[DR_JOSH]

IN2DEP wrote:

Thanks guys this is all good reading

But ive called up OMU (ARB) and they dont have a 50mm kit, EFS do supplie a 50mm springs and i want it to be pretty soft

Pretty sure they do. I have OME 2" springs in my car and I only bought them a month or 2 ago. Maybe the guy behind the counter didnt realise that 2" = 50.8mm

[Gwagensteve]

I'm pretty sure OME don't claim 50mm of lift, but that's pretty nominal. Put HD springs in a light car and you'll have well over 50mm. Put light springs in a heavy car and you'll have none.

50mm is pretty nominal. Remember all you are trying to do with a bolt on suspension kit is improved ride. A small increase in compression travel might help the ride improve, but a large increase in compression travel will actually degrade the ride as the car won't have any rebound travel so it will pitch and be choppy. This is very common with cars with HD springs and over 2" of lift.


Steve.

[IN2DEP]

DR_JOSH wrote:

IN2DEP wrote:

Thanks guys this is all good reading

But ive called up OMU (ARB) and they dont have a 50mm kit, EFS do supplie a 50mm springs and i want it to be pretty soft

Pretty sure they do. I have OME 2" springs in my car and I only bought them a month or 2 ago. Maybe the guy behind the counter didnt realise that 2" = 50.8mm

They told me they have a 45mm lift, but thats not good enough for me i want min 50mm

some ppl might think thats wrong but i want my rig to be a BIG small truck

[Ben_Sierra]

IN2DEP wrote:

DR_JOSH wrote:

IN2DEP wrote:

Thanks guys this is all good reading

But ive called up OMU (ARB) and they dont have a 50mm kit, EFS do supplie a 50mm springs and i want it to be pretty soft

Pretty sure they do. I have OME 2" springs in my car and I only bought them a month or 2 ago. Maybe the guy behind the counter didnt realise that 2" = 50.8mm

They told me they have a 45mm lift, but thats not good enough for me i want min 50mm

some ppl might think thats wrong but i want my rig to be a BIG small truck

Why are you so hung up on having to get at least 50mm of lift?

Surely ride quality and flex are more important than height?

[Gwagensteve]

IN2DEP wrote:

They told me they have a 45mm lift, but thats not good enough for me i want min 50mm

some ppl might think thats wrong but i want my rig to be a BIG small truck

You can't be serious?

You do realise that the only reason for "lift" is to provide sufficient compression travel for the speed you want to travel at? It has nothing to do with flex, tyre size, and almost nothing to do with suspension performance at all.

Bearing in mind a sierra is a light car with a very short wheelbase and plenty of bumpsteer, so you're never really going to be traveling fast, so you don't need lots of lift.

There's a bunch of cars in the Vic club that run no, or next to no lift (certainly not over 2") and nobody calls them small cars, and despite running very little compression travel, they drive fine at the speeds their wheelbase and steering allow.

<2" of lift


and again



Just a touch over 2" of lift



No lift at all (That's NO suspension or body lift)



These cars are running RUF, but typically with 3 leaves in the front and they run very flat.

45mm or 50mm of lift- who cares? Get the car working right. What height it ends up is secondary.

Steve.

[Jccck]

Steve all of those cars have huge virtual lifts.. (Guard chop for those of you playing at home )

Not everyone is skilled with sheet metal/bodywork and a mig.. And so chopping isnt an option.

People lift so they can clear bigger tyres without hacking their guards up and moving them
There's nothing wrong with a a bit of height.. I've seen many many Sierras with no guard work running 33-35s, having heaps of flex.. And being plenty stable

[Ben_Sierra]

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

[Gwagensteve]

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres.

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

[IN2DEP]

Ben_Sierra wrote:

IN2DEP wrote:

DR_JOSH wrote:

IN2DEP wrote:

Thanks guys this is all good reading

But ive called up OMU (ARB) and they dont have a 50mm kit, EFS do supplie a 50mm springs and i want it to be pretty soft

Pretty sure they do. I have OME 2" springs in my car and I only bought them a month or 2 ago. Maybe the guy behind the counter didnt realise that 2" = 50.8mm

They told me they have a 45mm lift, but thats not good enough for me i want min 50mm

some ppl might think thats wrong but i want my rig to be a BIG small truck

Why are you so hung up on having to get at least 50mm of lift?

Surely ride quality and flex are more important than height?

Lift is always going to be a positive then stock and i dont see the point of spending money and getting a 1" or 1.5" lift if your going to do it do it well, now ive always wanted a big looking 4b so i want it big

Yes i dont want it to go backwards in preformance but i want it still to look good, and personaly i dont really mind how it drives on road i bought it to go off road and to have fun, lol its a soft top sierra, its never going to be a good car for road use lol

Now i wanted 3" lift but alot of ppl have adviced me not to go there so i changed my mind and now going 2" now i thought thats what ever one does with sierras,

Now with the flex issue, im getting my self some drop shackels so that would cover the flex i should think

Now can any one tell me what are good shocks ???????????

