Lots of options depending on color code/year/trim
LC coil spring Color codes
LC color codes
Help Identifying Coils
12mm Rear Shock Upper Threaded Shaft
- Thread starter jross20
- Start date
LC coil spring Color codes
LC color codes
Help Identifying Coils
GhostRing
Member
Getting antsy to try out the shocks, so I would like to hear some thoughts on this?
My 50701's (which Dobinson's stated to me directly are the newest valving) came with a set of bushings for a Toyota Fortuner.
As you can see, the kit came with 2 washers & 2 bushings. No Centering/Index washer, or indication to use one.
They are also a softer compound that the 4th Gen bushings.
What is the drawback to simply installing it just like this? I figure any index washer essentially "becomes" the hole in the frame, and keeps
the shock shaft completely isolated in the bushing stack. That to me is the primary goal to allow safe movement as the post pivots inside the frame hole.
The combined height of the Fortuner bushing shoulders is equal to the bushing/washer intended for the 4th Gen T4R,
and the 17mm shoulder diameter equals the 3rd Gen frame hole. This (in theory) should still isolate the shaft during use, correct?
I do have the following concerns:
Index washers seem to exist for a reason, but I can't quite get my head around it...If they are sufficiently tensioned,
they should effectively be one with the shock frame hole. (imagine welding the washer in place)
I assume it shouldn't move at all during the shock cycle.
Is it simply the needed method to be able to utilize a cupped washer?
I am worried that under full articulation, the bushing will try to smush out
against the frame plate instead of staying tucked into the washers.
[MENTION=691643]ZSW99[/MENTION] image illustrates this bushing containment.
Second, due to the larger post diameter, the Fortuner bushing shoulder is
thinner than the 4th Gen's. Too thin? I mean Dobinsons provides these to
be utilized on a similar, alternate vehicle, so it's apparently acceptable...
So I am going to chuck these under there and see what happens.
I don't see the post snapping off suddenly, but the bushing shoulders
may not hold up. I know these are wicked long shocks, but between
the 890s and ext. bumpstops, I should hopefully stay out of trouble.
I figure at least this lets me see if the valving is even close to what I want
without having to drill out OEM holes, or fab up outboard mounts yet.
My 50701's (which Dobinson's stated to me directly are the newest valving) came with a set of bushings for a Toyota Fortuner.
As you can see, the kit came with 2 washers & 2 bushings. No Centering/Index washer, or indication to use one.
They are also a softer compound that the 4th Gen bushings.
What is the drawback to simply installing it just like this? I figure any index washer essentially "becomes" the hole in the frame, and keeps
the shock shaft completely isolated in the bushing stack. That to me is the primary goal to allow safe movement as the post pivots inside the frame hole.
The combined height of the Fortuner bushing shoulders is equal to the bushing/washer intended for the 4th Gen T4R,
and the 17mm shoulder diameter equals the 3rd Gen frame hole. This (in theory) should still isolate the shaft during use, correct?
I do have the following concerns:
Index washers seem to exist for a reason, but I can't quite get my head around it...If they are sufficiently tensioned,
they should effectively be one with the shock frame hole. (imagine welding the washer in place)
I assume it shouldn't move at all during the shock cycle.
Is it simply the needed method to be able to utilize a cupped washer?
I am worried that under full articulation, the bushing will try to smush out
against the frame plate instead of staying tucked into the washers.
[MENTION=691643]ZSW99[/MENTION] image illustrates this bushing containment.
Second, due to the larger post diameter, the Fortuner bushing shoulder is
thinner than the 4th Gen's. Too thin? I mean Dobinsons provides these to
be utilized on a similar, alternate vehicle, so it's apparently acceptable...
So I am going to chuck these under there and see what happens.
I don't see the post snapping off suddenly, but the bushing shoulders
may not hold up. I know these are wicked long shocks, but between
the 890s and ext. bumpstops, I should hopefully stay out of trouble.
I figure at least this lets me see if the valving is even close to what I want
without having to drill out OEM holes, or fab up outboard mounts yet.
Last edited:
HiluxSurf SSR-G
Senior Member
dunno if this has a bearing on the behavior of your shocks. but the fortuner has its rear shocks located behind the rear axle and coils are seated on the rear LCAs.
also, I am not sure about those bushings being able to hold out against the loads applied to it. I would rather have the stock cushion retainer if it works with the dobinsons shocks.
OME recommends that the stock cushion retainer be used with their bushings to ensure that the shock shaft is centered on the hole.
also, I am not sure about those bushings being able to hold out against the loads applied to it. I would rather have the stock cushion retainer if it works with the dobinsons shocks.
