LOST JEEPS :: View topic - Why stock strut length on coil lifts?

Just thinking about this the other day instead of working. Why do all of our lifts use the stock length "struts" instead of extended ones. It doesn't really make sense since we are using longer length springs.

It seems to me that if we used a little bit of a longer strut....we wouldn't have to compress to the springs so much to get the top nut on resulting in more lift and less preload on the springs. Do I have the proper thinking on this? It just doesn't make sense to me to extend the length of everything else except the strut.

Jeep4me99 wrote:

Extended length struts??

tommudd wrote:

Jeep4me99 wrote:

Extended length struts??

I think he means longer struts.

No one makes longer struts for the Liberty.

LiLredLibby had found a minivan strut that was longer and would fit
- but he never identified which one it was.

Welcome to the world of IFS :lol:

longer struts would be bad because you would have a-arm/ball joint contact against the springs. That is why you have to use the same length as stock. The length limits the amount of droop so the arms do not hit. With my frankenlift the a-arms barely clear the spring as it is.

I gave up trying to convince people we had coil-over-shocks in the front & not classic " struts" years ago.

icarl wrote:

very true...didn't think about that aspect of the suspension. That and the stupid IFS is a major limiter of the KJ. But we do darn goood with what we have to work with

I thought when you bought a genuine lift kit (not spacers) it came complete with four longer coils & longer shocks (aka: struts).

Right now I'm considering losing the 2.5" spacers that I have on top of my stock front shocks & coils and replacing them with Rancho's and longer coils. My stock front shocks have failed twice in the past six months.

Author:	Jeep4me99 [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Why stock strut length on coil lifts?
Just thinking about this the other day instead of working. Why do all of our lifts use the stock length "struts" instead of extended ones. It doesn't really make sense since we are using longer length springs. It seems to me that if we used a little bit of a longer strut....we wouldn't have to compress to the springs so much to get the top nut on resulting in more lift and less preload on the springs. Do I have the proper thinking on this? It just doesn't make sense to me to extend the length of everything else except the strut.

Author:	tommudd [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Why stock strut length on coil lifts?
Jeep4me99 wrote: Just thinking about this the other day instead of working. Why do all of our lifts use the stock length "struts" instead of extended ones. It doesn't really make sense since we are using longer length springs. It seems to me that if we used a little bit of a longer strut....we wouldn't have to compress to the springs so much to get the top nut on resulting in more lift and less preload on the springs. Do I have the proper thinking on this? It just doesn't make sense to me to extend the length of everything else except the strut. Extended length struts??

Author:	jsc7002 [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:35 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Why stock strut length on coil lifts?
tommudd wrote: Jeep4me99 wrote: Just thinking about this the other day instead of working. Why do all of our lifts use the stock length "struts" instead of extended ones. It doesn't really make sense since we are using longer length springs. It seems to me that if we used a little bit of a longer strut....we wouldn't have to compress to the springs so much to get the top nut on resulting in more lift and less preload on the springs. Do I have the proper thinking on this? It just doesn't make sense to me to extend the length of everything else except the strut. Extended length struts?? I think he means longer struts.

Author:	Jeep4me99 [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:51 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Why stock strut length on coil lifts?
jsc7002 wrote: tommudd wrote: Jeep4me99 wrote: Just thinking about this the other day instead of working. Why do all of our lifts use the stock length "struts" instead of extended ones. It doesn't really make sense since we are using longer length springs. It seems to me that if we used a little bit of a longer strut....we wouldn't have to compress to the springs so much to get the top nut on resulting in more lift and less preload on the springs. Do I have the proper thinking on this? It just doesn't make sense to me to extend the length of everything else except the strut. Extended length struts?? I think he means longer struts. yup thats what I mean. Longer case...longer piston. pretty much just like the OME longer shocks for the rear.

Author:	ATXKJ [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:07 pm ]
Post subject:
No one makes longer struts for the Liberty. LiLredLibby had found a minivan strut that was longer and would fit - but he never identified which one it was.

LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/

Why stock strut length on coil lifts? http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=39049	Page 1 of 2

Author:	tommudd [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:11 pm ]
Post subject:
ATXKJ wrote: No one makes longer struts for the Liberty. LiLredLibby had found a minivan strut that was longer and would fit - but he never identified which one it was. it was from a Dodge minivan but thats all I ever got out of him about it. Longer strut would not help that much if any. Only so much wheel travel can be had by the way our front ends are, unless you have a different spindle, UCAs and LCAs, CVs

Author:	InCommando [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:40 pm ]
Post subject:
I longer strut is only good if you can have longer travel. Like Tom pointed out, the best lifts still don't extend the front's range of motion much.

Author:	Guest [ Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:19 pm ]
Post subject:
longer struts would be bad because you would have a-arm/ball joint contact against the springs. That is why you have to use the same length as stock. The length limits the amount of droop so the arms do not hit. With my frankenlift the a-arms barely clear the spring as it is.

Author:	dieselenthusiast [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:47 am ]
Post subject:
Welcome to the world of IFS

Author:	tommudd [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:53 am ]
Post subject:
dieselenthusiast wrote: Welcome to the world of IFS That about sums it up, next time I have mine torn down "for research" maybe I can remember to take pictures of the full range of motion so that everyone can see what we are talking about.