[Ben_Sierra]

Drop shackles.....

It gets worse and worse...

And without modifying shock mounts you won't get extra flex from the shackles. The longest shock you can run with the stock mounts will top out long before the drop shacles come into play...

[Fatzook]

IN2DEP wrote:

Now i wanted 3" lift but alot of ppl have adviced me not to go there so i changed my mind and now going 2" now i thought thats what ever one does with sierras,

Now with the flex issue, im getting my self some drop shackels so that would cover the flex i should think

Now can any one tell me what are good shocks ???????????

You will get flamed again for this. There are plenty of haters of goofy shackles on sierras. And rightly so.

Hit the search button and traul through the not so positive comments

[Jccck]

Drop shackles only work if you set your entire suspension to work with them, so you still need ALOT of mods
You don't just bolt them on and bam, flex.

I'm going to run 2" Zook rears, 2" Lux fronts, a full sky shockmount kit from Lowrange and my current 2" ext shackles.. So it'll be roughly another 1" over my current height (Because my shackle angle is currently terrible)
Will be running 33s, and something like 40/60 up/downtravel with shackle angle set how i want it

Victoria is a little different to NSW, and where i really push my Zook to the limits.. Belly clearance is as important as flex

[Jccck]

Fatzook wrote:

IN2DEP wrote:

Now i wanted 3" lift but alot of ppl have adviced me not to go there so i changed my mind and now going 2" now i thought thats what ever one does with sierras,

Now with the flex issue, im getting my self some drop shackels so that would cover the flex i should think

Now can any one tell me what are good shocks ???????????

You will get flamed again for this. There are plenty of haters of goofy shackles on sierras. And rightly so.

Hit the search button and traul through the not so positive comments

People are just haters, no offense but there's plenty of people on this forum who bag something out for the sake of it.

I've seen Zook builds with drop shackles that performed amazingly.. And it was because they designed their suspension to work with them.
Even 100% stock you can get some rather impressive downtravel, but without supporting mods you won't actually gain much benefit

[Fatzook]

Gwagon should chime in soon

[Ben_Sierra]

At the end of the day there's no point asking for advice and then ignoring the advice you get cos its not what you want to hear...

[Jccck]

Fatzook wrote:

Gwagon should chime in soon

And do what? Agree with me that drop shackles WORK FINE when the suspension setup is designed to work with them?

I dont think i'd ever run drop shackles, the cost isn't worth the small gain they give.. But that's not to say they don't work

Ben_Sierra wrote:

At the end of the day there's no point asking for advice and then ignoring the advice you get cos its not what you want to hear...

Well that's the point of advice.. You don't have to take it

[SuziBlu]

Gwagensteve wrote:

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres.

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

My maruti has a 2" suspension lift and 130mm shackles and runs 31s with 2" spacers. If a suspension lift does not allow running larger tyres I better go out abnd tell my maruti, as she thinks that the short term combo I gave her runs just dandy, silly maruti.

[Jccck]

SuziBlu wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres.

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

My maruti has a 2" suspension lift and 130mm shackles and runs 31s with 2" spacers. If a suspension lift does not allow running larger tyres I better go out abnd tell my maruti, as she thinks that the short term combo I gave her runs just dandy, silly maruti.

Steve is right, he just said it in such a way that will confuse most of the people that read it
He's good like that
Lift 'helps' to clear bigger rubber, with ext bumpstops

[SuziBlu]

Jccck wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres[i][u].

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

My maruti has a 2" suspension lift and 130mm shackles and runs 31s with 2" spacers. If a suspension lift does not allow running larger tyres I better go out abnd tell my maruti, as she thinks that the short term combo I gave her runs just dandy, silly maruti.

Steve is right, he just said it in such a way that will confuse most of the people that read it
He's good like that
Lift 'helps' to clear bigger rubber, with ext bumpstops

Seems he is saying a suspension lift will never make for larger tyres.

[Fatzook]

SuziBlu wrote:

Seems he is saying a suspension lift will never make for larger tyres.

I think what he meant was that lift makes room for bigger tyres at static height. But you still need to address the clearance issues at compression by use of bumpstop extentions or Virtual lift.

Thats how I ready it anyway.

[Jccck]

Fatzook wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Seems he is saying a suspension lift will never make for larger tyres.

I think what he meant was that lift makes room for bigger tyres at static height. But you still need to address the clearance issues at compression by use of bumpstop extentions or Virtual lift.

Thats how I ready it anyway.

Yep that's what i deciphered his cryptic post to mean also!

Plus, why are those Zooks he linked pictures to.. Running stock shackles?
Aren't 2" ext shackles optimal to allow more flex?

[matty87]

Jccck wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres.

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

My maruti has a 2" suspension lift and 130mm shackles and runs 31s with 2" spacers. If a suspension lift does not allow running larger tyres I better go out abnd tell my maruti, as she thinks that the short term combo I gave her runs just dandy, silly maruti.