OME recommends that the stock cushion retainer be used with their bushings to ensure that the shock shaft is centered on the hole.
jross20
New member
I'd have to get under there to see exactly what I used, but I basically used a combination of the washers and bushings that they sent with actual OEM ones. So like I did use the OEM centering washer.
Yeah I definitely would not install anything without using the proper centering washer!!
Yeah I definitely would not install anything without using the proper centering washer!!
gamefreakgc
Elite Member
If you torque down the bushings enough, they will squeeze in the hole and become a sort of 'centering washer' all on their own. However I don't know how you plan on driving your vehicle so if you expect the rear shocks to do a lot of work, meaning off-road a lot, it may not work and be secure enough. My reference on this is the sway bar bushings as if you torque them down tight enough they will squeeze into the recess around the threaded bolt and fill the gap on their own.
GhostRing
Member
Got the shocks installed and took them for a lil rip.
Valving seems decent, even though all I currently have are a basket/awning on roof, 2 bike hitch rack, and 265s on OEM wheels
Definitely *tight*, but not what I would consider harsh. Rebound reflects the lack of intended weight, but really comes alive a higher speeds.
The bushings are holding for now, but an outboard mount solution will put things in a proper stacked order.
My main takeaway:
They are long. kinda too long.
The actual shaft travel is 8.2" not 9.25"
This is less than the 8.5" what my 5100s have with a shorter collapsed length.
The Dobs are 1.1" longer extended and 1.46" longer compressed
The shock is at full stuff well before squishing the 2" dropped Daystar bumpstops.
There is about 2 3/8" exposed shaft at rest with seasoned OME 890s
So I am now at a point where I believe I need to extend the upper mounting point and lose a small bit of droop?
And that is math not 100% accounting for the new position being much more vertical.
Going to continue to mess with everything a bunch, but jury is still out if these are a worthwhile upgrade for me...
Valving seems decent, even though all I currently have are a basket/awning on roof, 2 bike hitch rack, and 265s on OEM wheels
Definitely *tight*, but not what I would consider harsh. Rebound reflects the lack of intended weight, but really comes alive a higher speeds.
The bushings are holding for now, but an outboard mount solution will put things in a proper stacked order.
My main takeaway:
They are long. kinda too long.
The actual shaft travel is 8.2" not 9.25"
This is less than the 8.5" what my 5100s have with a shorter collapsed length.
The Dobs are 1.1" longer extended and 1.46" longer compressed
The shock is at full stuff well before squishing the 2" dropped Daystar bumpstops.
There is about 2 3/8" exposed shaft at rest with seasoned OME 890s
So I am now at a point where I believe I need to extend the upper mounting point and lose a small bit of droop?
And that is math not 100% accounting for the new position being much more vertical.
Going to continue to mess with everything a bunch, but jury is still out if these are a worthwhile upgrade for me...
Last edited:
jross20
New member
Got the shocks installed and took them for a lil rip.
Valving seems decent, even though all I currently have are a basket/awning on roof, 2 bike hitch rack, and 265s on OEM wheels
Definitely *tight*, but not what I would consider harsh. Rebound reflects the lack of intended weight, but really comes alive a higher speeds.
The bushings are holding for now, but an outboard mount solution will put things in a proper stacked order.
My main takeaway:
They are long. kinda too long.
The actual shaft travel is 8.2" not 9.25"
This is less than the 8.5" what my 5100s have with a shorter collapsed length.
The Dobs are 1.1" longer extended and 1.46" longer compressed
The shock is at full stuff well before squishing the 2" dropped Daystar bumpstops.
There is about 2 3/8" exposed shaft at rest with seasoned OME 890s
So I am now at a point where I believe I need to extend the upper mounting point and lose a small bit of droop?
And that is math not 100% accounting for the new position being much more vertical.
Going to continue to mess with everything a bunch, but jury is still out if these are a worthwhile upgrade for me...
You've basically discovered what I did. So just so everybody knows, we're actually in the process of moving and stuff and so I haven't really been able to spend as much time on this as I wanted to. I also have a lot of family health issues going on so haven't had much motivation... But I'm getting back into it.
Well I'm not sure if I've actually felt it, I'm pretty sure that the shock is too long compressed to even touch my bump stops. I have the shorter plastic guy bumps. Durobumps I think they are called?
Besides that, yeah they were not as much of an improvement as I was hoping for, but I do agree that at high speed they do seem to work a bit better. Ultimately I've been debating on paying King to revalve my rear king shocks, AGAIN, but this time strongly expressing to them what I want. Currently the Robinsons with the supposed plush valving do ride better in general but it still it far from what I want.
Previously when I had a second generation Tacoma, I had $5,100 all the way around. Although it was totally undrivable, when I took off the front sway bar just to check it out I was blown away with how smoothly the truck with Crest over bumps and shit. I mean it was one of those eureka moments: "This is what I'm talking about!!!"
