auszookers.com
https://auszookers.com/forum/

Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
https://auszookers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=35127		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  buzbox [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:19 am ]
Post subject:  Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
After a fair bit of reading a few people's strongly worded arguements, I'm a little more confucious than I started.

Leafy sierra is the car, and I'm wondering what direction should I take in teh suspension department. At the moment it is standard, In the sense of Standard springs and shackles, standard size aftermarket shocks.

From what I understand, most people try to avoid shackles but they do have their place in some cases. 2" Springs means an even more uncomfortable ride, even with the load leaf taken out. I was also wondering if having both would be a bad idea.

As for shocks, well let's not get into that can of worms, there's a few other threads that go into depth on that issue.

The main terrain it would be used for would be rocks, and ruts. So without having to go for shock hoops and all that jazz what would be the ideal setup for max flex while still keeping it SPUA.

Now no fighting or personal attacks please.. Play nice pompoms

Cheers,
Dave
Author:  Zook_Fan [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
For comfort and flex in a bolt on fashion I haven't found anything better than the OME springs and they are much better than stock. 40mm lift in the medium duty unless you have winches and excessive weight either end.

I've tried OME, EFS, dobinsons, kings and bluepac springs and without a doubt I'll buy nothing other than OME from now on.
Author:  atari4x4 [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
drop shackles are the future. pompoms
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
atari4x4 wrote:
drop shackles are the future. pompoms

Drop shackles with limit straps FTW. :D


Ome ride better than stock. On my phone IMHO, I'll post in more detail when I'm at home.

Steve.
Author:  zukmeista [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
I've got EFS gear in mine, rides much better than stock and plenty of flex too. I would steer clear of OME as Zookfan had the fronts sag heaps apparently?
Author:  tanshi [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
I use all efs, would never buy OMEs again.
Axle wrapped to shit house, i have much less issues with EFS
Author:  Bruce [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
tanshi wrote:
I use all efs, would never buy OMEs again.
Axle wrapped to shit house, i have much less issues with EFS


x2
Author:  JrZook [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
zukmeista wrote:
I've got EFS gear in mine, rides much better than stock and plenty of flex too


Of the shelf 5 leaf, 7mm EFS leaf packs?......... I doubt it
Author:  Trypt [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
JrZook wrote:
zukmeista wrote:
I've got EFS gear in mine, rides much better than stock and plenty of flex too


Of the shelf 5 leaf, 7mm EFS leaf packs?......... I doubt it


I have EFS in mine, only 4 leaves though... and they ride OK and flex really well
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Right - sitting in front of my computer.

Firstly, I can't comment in detail on EFS springs. The only car I have experience with running them is Dank's, and it's too modified to pass judgement.

Secondly there's very little added flex to be had by bolting on a suspension kit. Shock length is the limiting factor in the suspension design, and the train wreck that the "longer shocks" thread is proff of what a minefield that is. In short, the aftermarket producers already run the maximum safe shock length within the limitations of factory suzuki mounts. They can measure shock lengths just as well as we can and know what's safe.

I will comment generally though on "lifted" springs and ride quailty, and on the effect of longer shackles.

The #1 complaint against "lift" springs is that they don't deliver the lift advertised. To counter this, suspension marketers will add rate to more or less ensure that the car holds the height advertised. This is where some of the opinion that lift springs don't/can't ride properly.

Why do they do this? It's much easier to sell one spring that has lots of rate and limited free arch to ensure 2" of lift with a wide range of setups than to offer a heap of different springs and hope their seller and the buyer are willing to sort it out.

I think OME don't claim 50mm/2" - I think the claim is 40mm. In truth, I think they try and avoid a pissing competition about lift height altogether and try to get the best possible ride quality. There's no question their springs are soft does this make them fragile etc? Maybe, we've all bent/wrapped OME springs, but we're not running them anything like the way OME intended. RUF, de-rated, de-clamped and with massive drive loads (compared to a stock sierra) of course they will flog out. I've also seen OME kits last for years and years. In fact, the springs in the back of Jinxie are from 1986 and they are in great condition.