Steve is right, he just said it in such a way that will confuse most of the people that read it
He's good like that
Lift 'helps' to clear bigger rubber, with ext bumpstops

No lifts help to clear bigger rubber full STOP. just because at full up travel they rub like hell on the guard doesnt mean they dont fit. if you want your tyres to last you extend the bump stops. or you guard chop. but the fact still remains that befor the lift you could only fit 29's and after you could fit 31's say.

[Jccck]

matty87 wrote:

Jccck wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres.

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

My maruti has a 2" suspension lift and 130mm shackles and runs 31s with 2" spacers. If a suspension lift does not allow running larger tyres I better go out abnd tell my maruti, as she thinks that the short term combo I gave her runs just dandy, silly maruti.

Steve is right, he just said it in such a way that will confuse most of the people that read it
He's good like that
Lift 'helps' to clear bigger rubber, with ext bumpstops

No lifts help to clear bigger rubber full STOP. just because at full up travel they rub like hell on the guard doesnt mean they dont fit. if you want your tyres to last you extend the bump stops. or you guard chop. but the fact still remains that befor the lift you could only fit 29's and after you could fit 31's say.

If a tyre scrubs at full flex, it doesn't fit.
"Fit" isn't just about what you can shove under the guards when the car is at rest

[matty87]

Jccck wrote:

matty87 wrote:

Jccck wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

Ben_Sierra wrote:

And so the myth that lifted springs give you more tyre clearance continues....

And there's the real problem.

Suspension lift does not, and never has, allowed the fitment of bigger tyres.

Lowering bumpstops, body lift, or guard cutting equals bigger tyres. That might require some suspension lift in order to maintain acceptable compression wheel travel, but it's not the suspension lift that getting the tyres under those cars.

My point was that suspension a 5mm difference in suspension lift is irrelevant in building a "big" sierra. I agree, I mischievously avoided mentioning lots of body work, body lift or bumpstop spacing as the reason these cars run such big tyres, but my point still stands, we build cars without any thought to suspension lift. (and sometimes even try to avoid it)

Steve.

My maruti has a 2" suspension lift and 130mm shackles and runs 31s with 2" spacers. If a suspension lift does not allow running larger tyres I better go out abnd tell my maruti, as she thinks that the short term combo I gave her runs just dandy, silly maruti.

Steve is right, he just said it in such a way that will confuse most of the people that read it
He's good like that
Lift 'helps' to clear bigger rubber, with ext bumpstops

No lifts help to clear bigger rubber full STOP. just because at full up travel they rub like hell on the guard doesnt mean they dont fit. if you want your tyres to last you extend the bump stops. or you guard chop. but the fact still remains that befor the lift you could only fit 29's and after you could fit 31's say.

If a tyre scrubs at full flex, it doesn't fit.
"Fit" isn't just about what you can shove under the guards when the car is at rest

i will agree that to be done right "fit" means to work in all situations,

however the dribble that suspension lifting provides for larger wheel fitments is a myth is rubbish. As we know the vast majority of vehicles running larger tyres employ a suspension lift to get them under. i dunno where the myth that is a myth started bu come on

[Zook_Fan]

Jccck wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Seems he is saying a suspension lift will never make for larger tyres.

I think what he meant was that lift makes room for bigger tyres at static height. But you still need to address the clearance issues at compression by use of bumpstop extentions or Virtual lift.

Thats how I ready it anyway.

Yep that's what i deciphered his cryptic post to mean also!

Plus, why are those Zooks he linked pictures to.. Running stock shackles?
Aren't 2" ext shackles optimal to allow more flex?

No 2" ext shackles are not optimal for more flex. The optimal shackles are the standard shackles as long as you can get them at the right angle. This is why people do a chassis extension with RUF, if 2" shackles were optimal than the best way would be to just redrill the hanger and put the longer shackles on. Extended shackles have plenty of negative effects unless they are used on rather long springs.

[shep]

i love the way the people that say that lift doesn't mean ya can fit bigger tyres forget to mention that chopping the fuck out of ya car doesn't mean ya can fit bigger rubber either and for the same reasons.

the whole thing is just a dick pulling exercise by people who think that they
are smarter then everybody else.

[joeblow]

well said shep......very well said.

[Fatzook]

shep wrote:

i love the way the people that say that lift doesn't mean ya can fit bigger tyres forget to mention that chopping the fuck out of ya car doesn't mean ya can fit bigger rubber either and for the same reasons.

the whole thing is just a dick pulling exercise by people who think that they
are smarter then everybody else.

This has some pretty big rubber?

[IN2DEP]

All i want is a 2" lift to go with my 2" body and some good shocks

[shep]

Hay fatzook did he just do a simple guard chop to fit them? Gwagon is always going on
About how lift won't allow ya to fit bigger rubber and neither will just choping ya guards
Allow ya to fit bigger rubber. The car in the photo (from memery) has zero up travel
How great would that be to drive on the road? I reckon it would be shitful.
Lifted springs+bumpstop spacing+extended brake lines=easy fitment of bigger rubber
And ya can be finished in a half days effort.