1" Spacer Lift
- Thread starter deputy92
- Start date
Jason B
Official Vendor
thomasugenius
New member
1" lift front w/ XREAS - Burtman
had some trouble with the lift with XREAS, but it works and looks good. I also have the XREAS complete OEM DIAGRAM. I will try to post along with some pics
had some trouble with the lift with XREAS, but it works and looks good. I also have the XREAS complete OEM DIAGRAM. I will try to post along with some pics
Thai
Elite Member
Muffin-Man said:
This is NOT true. The "dive" forward stance that you see on new SUVs is due to meeting government crash test requirements. SUVs nowadays have to have it's bumper at car bumper height. Some SUVs get around this by placing a crossmember low to the ground but the bumper itself is higher (see new Jeep Wrangler). If you go back several years, then you will see that not many SUVs have this dive forward stance, even though they could tow 6000 lbs.
For example, my G500 has tow capacity of 7000 lbs...it's stance is neutral. Or take the Lexus LX470...it can tow 6500 lbs, but it's stance is neutral also. Why? These SUVs were designed before the crash test requirements came into existence.
Muffin-Man said:
This is true, but your bigger-than-stock BFG tires do a little bit of the above too.
That why I want to stick with the 1" front level kit. I already have 265/70's , I figure it will look nice and pretty much go where I need it to go.
This truck handles pretty good on road to and don't really want to change that to much.
Off road I've been totally impress with it with just bigger tires with have given me a 1/2" lift all around. I got through , up , over a lot of stuff ( in crawl mode ) I might add and with careful planning and using my head you can go pretty far (a good set of tires is a must though ).
This truck handles pretty good on road to and don't really want to change that to much.
Off road I've been totally impress with it with just bigger tires with have given me a 1/2" lift all around. I got through , up , over a lot of stuff ( in crawl mode ) I might add and with careful planning and using my head you can go pretty far (a good set of tires is a must though ).
Muffin-Man
New member
Thai said:
Wow, so basically what your saying is that if there was NO crash test requirement like you stated, then vehicle companies could theoretically level out or even lift the front of their SUVs and trucks, so when they tow or haul up to capacity, the nose of the vehicle is up in the sky which is unsafe because you cant see anything, and if you have to swerve, you can lose control due to less traction on the front tires.
Im no expert and I'm not going to go research this but it seems logical that when you tow or haul up to capacity that the vehicle should have a slight lift in the nose or be completely level. SO I am sure that this is also a reason.
My BFGs are 1/2 inch larger in diameter, they give little or no affect to my vehicle, and don't try to equate this with what idiots like bala2plata does. Me using tires that are a 1/2 inch larger than stock are not even in the same league as the costly and unsafe modifications that he does to his vehicle. There is a reason why on the lifts it says "FOR OFFROAD USE ONLY" and that is perfect grounds for someone to sue you for if you get into an accident with them.
Thai
Elite Member
Muffin-Man said:
MM, you need to READ my post again. How do you explain the LX470 and G500 having a level stance?? Your assumption may be right for the bigger rigs, such as Ford SuperDuty or Chevy Duramax series. However, for SUVs, the nose down is more for crash compatibility than towing and only seen on recent models. Again, i encourage you to go back a few years and look at all the SUVs.
Although the fact that you have BFG AT KO does not equate to lifts, it is still an out-of-spec modification. Did you know that your BFG AT KO weighs at least 5-10 lbs more PER TIRE than your old factory tires?? Did you know that BFG AT KO performs WORST on dry land than your old tires?? It's small, but still significant. Before you go preaching, i think that you need to change back your OEM tires!
The BFG's your talking about 265 70 17 are an inch bigger than stock providing a 1/2 " of lift. give or take.
I would not run any bigger tires than 265/70/17's , I would be ok with a 1" leveling kit which still leaves the nose down , just not quite as far .
The 2/1 spacer lift is also a tempting lift which I feel the 4R can handle without long term effects IMO.
Anything from stock alters handling.
I would not run any bigger tires than 265/70/17's , I would be ok with a 1" leveling kit which still leaves the nose down , just not quite as far .
The 2/1 spacer lift is also a tempting lift which I feel the 4R can handle without long term effects IMO.
Anything from stock alters handling.
Muffin-Man
New member
Thai said:
I'm going to take an educated guess here Thai, as far as I know the 4runner LIMITED has air leveling suspension, to level the vehicle when it is loaded. This 4runner is >$50k imagine what type of luxury suspension is on vehicles that are $50k+ I would not doubt that these vehicles have some sort of air leveling suspension or just electronic leveling shocks.
So, if I decidided to put on another tire besides the dunflops at 265/65/70, the stock size, would that be an out of spec modification, because its not a dunflop? I think your definition and my definition of out of spec modification are two different things.
Yes you are right, my BFG's do weigh more than stock. However, in my experience, they ride better and have more traction in wet AND dry. I find it funny that you recommend I change back when not only are you running an out of spec modification on your g500 with your tires, but the BFG AT KO's are also your FAVORITE tire, which you have stated many times. I think you need to check your facts before trying to counterpoint me.
