| Author |
Message |
Che

az supporter
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 2401 Location: Perth
Vehicle: LPG 1.6 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:32 am |
|
Is my Sierra sitting at the standard ride height? Just seems to be an awful lot of air between the wheels and wheel arches... i'm not really fussed about it, just curious if it's been toyed with in the past.

|
|
|
|
 |
alex

az supporter
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 11:30 pm Posts: 2151 Location: Brissy
Vehicle: Nissan
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:34 am |
|
looks like its been lifted to me 
|
|
|
|
 |
89_tintop

az supporter
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 3159 Location: gold coast
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:41 am |
|
|
Im with alex.... Does look lifted
|
|
|
|
 |
foolsp33d
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:30 pm Posts: 2123 Location: Deep Inside Jamies Mouth
Vehicle: Clown Car..
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:45 am |
|
x3 LOOKS lifted especially the rear end..
any markings on the springs?
If you want to measure (on FLAT ground) to the base of the door handle. The 'other forum' has a thread with the majority of members heights listed to this point. pretty sure their mods are also listed as a comparison..
Maybe we need an AZ What is your door handle height thread? 
_________________ Roads... Where we're going we dont need Roads....
|
|
|
|
 |
MacDaddy

az supporter
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 10453 Location: Perth, Australia
Vehicle: Jeep
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:03 am |
|
89_tintop wrote: Im with alex.... Does look lifted
X 4
Definitely looks lifted to me ! 
|
|
|
|
 |
foonji
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 1286
Vehicle: Suzuki
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:06 am |
|
|
Yeh the building does look lifted.
|
|
|
|
 |
89_tintop

az supporter
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 3159 Location: gold coast
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:28 am |
|
foonji wrote: Yeh the building does look lifted.
Its got to have at least a 150inch lift..
|
|
|
|
 |
Fatzook

az supporter
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 14977 Location: The Hills
Vehicle: Vitara, NGV
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:39 am |
|
|
I reckon it has new standard height springs.
|
|
|
|
 |
Che

az supporter
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 2401 Location: Perth
Vehicle: LPG 1.6 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:18 am |
|
Here's a dodgy pic from my camera phone. Apart from the springs and shocks i'm lost with part names of the suspension assembly, but if you're in the know I guess this will be the money shot:

|
|
|
|
 |
steak_knife

az supporter
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 21335 Location: Smart Ass Island
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:35 am |
|
Fatzook wrote: I reckon it has new standard height springs.
 To many rum's mate??
thay look to be 2in lifted..
|
|
|
|
 |
Moph

az supporter
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 2535 Location: Perth
Vehicle: 93 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:40 am |
|
Shackles are standard; poly bushes; springs are definitely non-standard (stock was 4 leaf pack) - my bet is on 2" lifted OME's purely based on what mine looked like.
If they are you might be able to read markings like this on the top side of the spring:

|
|
|
|
 |
Che

az supporter
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 2401 Location: Perth
Vehicle: LPG 1.6 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:05 am |
|
|
Nah, no markings as yours have Moph. Camera shows poor detail but the springs (and shocks) are looking pretty old and weary to me. Bushes are new - I think they needed replacing for the RWC when I bought it
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:07 am |
|
|
Arn't standard springs falt, where as lifted curve like in the pics ?
Im going withy Steky, 2" lift.
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
Gwagensteve
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 13007 Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 5:44 am |
|
|
Standard rear springs are definitely NOT flat.
Che- thats about the height a sierra sits with a 2" lift in it and no weight in the back.
Steve.
|
|
|
|
 |
foonji
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:30 pm Posts: 1286
Vehicle: Suzuki
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:02 am |
|
Gwagensteve wrote: Standard rear springs are definitely NOT flat.
Mine are!
They look like gabriel shocks too, commo/hiace combo!
|
|
|
|
 |
SuziBlu
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:30 pm Posts: 4268 Location: Eyre Peninsula
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:14 am |
|
|
Mine were.
_________________ Bad decisions make good stories.
|
|
|
|
 |
steve

