Toyota FJ Cruiser Forum banner
  • Hey everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part of JUNE's Ride of the Month Challenge!

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just installed the TC 2" long travel kit. What suspension set up for the rear? I see that Fox and Icon both make rear shocks for the FJC. The Fox shocks are for stock length, so they won't work for my rear suspension. Are the Icons set up for a longer length.

For those with the TC long travel kits installed, what did you do for the rear end?
 

·
Premium Member
2007 Black FJC
Joined
·
2,204 Posts
Ah, that is the question, isn't it.

I have a stop-gap system on the back: OME LTR shocks and 897 extra heavy coils. No way can it keep up with the front.

My guess is none of the normal shock/coil systems will keep up with the front. Todd (formerly known here as "air2air") had some killer Fox shocks / coils in the rear with the 3.5" TC LT kit up front, and complains even to this day how they sucked goats compared to the fronts (near quote: front is on a smooth magic carpet ride, with the back bouncing off every rock and bump). And he hasn't even owned the truck for over a year...

My guess is something more radical, with much more travel is needed. I'm currently eyeing the MT rear LT kit, with the hoops for longer shocks, the redesigned upper arms, longer lower arms etc. (in combination with a new, stronger axle). I really like some of the 2.5" King racing shocks - but making that fit is really going to take imagination...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for the help Mir. I have the OME in the rear, and I do remember Todd saying his rear sucked compared to the front. I was just hoping I could just bolt something in that are at least better than the OMEs. I guess I'll most likely have to do some sort of hoop in the rear.
 

·
Premium Member
2007 Black FJC
Joined
·
2,204 Posts
Thanks for the help Mir. I have the OME in the rear, and I do remember Todd saying his rear sucked compared to the front. I was just hoping I could just bolt something in that are at least better than the OMEs. I guess I'll most likely have to do some sort of hoop in the rear.
Yeah, kind of sucks. Only consolation is I keep reminding myself how bad it was bottoming out the fronts on whoops, and then I remember that even though the back sucks, it's a much better suck than the pre-TC front suck :lol:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,779 Posts
Metal-Techs 3-Link kit for the rear. They are coming out with it soon. It dwarfs everything else.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,294 Posts
You don't have to get the 3 link system for the additional travel. In speaking with LT, he says that is for the geometry of the vehicle. The springs they are selling will provide the travel along with adjusted internal bumpstops in the shocks.

As for the shocks, I am looking at the Icon Bypasses for the rear.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,639 Posts
To optimize travel you need the 3link. You won't get the same travel #s with just the springs/adjust bumpstops as you would with the 3 Link & shock hoops.


Hence what MT plans on doing it in stages on their truck and showing the gains from each stage.

1. New Springs.
2. New Shocks
3. Springs/Shock Hoops/Shocks
4. OEM axle w/ 3 link shock hoops/shock/springs
5. Currie Axle w/ 3 link shock hoops/shocks/springs


The Icon bypass only fit if you are using stock mounts.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,294 Posts
To optimize travel you need the 3link. You won't get the same travel #s with just the springs/adjust bumpstops as you would with the 3 Link & shock hoops.


Hence what MT plans on doing it in stages on their truck and showing the gains from each stage.

1. New Springs.
2. New Shocks
3. Springs/Shock Hoops/Shocks
4. OEM axle w/ 3 link shock hoops/shock/springs
5. Currie Axle w/ 3 link shock hoops/shocks/springs


The Icon bypass only fit if you are using stock mounts.
I plan on using the stock mounts and not doing the three link.

I was not trying to say that not doing the three link would be just as good as with. You will not get the same travel numbers; however, I think that is due to the body roll. In speaking with LT it has to do with the "antisquat?".

Clearly I am no expert. I am just parroting what LT and I were talking about last night.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,639 Posts
Slightly off toppic, but Basically all the links do is position the axle under the vehicle and prevent system interference or binding. The properties of those links (angle, location, length, etc) in relation to the rest of the system will determine how the vehicle drives down the road.

What you refer to as "antisquat" is basically the amount of force that will be applied to the links to prevent squatting under acceleration. Antisquat is measured from an imaginary point in space where your upper and lower links converge when viewing from the side. Antisquat is one of the two factors which prevent the vehicle from squatting under acceleration - the other is your springs. At 100% antisquat all the weight transfer goes through the links and none through the springs (vehicle won't squat or raise). At 0% all the weight transfer goes through the springs - which then entirely depends on your spring rates. Stiff springs won't compress a much and softer springs will compress quite a bit.

However, to make any of that meaningful you need to know where your actual CG is. Mine won't be the same as yours - especially with a RTT

LT has designed the antisquat to be ~100% (neutral) so the rear doesn't raise or squat with the 3Link. I assume the CG he is using is the MT FJ measured on scales.