We could go on like this forever, but basically by putting on a spacer or ANY type of lift on your vehicle, you affect the handling characteristics of your vehicle negatively, not to mention rollover and gas mileage hit. And be warned if you get in an accident with someone and you have a lift, you will get sued for modifying the safety measures on your vehicle. The same goes for those people who put aftermarket bumpers on their vehicles, the ARB or whatever you call them, they eliminate crumple zones, that are essential in saving lives in head-on accidents. Its too bad that people ignore the label that says FOR OFFROAD USE ONLY. Dont get me wrong, I am not against lifts or modifying your vehicle, I think that if you choose to do so, then the vehicle becomes an OHV ONLY. I cringe every time I think of some idiot redneck with a 16 inch lifted truck, flared, unpainted fenders, hitting a honda civic and just rolling right over it.
Thai
Elite Member
Muffin-Man said:
Muffin Man, your educated guess is really not very educated at all. First off, a top-of-the-line 4runner Ltd is NOT greater than $50K. Secondly, IF your theory is right, then why does the 4runner Ltd need a load-leveling system if the nose-down design is already good enough for towing. Ahhh...it still needs it because the nose-down design is NOT for towing. Get it now??
My G500 does NOT have any load leveling system. Or take the new Tahoe...it has a load leveling system, yet still has nose-down design, yet the old Tahoe did not.
Although i run big tires, the difference is that i do not go around preaching like a hypocrite.:bash:
Muffin-Man
New member
Thai said:
Thai maybe I need to educate you again in basic math > means less than < means greater than, for example 5>3 or 7<9, there for if I was to say the g500 is <$50,000 I would be correct just like I said the 4runner LIMITED is >$50,000. You think I said that the Limited is I am sorry that YET AGAIN you are confused by my post.
Also, I don't know why the load leveling air system is needed, I am not an engineer, I just know it is there. Here is a possible solution as to why there might be a nose low configuration on certain vehicles. When you put a suspension in with the body and the frame, the vehicle sits level. Then you drop in a + or - 800LB engine to the front, that will make the front of the vehicle lower than the back. Then add heavier duty springs in the back to carry about 1500 LBS, I am using that as a rough estimate, and there you go.
I am in no way preaching like a hypocrite, I am not against using tires that are 1 size bigger, that make little or no difference, and certainly don't eliminate any safety measures that are put into the vehicle. This is also something that MANY MANY people, including yourself have done SAFTELY. What I am against are lifts, especially what someone has done here by experimenting trying to turn their $30,000 4runner into some sort of white trash wannabe pre-runner. And even after last time I said what he was doing was unsafe, you and he seemed a little butt hurt over, and guess what happened, he screwed up his car and had to pay a bunch of money just to fix it. AND YET HE STILL DIDNT LEARN! I have not put a lift on my vehicle therefore I am not being a hypocrite. I am not quite sure why you are hunting around to comment on this post that I made like a year ago, but if you want to be a troll and contradict everything I state, thats fine. We can keep going on like this if you wish I have time so thats ok by me.
josh220
Banned
You may want to just say "less than" or "greater than" in the future. You aren't very good at placing inequality signs in the right places for them to represent your examples in the right way.
When comparing numbers, the sign doesn't matter. The open side will always be to the greater number. (Example: 7>5 is the same as 5<7) But not when using it in a sentence. Without numbers on both sides, > is always "greater than" and < is always "less than." (When you said This 4runner is >$50k, you said "greater than $50k" ) You would have to read your post backwards for the inequality signs to have made sense to anyone but yourself.
You might want to avoid picking fights with mods, especially with THE mod, and especially when you are wrong. :chair:
When comparing numbers, the sign doesn't matter. The open side will always be to the greater number. (Example: 7>5 is the same as 5<7) But not when using it in a sentence. Without numbers on both sides, > is always "greater than" and < is always "less than." (When you said This 4runner is >$50k, you said "greater than $50k" ) You would have to read your post backwards for the inequality signs to have made sense to anyone but yourself.
You might want to avoid picking fights with mods, especially with THE mod, and especially when you are wrong. :chair:
Last edited:
Thai
Elite Member
Muffin-Man said:
First off, your "math" is moronic in a sentence/paragraph. It makes no sense. Does this look like a math thread to you??
Thanks Josh220...hopefully, MM can learn more about how to post on a forum.
If you put a "800 lbs" engine up front, then why didn't the engineers anticipate this and stiffen up the front suspension to compensate?? (BTW, i don't think that neither V6 nor V8 weigh anywhere close to 800 lbs.) According to YOUR theory, why doesn't other older SUV have this nose dive??? My G500 is level. My brother's 2001 LX470 is level. Older Tahoes are level.
Another example? You can see clearly in this picture between a 3rd gen and 4th gen 4runner:
BTW, the 3rd gen V6 is just as heavy as 4th gen V6 from what i can remember. The 3rd gen can tow 5000 lbs and has similar suspension design (other than nose dive feature).
As for commenting on your dumb assumptions, i had too because this thread was resurrected by another member. I usually try to correct misinformation as much as possible. As for "trolling," let me educate you one more time...THIS IS MY FORUM. Keep up your shitty hypocritical ways with other members and i will be more than happy to ban your ass. Do you need me to point you to another forum??
