I need coils/shocks for a 2000 SR5 3.4 4x4.

I've been going around and around (for a year) between the 99 tall coils or the Tundra setup. I need to make a decision.

With the Tundra setup I have seen reports of people getting 1.5" - 3". Sonoran Steel said 2.5" front. Is the lift in this link different that the SS Tundra setup? I don't want 2.5", how are people keeping it at 2" ? Can someone clear this up for me? Speedy's Lift Install with "How To" Video

I'm trying to put together a comfortable daily driver/forest road rig. I plan on going with 265/75R16's. Center of wheel to fender is currently at 20". I don't want more than 21.5 -22".

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/06...f?v=1667684257
Check out the install guide for the 2.1 classic system on the Sonoran Steel website. There is a section that cross references the amount of lift you get with the different clip settings based on the year of vehicle. It looks like the lowest setting with a 2000 Runner is 2 1/2 inches. For reference, I'm on the second to lowest setting and I'm getting 2 1/2 inches on my 97 Runner. So that chart was pretty accurate for me. I'm thinking about going down to the lowest setting which should put me at 2 inches.

Pretty sure that the lift in that link is the same as the Sonoran Steel setup. Sonoran Steel refers to them as Toyota TRD Progressive front coils. They both have the exact same Toyota part numbers.

Putting aside the original height differences of all the years and how much we are lifting over stock, shouldn't they all end up at the same height with the Tundra lift??? I don't understand how putting the same Tundra stuff on one year 4runner would put it at 21.5" Hub/fender and another year at 22.5".


Do you know your hub center to fender measurement?
I have found two guys saying they are at 21.5" hub/fender. This would be fine for me but it's only 1.5" up from the 20" that I'm at now and that doesn't match up with the chart in your link or what SS told me.

My hub center to fender measurement on my 97 Runner on the second to the lowest setting is 22 1/2".

I totally agree and would like to know what the differences are as well. I would have thought that all the different years would be exactly the same but apparently Sonoran Steel has found different results. I'd recommend call Sonoran Steel and possibly Toytec and tell them you want 1 1/2 to 2" on a 2000. I'd be curious to know what they say.

Another way to get 2'' is a body lift. Pro's are no impact to suspension geometry - less impact to center of gravity rising and choices between .5'' and 3". Just swap pucks and related bolts.

Unless you are adding weight, re-use your stock springs. Get the 4Runner specific 5100's, put it up two notches (1.5" lift) and maybe a tiny (1/4") top plate spacer. That solves the front. 4Runner specific 5100's in the rear with either OME2906 or 2980 springs.

Quick and easy, and won't get you so high you need all the other crap to make it align and handle (upper front arms, etc.).

-Charlie

This sounds pretty close to the other rout I'm considering. I was thinking 4runner 5100's, 99 coils front and 99's plus a 20mm spacer in the rear. Do the stock coils still ride nice on the second notch?


I'm hesitant on the emu coils because I've read they are stiff and I don't like that the 906 is shorter than stock.


For weight I need to build a rear bumper (stock one is trashed) but I don't think it should really add more weight than the stock bumper/hitch.
In the future I would like a winch but that isnt happening now or any time soon.


"and won't get you so high you need all the other crap to make it align and handle (upper front arms, etc.)."
I really want to avoid this. I don't mind adjusting the panhard bar but I don't want to get into aftermarket arms and working out the issues that can come from too much lift right now.

Unless you are using long travel shocks in the rear, there is no issues there. The 906 springs are fully captured and partially pre-loaded with stock-length rear shocks - I run them now and am quite happy with them.

The stock rear springs are wayyyy to soft, even with no weight in the back. The 906's are still in the 'soft' portion of their travel at un-weighted ride height. Also, the 4Runner 5100's are specifically designed for those shocks (read between the lines - they are for a 2" lift spring with a 220lb/in rate - that's the only spring on the market that meets those specs). 906's aren't the only good choice though - I would just suggest a stiffer spring than stock for the rear...

-Charlie

Our 1997 had fairly saggy rear suspension at 200k. I got the OME rear springs, and for the front I used oem springs I had sitting around from a '01 Taco. Then put them in with kyb shocks for front/rear that were supposed to be stock height. Pretty sure it gained .5 - 1 inch of height from those springs and rides really well