Image

The point is that the only "lift" a spring needs is enough to allow the suspension to cycle properly. Part of the poor ride that stock springs provide is not due to the rate, it's because once the springs have settled in, there is little compression travel available to prevent them hitting the bumpstops. Even an inch of lift is enough to notice a big improvement in ride.

So in relation to springs, if the rate is well matched to the setup of your car, there is no doubt you will see an improvement in ride with replacement springs (which may offer some amount of lift)

Extended shackles might be a part of fine tuning ride height, in a RUF or dealing with an unusual spring length, but they are not a legitimate way to add lift, travel, or improve suspension performance within the confines of standard springs or shock mounts. The screw with steering response, caster and pinion angle. The effect of this can be crushed rear shocks, wandering and poor turn in. If you must run extended shackles, they really require the use of caster wedges or rotated spring pads in the front to restore (or increase) caster. Obviously they also reduce approach angle This is particularly noticeable if you are also running pretty flat springs.

I have built numerous sets of extended shackles, and at one stage was running rear shackles 3" over stock in the back of Piggles (with stock shocks and 2" bumpstop spacers :shocked: Kwality!) but tightarse workarounds don't change the fact they don't improve performance.

What would I be doing?

If you don't need to run bumpstop spacing to clear big tyres, I would choose the lightest-rated, lowest lift aftermarket springs you can find. These will provide you with the best articulation and best ride possible from stock mounts and without fabrication. The lift height you achieve is just a by-product of the compression travel required for acceptable road manners.

Steve.
Author:  zukmeista [ Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
JrZook wrote:
zukmeista wrote:
I've got EFS gear in mine, rides much better than stock and plenty of flex too


Of the shelf 5 leaf, 7mm EFS leaf packs?......... I doubt it

Yep, the leafs are all intact!
Author:  Trypt [ Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
@steve. how big are those tyres! 8O
Author:  SierraDan [ Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
35"
Author:  Lukeszook [ Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
I have 2" rise in the leafs in my sierra. it's ruff as guts but the clearance make a lot of difference. But i also believe it could be the shocks fault because they aren't in the best shape.
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Sat Aug 25, 2012 3:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
A lot of difference to what Luke?

Steve.
Author:  xedent [ Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Spring lift does not help with any clearance as if the springs are working 100% they will flex to the bump stops anyway.
Author:  SierraDan [ Sat Aug 25, 2012 10:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Belly clearance. Pretty useful.
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Sun Aug 26, 2012 9:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
I think belly clearance is a little bit of a myth. There's a couple of anchors under a sierra and if you try to lift until they aren't a problem any more the car just ends up unstable because it's too tall.

I think a sierra with a 2" lift can ride better than stock, and it might feel better than stock offroad, but I don't believe there's a significant improvement in capability.

Steve.
Author:  SierraDan [ Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
There's obviously a line between sensible lift and "hey how do I do a spring over with my body lift". But you really can't say belly clearance/height isn't something to think about.
Author:  buzbox [ Sun Aug 26, 2012 2:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Thanks Steve for your wise words.

I've bought some 2" "comfort" springs and shocks to suit. I'll report back with my findings once they're installed and settled in. With the 2" BL it already has and 31" muddies with -23 offset rims I'm hoping it would balance out and not make it too tippy.
Author:  KEENSY85 [ Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
This is a weird post Steve I'm sure iv seen u condemn extended shackels , I apolagise if I'm in correct
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
KEENSY85 wrote:
This is a weird post Steve I'm sure iv seen u condemn extended shackels , I apolagise if I'm in correct


Quote:
Extended shackles might be a part of fine tuning ride height, in a RUF or dealing with an unusual spring length, but they are not a legitimate way to add lift, travel, or improve suspension performance within the confines of standard springs or shock mounts. The screw with steering response, caster and pinion angle. The effect of this can be crushed rear shocks, wandering and poor turn in. If you must run extended shackles, they really require the use of caster wedges or rotated spring pads in the front to restore (or increase) caster. Obviously they also reduce approach angle This is particularly noticeable if you are also running pretty flat springs.