I honestly believe that most of these shocks available for 3rd gen 4Runners are just valved for too much weight. Or I mean maybe I'm using the wrong description, but they definitely all feel too stiff to me. Maybe they expect you to have 500 pounds of gear and armor? Not sure...
I think the length of the Kings for 3rd gens is good with 890 coils, so perhaps if I can get the valving exactly where I want it they will be perfect... The front Kings do feel pretty close to what I would consider perfect. I'm curious to see if once I eventually add my front bumper if that extra weight gets them into that perfect zone.
Any chance you measured the overall compressed/extended of the shock before install? That's good to know about the travel being less than advertised. A little disappointing, but good information nonetheless.
I'm sorry to hear about your family health issues. Compounding that with moving makes for a stressful and hectic time.
I agree it seems most aftermarket shocks really need extra weight to get a less jarring ride. If I ever find the time and finances I think I'll go the lc80 springs/shocks for the rear as a cheap starting point.
Last edited:
GhostRing
Member
[MENTION=388984]jross20[/MENTION] Focus on you and yours! We can always get more goofy car parts, but we only get one family. We'll be here whenever you have the time.
I do appreciate your input, and if I come to any revelations, I will certainly share them. I do think the Aussie approach is to assume the suspension
primarily gets modified to carry increased weight for touring etc. We're probably not going to get a plush SUV that handles like a sports car... :madgrin:
[MENTION=319302]Bad Luck[/MENTION] in my haste, I didn't take super-accurate measurements of the new shocks - but I did have the following: ~ 24.5" Max OAL & 16.5" Min.
Bear in mind however, I chose to use numbers from the center of the lower shock eye, to the actual vehicle mounting plate. I wanted to include
any bushing/washer/whatever into the equation. At least one is coming out this weekend to check some things, so I am happy to get some tighter numbers.
Dobinsons site shows 23.5" (598mm) Ext. & 15.3" (389mm) Comp. for the IMS59-50701 if that helps any. (The 50705 seems to have slightly different measurements)
I do appreciate your input, and if I come to any revelations, I will certainly share them. I do think the Aussie approach is to assume the suspension
primarily gets modified to carry increased weight for touring etc. We're probably not going to get a plush SUV that handles like a sports car... :madgrin:
[MENTION=319302]Bad Luck[/MENTION] in my haste, I didn't take super-accurate measurements of the new shocks - but I did have the following: ~ 24.5" Max OAL & 16.5" Min.
Bear in mind however, I chose to use numbers from the center of the lower shock eye, to the actual vehicle mounting plate. I wanted to include
any bushing/washer/whatever into the equation. At least one is coming out this weekend to check some things, so I am happy to get some tighter numbers.
Dobinsons site shows 23.5" (598mm) Ext. & 15.3" (389mm) Comp. for the IMS59-50701 if that helps any. (The 50705 seems to have slightly different measurements)
Thank you for the measurements. I've seen it a couple times that Dobinson's reported shock measurements are off for extended/compressed, but the travel seems to be close to the same between what people are measuring and what dobinson shows.
jross20
New member
Thanks for the words of encouragement guys.
So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think that the rear kings for 3rd gen have the best travel for 890 coils. They definitely weren't too long, when I was at what I'm pretty sure it was full stuff, there was still a bit of these shock shaft exposed. Then, the maximum flex was definitely probably more than enough. I actually had taken measurements and written them down but I can't find that notebook, but I'm pretty sure I was getting an outrageous amount of travel in the back.
I just received my order of extra rear sway bar brackets so I'm going to try to install the Sonoran rear sway bar relocation brackets again. (Try to do it last weekend, but the little fingers on the brackets made it impossible to fit, so I ordered some spare brackets and I'm just going to cut the fingers off).
I have no idea that this will affect the rear travel or not but I'm hoping that it prevents the lower arms from colliding with the rear links. I'm shocked that the rear link mounts are as strong as they are...lol
So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think that the rear kings for 3rd gen have the best travel for 890 coils. They definitely weren't too long, when I was at what I'm pretty sure it was full stuff, there was still a bit of these shock shaft exposed. Then, the maximum flex was definitely probably more than enough. I actually had taken measurements and written them down but I can't find that notebook, but I'm pretty sure I was getting an outrageous amount of travel in the back.
I just received my order of extra rear sway bar brackets so I'm going to try to install the Sonoran rear sway bar relocation brackets again. (Try to do it last weekend, but the little fingers on the brackets made it impossible to fit, so I ordered some spare brackets and I'm just going to cut the fingers off).
I have no idea that this will affect the rear travel or not but I'm hoping that it prevents the lower arms from colliding with the rear links. I'm shocked that the rear link mounts are as strong as they are...lol
