long shocks and I think you wouldn't loose too much. That and 33" tires and I think you are golden personally
dieselcruiserhead
16 Years on ExPo. Whoa!!
Here is it loaded down, the truck literally has about 2500lbs of stuff in it and on it (supplies for 7 for a week, including 60 gallons of water, and our all of our trash on the way out. The roof alone had maybe 400lbs on it). And here is the best SOA spring pack I ever built, after literally years of messing with them. This is semi on a budget too. If I were to do it again, I would get OME medium and de arch them immediately I think
Front and rear packs. Front is 4 stock leaves, one "worked" short add-a-leaf to take the place of the bottom leafs, and one long soft add-a-leaf. Rear is 5 stock leaves (4 on the passenger side to compensate for cruiser lean -- worked like a charm), and two long add-a-leafs. It is a compromise between height and weight loading, the more you load the more you sag. To me this was an excellent set up.
:beer:
Front and rear packs. Front is 4 stock leaves, one "worked" short add-a-leaf to take the place of the bottom leafs, and one long soft add-a-leaf. Rear is 5 stock leaves (4 on the passenger side to compensate for cruiser lean -- worked like a charm), and two long add-a-leafs. It is a compromise between height and weight loading, the more you load the more you sag. To me this was an excellent set up.
:beer:
RAM5500 CAMPERTHING
OG Portal Member #183
DBS311 said:
In Order:
-Fridge
-Aux Tank
-Dual Bats
-GPS
-Some Sort Of Sleeping Aparatus
-On Board Air
ntsqd
Heretic Car Camper
You've said that you don't wish to go back to SUA and I can understand and appreciate that. Consider, though, that with SOA and a low vehicle height requirement that you'll have nearly flat to flat springs at ride height.
THE thing that leaf springs do not like to do is to be reverse arched. So while you can get the low ride height from an SOA the spring life for any kind of wheel travel will be greatly to drastically shortened. As a very general RoT a spring should be limited to 0.5"-1.0" of arch remaining at metal to metal contact. One of the desert racers I crew for is stroking a 57" long spring to 16" of travel. It does that by going almost 3" reversed arch. Those springs, at $600+ a pair, don't even live one whole racing season.
A crawler wants a lot of droop, but usually doesn't run a lot of compression travel. Desert racers try to run their static ride height at about 50% of total travel (though some don't for vehicle or class specific reasons). An Overlander's ride quality is better served by the racer model than the crawler model.
At the same ride height an SUA spring will have more arch in it than an SOA spring. Same is true when on the bumpstops. Even though they are flexing (in theory) the same distance, the SUA springs will live a lot longer.
IMO an SOA is is the wrong compromise. True, SUA springs do tend to get hung up on more things. Factor in that an Overlander isn't intended to run the Hammers. If you're hanging up on SUA springs you probably should've brought the crawler for that trail.
THE thing that leaf springs do not like to do is to be reverse arched. So while you can get the low ride height from an SOA the spring life for any kind of wheel travel will be greatly to drastically shortened. As a very general RoT a spring should be limited to 0.5"-1.0" of arch remaining at metal to metal contact. One of the desert racers I crew for is stroking a 57" long spring to 16" of travel. It does that by going almost 3" reversed arch. Those springs, at $600+ a pair, don't even live one whole racing season.
A crawler wants a lot of droop, but usually doesn't run a lot of compression travel. Desert racers try to run their static ride height at about 50% of total travel (though some don't for vehicle or class specific reasons). An Overlander's ride quality is better served by the racer model than the crawler model.
At the same ride height an SUA spring will have more arch in it than an SOA spring. Same is true when on the bumpstops. Even though they are flexing (in theory) the same distance, the SUA springs will live a lot longer.
IMO an SOA is is the wrong compromise. True, SUA springs do tend to get hung up on more things. Factor in that an Overlander isn't intended to run the Hammers. If you're hanging up on SUA springs you probably should've brought the crawler for that trail.
DBS311
Adventurer
Yeah, I know all about the (short) life of flat springs when coupled with a spring over. I put brand spankin' new stock height springs on when I did the SOA and they lasted all of 8 months before inverting, and that was only after a couple trails and typical daily driving. That is why I am now running OME heavies on the front. Problem is, now I have the typical 6-7" SOA setup AND the extra 2.5" the OME's give me.
I wonder if anybody has ever outboarded the springs to get the benefit of a spring over while being able to keep it reasonably low WITH the arched springs?
I wonder if anybody has ever outboarded the springs to get the benefit of a spring over while being able to keep it reasonably low WITH the arched springs?
DBS311
Adventurer
dieselcruiserhead said:I say reduce height as much as possible. Otherwise, your axles DO have value to them for people looking for a bolt on SOA. You could sell them and your leafs, buy OME, and buy a new set of axles. Really, there is nothing wrong with this at all. If someone made a decent 4" or 5" suspension that worked really well, I would strongly consider that too. That, with Ford shock towers and nice long shocks and I think you wouldn't loose too much. That and 33" tires and I think you are golden personally
I have thought about doing this exact thing, but after all I went through getting the SOA set up the way I like it, I'd just rather stick with it and make other compromises. Then again, I've never run with my current setup (SOA+OME) and a tent up top :yikes:, so that might scare the crap out of me the first time I try it. I'll just have to let you know how it turns out.
DBS311
Adventurer
Chuck, there is a killer 55 on Coronado Island (it's white and blue). We'll all have to meet up when you are CONUS again.
Those of you with a 60/62........have you seen any options for replacement tanks besides Man-a-Fre and Opposite Lock? I would kill for an OL 50 gallon tank but I don't know who I can go through to source it from AU.
Those of you with a 60/62........have you seen any options for replacement tanks besides Man-a-Fre and Opposite Lock? I would kill for an OL 50 gallon tank but I don't know who I can go through to source it from AU.
ntsqd
Heretic Car Camper
I presume everyone has seen this 9 page thread on Mud?DBS311 said:
CaliCruiser
Adventurer
I have 63" Chevy springs on the rear and they do not negatively invert while flexing. So far I am very happy with them. . .
Dylan
Dylan
Similar threads