Running a link kit with existing shocks and springs basically offers improved geometry/performance - not a substantial travel gain. If you stick with the normal 4link and add their new springs you'll gain a bit of travel, but nothing like running larger shocks and springs.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,294 Posts
Slightly off toppic, but Basically all the links do is position the axle under the vehicle and prevent system interference or binding. The properties of those links (angle, location, length, etc) in relation to the rest of the system will determine how the vehicle drives down the road.

What you refer to as "antisquat" is basically the amount of force that will be applied to the links to prevent squatting under acceleration. Antisquat is measured from an imaginary point in space where your upper and lower links converge when viewing from the side. Antisquat is one of the two factors which prevent the vehicle from squatting under acceleration - the other is your springs. At 100% antisquat all the weight transfer goes through the links and none through the springs (vehicle won't squat or raise). At 0% all the weight transfer goes through the springs - which then entirely depends on your spring rates. Stiff springs won't compress a much and softer springs will compress quite a bit.

However, to make any of that meaningful you need to know where your actual CG is. Mine won't be the same as yours - especially with a RTT

LT has designed the antisquat to be ~100% (neutral) so the rear doesn't raise or squat with the 3Link. I assume the CG he is using is the MT FJ measured on scales.

Running a link kit with existing shocks and springs basically offers improved geometry/performance - not a substantial travel gain. If you stick with the normal 4link and add their new springs you'll gain a bit of travel, but nothing like running larger shocks and springs.
Yes, I think we are on the same page. I am looking to do the springs with my Icon upper and lowers along with a longer travel shock. The geometry will not be up to snuff; hence, not as much usable travel on wierd angles...but significantly more travel than a standard 2" spring and the associated shocks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
It really comes down to personal preference and what you think feels right/good/better.

The front with the TC +2" kit just soaks up the bumps and is gentle vs. the rear that seems much more harsh and unforgiving. I have a set of MT's new springs to install in the back, going to see how those make it feel running my current Icon monotube shocks. If I don't like that then I'll look at either their 11" travel shocks to be mounted in the stock position and see how those do. If I don't like that then I can always do the three link, gain some more travel and again see how it goes. The final straw would be the outside shock hoops paired with the 3-link for maximum travel.

Demello just did an install of a 3-link with the regular mounting position for the shocks, maybe the owner will chime in on how it feels in the rear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,376 Posts
long travel just equals money, if you have the money do the 2+ with metal tech rear like everyone said, but its just time and money
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,779 Posts
The length of the stock links is partly what the killer is. If the links were longer then it would flex a lot better.

The 3link has much longer links.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,294 Posts
The length of the stock links is partly what the killer is. If the links were longer then it would flex a lot better.

The 3link has much longer links.
Yes, but alot of people have adjustable links. If you just extend those out for extra travel, it will inevitably screw up the rear end. That is one reason the mount points shift in the three link kit.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,779 Posts
Yes, but alot of people have adjustable links. If you just extend those out for extra travel, it will inevitably screw up the rear end. That is one reason the mount points shift in the three link kit.
The adjustable links are just to reposition the axle after installing lifts and to have beefier links.

I am referring to cutting off the frame mounts, installing new ones and adding much longer links. Without doing something this drastic, you are not going to see a whole lot more flex with the stock link configuration.
 

·
Premium Member
2007 Black FJC
Joined
·
2,204 Posts
am referring to cutting off the frame mounts, installing new ones and adding much longer links. Without doing something this drastic, you are not going to see a whole lot more flex with the stock link configuration.
x2. I think if it's staying near stock, it's about eking out tiny improvements - the standard shocks/springs in stock mounts, with near stock arms just is not going to do very much. My feeling is that it's not worth wasting too much money on tiny improvements like that. If/when I do something, I want to be able to notice a significant difference, and as Layonnn says, that's going to need a bunch of stuff moving, rearranging, with longer shocks, different shock mount locations, and longer arms. It's all about the range of travel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Thanks for the help everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Metal-Techs 3-Link kit for the rear. They are coming out with it soon. It dwarfs everything else.
I'm looking forward to it, can't wait!.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,440 Posts
I've been running SAWs all the way around. I've had my 2" Total Chaos long travel for two years now. After Baja, I'm now planning to up grade to the Metal Tech long travel in the rear since the back end just can't keep up with all that travel in the front. The Metal Tech Long travel has different stages from longer links, dual coil rear springs, longer shocks (to much longer shocks) and even new full floating rear end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 · (Edited)
Metal-Techs 3-Link kit for the rear. They are coming out with it soon. It dwarfs everything else.
My friend who is helping me build my truck is friends with LT over at Metaltech. He called LT last night and LT said maybe a couple of weeks. Due to the fact I'll be desert running, I'll need to upgrade the springs to a heavier spring. Metaltech's spring is more for rock crawling.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top