Author:	jeepkj02 [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:23 pm ]
Post subject:
Doesn't say if it is longer than stockers, but I would assume so since it works for 2-6" of lift on the Liberty. http://jeepinbyal.com/prod-Skyjacker_Fr ... _-604.aspx

Author:	Jeepjeepster [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:17 pm ]
Post subject:
icarl wrote: longer struts would be bad because you would have a-arm/ball joint contact against the springs. That is why you have to use the same length as stock. The length limits the amount of droop so the arms do not hit. With my frankenlift the a-arms barely clear the spring as it is. Exactly. This question comes up from time to time. Gotta remember there is a spring in the way. And they are shocks, not struts.

Author:	InCommando [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:49 pm ]
Post subject:
I gave up trying to convince people we had coil-over-shocks in the front & not classic " struts" years ago.

Author:	tommudd [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 5:55 pm ]
Post subject:
InCommando wrote: I gave up trying to convince people we had coil-over-shocks in the front & not classic " struts" years ago. Thats why I call them struts anymore, got tired of posting shocks and then get a PM " what are you talking about, blah blah blah, " easier to say strut and be done with it, tired enough going through the same things every 23.75 days

Author:	InCommando [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:23 pm ]
Post subject:
Jeep offered IFS starting in '64 for two years in FSJ's. They never should have started back. The M151 Mutt was IFS/IRS, but never meet safety standards & wasn't converted to the civilian market like the other 1/4 ton utilities. They had a serious roll-over issue. I don't count it as a jeep, anyway, as it was a Ford design. Kaiser did make some under contract, but the majority were made by Ford &, on a later re-order, AM General ( the military vehicle wing of AMC that also designed & built the Humvee and the H1, both IFS/IRS.) The Mutt was in service in one form or another for almost 40 years, though. The KJ being less capable than the utility jeeps is nothing new. A Wagoneer N/T came with 28" tires stock & takes 3" of lift to fit 31" tires with no problem areas. Sound familiar? At least the KJ did not have whitewall tires like the Limited & Grand Wagoneers. And the KJ was not saddled with the large rear over hang that the Waggies have. But the SFA makes the Wagoneer much much easier to modify. I hate to say it, but the KJ was a success in part because its road-friendly IFS opened it up to a larger pool of buyers. It really only screws those of us who want an "easily" modified jeep.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Jeep4me99 [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:34 pm ]
Post subject:
icarl wrote: longer struts would be bad because you would have a-arm/ball joint contact against the springs. That is why you have to use the same length as stock. The length limits the amount of droop so the arms do not hit. With my frankenlift the a-arms barely clear the spring as it is. very true...didn't think about that aspect of the suspension. That and the stupid IFS is a major limiter of the KJ. But we do darn goood with what we have to work with

Author:	tommudd [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:44 pm ]
Post subject:
Jeep4me99 wrote: icarl wrote: longer struts would be bad because you would have a-arm/ball joint contact against the springs. That is why you have to use the same length as stock. The length limits the amount of droop so the arms do not hit. With my frankenlift the a-arms barely clear the spring as it is. very true...didn't think about that aspect of the suspension. That and the stupid IFS is a major limiter of the KJ. But we do darn goood with what we have to work with IFS is a limiting factor on a lot of 4x4s now to a point, but then 90% of people who buy them anymore the biggest thing they go over is a speed bump so mute point to Jeep / Ford etc. BUT look back at where Jeep started, look at the suspension and we have the same amount of travel that they had pretty much and look where all they went, what they went through. Its more what you can do as a driver with what you have than 20 inches of suspension travel and a stupid driver. I have seen people with a Rubicon on 37s and 6 inches of lift not be able to go where a stock Wrangler did. Main thing is go out and have fun, speaking of which I am going out to play in the snow for a while and then come back and tear my front suspension apart....just for fun !

Author:	LibertyFever [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:12 pm ]
Post subject:
I thought when you bought a genuine lift kit (not spacers) it came complete with four longer coils & longer shocks (aka: struts). Right now I'm considering losing the 2.5" spacers that I have on top of my stock front shocks & coils and replacing them with Rancho's and longer coils. My stock front shocks have failed twice in the past six months.

Author:	tommudd [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:47 pm ]
Post subject:
LibertyFever wrote: I thought when you bought a genuine lift kit (not spacers) it came complete with four longer coils & longer shocks (aka: struts). Right now I'm considering losing the 2.5" spacers that I have on top of my stock front shocks & coils and replacing them with Rancho's and longer coils. My stock front shocks have failed twice in the past six months. No a "genuine lift kit" comes with stock length shocks for the front and of course extended for the rear. Going with OME Heavy Duty coils ...right? I am guessing you already know what KILLED your front shocks ?

Author:	tjkj2002 [ Sat Jan 10, 2009 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:
Just remember that the KJ was not the 1st Jeep with IFS,Jeep has put IFS(and IRS) on flat fenders in the '60-'70's though mostly for the military. IFS can have more travel then a SFA,but as we all know that that type of IFS is not very street friendly and costs about 3 times as much as a SFA swap.Keep the stock length shocks up front to keep the CV's in there "happy" spot so they live longer.