I live here!
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 11:30 pm Posts: 7681 Location: Brisbane
Vehicle: 75 Cruiser
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:35 am |
|
ah i love the CSI topics...
The photo of te springs looks like there's kinks in the springs as there's gaps between them, which happens when you reset springs, but the clamp looks untampered with so maybe they are just two inch lifted springs. Looks pretty high though, like 3 inch lifted.
ohwell.. come back and give us an update in a year and measurements and see if how much they sag
PS. how big are your tyres?
|
|
|
|
 |
whincup

az supporter
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:30 pm Posts: 1588 Location: Gracemere, QLD
Vehicle: '94 suzuki maruti
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:59 am |
|
steve wrote: how big are your tyres?
was just about to ask that... looks similar height as mine with 215/75's on, with 2" lift, so im going to assume thats what you have
|
|
|
|
 |
Che

az supporter
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 2401 Location: Perth
Vehicle: LPG 1.6 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:00 am |
|
|
Monroe shocks, 10+ years old I reckon by the operating state of them. I know Sierras are a bouncy breed, but this thing is outta control - go over a bump and it takes a full 2 seconds to stop bouncing.... doesn't sound like much but it is when you're travelling at 20 bumps a second!!!
I think the front springs are normal, only 4 a leaf pack. They look in better nick than the rears too.
Anyway, measuring vertically through dead centre of wheel: Front 82.5cm to guard, Back 84cm to guard.
|
|
|
|
 |
Moph

az supporter
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 2535 Location: Perth
Vehicle: 93 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:14 am |
|
|
Nope front springs are aftermarket if they're a 4 leaf pack - stock is 3 leaf. They're definitely lifted, look 2", have 1 leaf per pack more than stock and are not OME (just checked mine - different chamfer on spring end).
|
|
|
|
 |
Che

az supporter
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 2401 Location: Perth
Vehicle: LPG 1.6 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 8:10 am |
|
|
Tyres are as Whincup said - 215/75/15
Never noticed those gaps between the leaf sections before either... interesting
|
|
|
|
 |
honks
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:30 pm Posts: 214 Location: ipswich
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:17 am |
|
|
just measured mine stocka it is 750mm through center of tyre to top of guard at the front on 205/70/15 and measures 765mm at the back must be 2" getting 215/75/15's fitted this week might take some measurements on the extra height from the bigger tyre and let you know
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:22 am |
|
definitely 2" lifted, and those arent standard shackles either - here's standard ones:

_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
royce

omnipotent being
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 11:30 pm Posts: 17216 Location: Pluto
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:38 am |
|
They are king springs, thats what they look like when they are worn in nicely cause the smaller leaves have a bit more camber to em and that massive load leaf
get a pic of the front, I'll bet the smallest leaf also has them rounded edges and isnt clamped
fwiw they are great springs when you pull the short leaf out of all of em and get some good shocks in there, mine even had rounded edges where each leaf rubbed on teh next (took forever with a die grinder) and painted with graphite impregnated paint 
|
|
|
|
 |
BlueSuzy

az supporter
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 11:30 pm Posts: 9716 Location: NSW
Vehicle: SJ51 LWB, SJ70 SWB
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:41 pm |
|
|
Those shackles ARE standard!
I have had 2 sierra's with rear shackles, channel on 1 side, flat plate on the other.
Whats the measurement inbetween the bumpstops and chassis on flat ground, no weight in car.
_________________ BlueSuzy wrote: I'm over the G16b's.
|
|
|
|
 |
Fatzook

az supporter
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 14977 Location: The Hills
Vehicle: Vitara, NGV
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:05 pm |
|
BlueSuzy wrote: Those shackles ARE standard!
X2
|
|
|
|
 |
whincup

az supporter
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:30 pm Posts: 1588 Location: Gracemere, QLD
Vehicle: '94 suzuki maruti
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:20 pm |
|
Fatzook wrote: BlueSuzy wrote: Those shackles ARE standard!
X2
X3...
|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:47 pm |
|
|
wow - never seen it here in perth, maybe an east coast thing?
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
Moph

az supporter
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:30 pm Posts: 2535 Location: Perth
Vehicle: 93 Sierra
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:36 pm |
|
Doubt it's an east coast thing Alien. The shackles in your photo are exactly the same as the ones on che_guitarra's rig. Here's some photos of the standard ones that were on mine, taken early in my RUF conversion to show various problems  . Flat inner plate; channel outer plate with corners 45'd rather than rounded. Seen these on every stock Zook I've ever looked at.

|
|
|
|
 |
alien
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:30 pm Posts: 16343 Location: Perth
Vehicle: '92 Sierra, 1.6efi, SPOA, 31s.
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:29 am |
|
|
wow thats amazing - i've never seen that before!
_________________ 
|
|
|
|
 |
|