Anyone LT or SAS a 5th gen yet?

[Swarty]

Yep, great comparison. Does Jeep doing it answer any of the issues? Have you read the reviews for handling? For reliability and resale? They are far less capable on road and still not a good choice rock crawling even with the SFA. Why make the compromise? Not saying SFA isn't useful but you have to have the fender and body clearance. The 5th gen has neither. Also as far as strength I haven't seen anyone manage to break the axle on their 5th gen yet. It'd be an interesting challenge but a mediocre end product, like an unlimited IMO.

 

[Swarty]

I am excited to see fenders and an LT. Seems more inline with 4runners build.

 

[Ducmonsta]

No one's breaking axles because no one can fit 37s on it yet. 4" on a JK clears 37s all day long. The unlimited is one of the MOST useless Jeeps ever made. It caters to the soccer mom that's going through midlife. The most hunted Jeep for rock crawling has been the LJ. Perfect set up with chassis and drivetrain dimensions. As long as you're not running a D35, of course. *** this is strictly my opinion based on experiences at my former shop

The most difficult thing to manage with an SAS or LT is the road manners. If you don't mind the boat like ride or the bump steer then go for it. I would love to have one or the other, just not for one driven on the street.

The most impressive 5th gen I've every had the opportunity to drive as been [MENTION=51030]joneseyyy[/MENTION]'s. I imagine [MENTION=74569]SOcalTRAIL[/MENTION]'s is very similar as they have relatively the same suspension set up. You can probably hit a curb at over 30mph and not feel like the suspension is going to blow up on you. *not that ever happened, Ben.

By the way, there is a company that will do a fiberglass fender. [MENTION=99235]Scott@Hightech[/MENTION] and I did some preliminary research awhile ago. I considered the 2" wider LT system last year. I don't remember the name of the company, though. Maybe Scott will.

 

[05Rrunner]

Let's all not forget the 4runner started life off with a straight axle , and 84/85 are the most prized today. This really helped the 4runner earn its great reputation.

 

[Ducmonsta]

Let's all not forget the 4runner started life off with a straight axle , and 84/85 are the most prized today. This really helped the 4runner earn its great reputation.

The same could be said about any truck that was developed in the early 80's. IFS wasn't exactly at the forefront of technology. Toyota's quality and dependability is what earned its great reputation.

 

[TOY2G]

Back in the day I use to think everything needed a solid axle. I did both of my Tacomas, and one old 4runner. I considered it on my 4th gen when I did the 4x4 conversion, but changed my mind. I did however buy 90% of the parts for the conversion including Dana 60s, Coil-Overs, Johnny joints, hydraulic steering, wheels, and a bunch of small parts.

Now that both of our 5th gens are paid off the wife wants a new Highlander, I told her I would get it for her if I could SAS her 4runner.. Truth be told, I think I'm past the SAS stuff now. I prefer my vehicles be able to take me long distances, to remote places and back.

My SASed Tacoma above was also my DD at the time, and it wheeled very well on the rocks, it did pretty good on the loose stuff.

Myself and IMO other 5th gen owners are more for the Overland wheeling now other than the rocks. If I want to play in the rocks again I can stick my stuff in one of my cheaper trucks.

The 5th gen is a bit of a cow for the rocks anyway.

 

[Scott@Hightech]

I cant remember if it was glasworks or Fiberwerx, that had said they might. im leaning towards the latter.

Im patiently waiting for someone to pull the trigger on the 5th gen TC lt setup, so i can install it

 

[joneseyyy]

Dilemma being Glass fenders vs. Snorkel?

Whether to keep the mid-travel setup or go long travel. I'd just sell the snorkel. Although going true LT in the rear to match the front would require major surgery...

 

[KCcarguy]

It sounds good to have a trick suspension, but if you're doing long distance travel/ overland type stuff in isolated areas, I would think simpler is better. I guess it all depends on how you plan to use the truck.

 

[Swarty]

Lt isn't necessarily more complex and is usually much beefier than stock.

 

[marshal]

Whether to keep the mid-travel setup or go long travel. I'd just sell the snorkel. Although going true LT in the rear to match the front would require major surgery...

Not completely. The most exteme part would be the fabrication of longer links, and the the placement of coilovers. More than likely the body and frame would need to be frenched to accept coilovers. Aswell, if you're going to be putting LT suspensions front and rear might as well swap for a wider and stronger housing in the rear. You're limited in up travel, but you can compensate for it pretty easily.

 

[Scott@Hightech]

Not completely. The most exteme part would be the fabrication of longer links, and the the placement of coilovers. More than likely the body and frame would need to be frenched to accept coilovers. Aswell, if you're going to be putting LT suspensions front and rear mtight as well swap for a wider and stronger housing in the rear. You're limited in up travel, but you can compensate for it pretty easily.

I think you all are overthinking the LT part of a rear suspension. The LT front suspension typically only nets 3-4" of lift(over stock). the extra travel comes from the increased width, there for making the arc in which the wheel moves larger. The rear would benefit from the extended travel setup such as ICONs but there is no need to redesign the whole rear suspension, its already 4 linked with coils. A good set of flexy control arms and slightly longer springs and shocks does wonders.

Most desert trucks(typically the only vehicles you see LT kits on) still run leafs in the rear. There are tons of other applications and specific vehicle builds, but im am speaking about LT suspension as a whole.

 

[marshal]

i disagree, the links in the rear need to be redone and the uppers triangulated. you can't have a rear suspension that is worth its salt at speed with a pan hard. I'm not talking about baja lets jump it off a clip speed, even if you're running through fire trails or gravel trails in the middle of the desert at 30mph

the way the rear suspension arcs isn't sufficient enough to be matched with 12-14" of vertical travel that the front would theoretically have

 

[joneseyyy]

i disagree, the links in the rear need to be redone and the uppers triangulated. you can't have a rear suspension that is worth its salt at speed with a pan hard. I'm not talking about baja lets jump it off a clip speed, even if you're running through fire trails or gravel trails in the middle of the desert at 30mph

the way the rear suspension arcs isn't sufficient enough to be matched with 12-14" of vertical travel that the front would theoretically have

Yeah this is what I was getting at. In all reality the truck goes about as fast as I'd want it to given the weight, no rollcage, and daily driver status. I highly doubt I'll end up going that direction. If I do ever want to really haul - I'll probably just get a RZR to fool with.