I have built numerous sets of extended shackles, and at one stage was running rear shackles 3" over stock in the back of Piggles (with stock shocks and 2" bumpstop spacers Kwality!) but tightarse workarounds don't change the fact they don't improve performance.


I think this is pretty clear condemnation.

Steve
Author:  KEENSY85 [ Mon Aug 27, 2012 6:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
I'm not taking the piss out of u Steve I swear, I think I got my wires crossed some were along the line(defently) I thought that 2 " inch exstended shackels on there own on stock springs is no good. On piggels did u have to move hangers for the right angle at all to run them.




I'm only asking these noobi questions to learn more, I understand if there's Tyre clearence that all u need like that pick above shows 35" and low COG.
Author:  Gwagensteve [ Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
KEENSY85 wrote:
I'm not taking the piss out of u Steve I swear, I think I got my wires crossed some were along the line(defently) I thought that 2 " inch exstended shackels on there own on stock springs is no good.


That's 100% correct Keensy. 2" shackles, on their own, with stock springs, are no good.

Quote:
On piggels did u have to move hangers for the right angle at all to run them.


No, I didn't, but that's because the leaf suspension on Piggles was a terrible mash up of rubbish parts because I didn't want to spend any money on it until I converted to coils. However, my front spring pads were rotated on the axle to provide more caster, so the car still handled quite well. This is quite a major modification though.

When I build cars RUF, I now set the up to run 100mm shackles (25mm longer than stock) but at a very flat angle, matched to the amount of compression travel the owner wants to run, so I do "move spring hangers" to get the shackle angle right with longer shackles.

I've also moved the rear spring hangers forward on the rear of a sierra to get a flatter shackle angle (to allow more droop) with a longer than stock shackle.

However, doing any of this is pointless unless you run longer than stock shock mounts - it's really part of a whole build, not just a bolt on, so hopefully you can understand why I don't recommend longer shackles, unless they are part of a major suspension build, not a quick way of gaining lift or travel.


Quote:
I understand if there's Tyre clearance that all u need like that pick above shows 35" and low COG.


The car in the picture clears its tyres with guard cutting alone. It basically has no suspension lift and no body lift. Not everyone wants to run a car that low (or with that much guard work) It has stock rear shackles, and whilst it has long front shackles, they are very flat and aren't adding lift. In the case of that car, stock shackles couldn't be used int he front due to the hanger spacing we are running.

Steve.
Author:  KEENSY85 [ Wed Aug 29, 2012 6:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Awesome tech mate, I understand completely know thanks for exsplaining it in noob for me iv very apriciative
Author:  buzbox [ Tue Sep 04, 2012 8:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
buzbox wrote:
Thanks Steve for your wise words.

I've bought some 2" "comfort" springs and shocks to suit. I'll report back with my findings once they're installed and settled in. With the 2" BL it already has and 31" muddies with -23 offset rims I'm hoping it would balance out and not make it too tippy.


It's only been a few day's since I got the springs in, I found the stiffness is the same if not slightly less than the well used standard flat springs, perhaps it's because these shocks actually work or the standard springs were well past their use by date, But overall I am pretty wrapped in how they perform. With the wider tyres, going around corners it's as stable as before.

The only down side is, I didn't notice it when they were installed but it's starting to develop the dreaded sierra lean.
Author:  zukmeista [ Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
JrZook wrote:
zukmeista wrote:
I've got EFS gear in mine, rides much better than stock and plenty of flex too


Of the shelf 5 leaf, 7mm EFS leaf packs?......... I doubt it

To prove a point... :lol: Not full flex either :wink:
Image
Author:  JrZook [ Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Interesting! Those sheep in the back must weigh a shit load!!

Show us a close up of your rear spring pack. It could also be the extra weight of the hardtop making them work as the full packs in a soft top are like someone has welded the axles directly to the chassis!
Author:  zukmeista [ Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
They are all standard, 5 leafs. The only thing in the car is a spare wheel. That's it.
Author:  SierraDan [ Wed Sep 05, 2012 7:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Sierra 2" Springs vs Shackles
Fuck that is ugly
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC + 9:30 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/