AxleIke- 1999 4Runner SR5

Back to the dual case set up:

So, after I couldn't get the trans working, I went with the Inchworm adapter, like I said.

This adapter has some plusses and minuses. Its got the option to clock, which is good, but I didn't do that, but it also has mounting patterns for the 4.0 transmissions, which kinda sucks. They provide set screws and tell you to seal every non-used hole with silicone. This is okay, but not brilliant, IMO. I'd rather have an adapter with only one set of mount holes for the transmission.

After bolting everything together (pretty self explanatory so no pics of that) I got to building a new cross member.



Got a press brake, so that was put to use matching up the mounting locations.



Why two? The factory set up has the mount on the transmission for the 3.4 trucks, but the 22re trucks, the mount was on the tcase, as you can see.

A person in our local club simply used the front trans mount when he went duals, and after about 5 years of use, the crawl box case split apart on the trail.

While I don't have specific data, my hypothesis here is that the crawl box is designed to take load through the lower mount, but in the 3.4 trucks, its taking all of the torque where it mounts to the adapter. This, coupled with the added weight of the factory tcase and adapter behind it means breakage is likely when using factory mounting spots.

By doubling up, I also increase the resistance of the tranny side mounts, taking load from the engine mounts, which *should* be less likely to break this way.

Once I had the mount set up figured, I build a crossmember skid around it.



I was going to remake all of the crossmembers, but I was heading to Moab in a week, so I opted to get done quickly. I cut the front factory crossmember and notched it for the tubes. I then just plated up to the rear.

One thing I plan to change: I kept the factory weight that is bolted to the tcase for what I assume is vibration damping. I thought that was a good idea, but I don't think its doing much with the double mounts on the trans and tcase. So I plan to remove it, and flatten out the crossmember.



To keep it simple at first, I just lost my cup holder as is common.



However, after about 6 months of driving like that, I hated it. The shifter hit my leg and I wanted my cup holder back.

So, back to the drawing board.

As with my transmission above, I knew that I could retain my factory j-shift by using solid pivots, and keeping the linkage pivot between the shifter pivot and the handle. *If you put the shifter pivot between the handle and the linkage, you reverse the patterns* (Just in case anyone wants to do that, I do this in a later modification of the front case shifter)





I fabbed a plate which sits on 3/8" spacers and bolts to the transmission shifter as well as the front two mounts of the front tcase shifter. It has to be spaced up to clear everything. With longer bolts, the shifters can be torqued properly.





And how it works:



Made a cap piece to clear the shift nub. I'd like to get rid of this at somepoint. Still working on how to do that.



And finally, I tried to make the front shifter work (using a similar link), by coming up through the boot next to the trans shifter. It had to be up that far to clear the rear case shifter when the rear case is in low, and the front in high.





Got my cup holder back, but the hole in the rubber boot made for a noisier cabin, and I never liked how janky it looked. So a new fix was in order. But not right away.
 
At this point, I was pretty sick of the craptastic ride afforded me by the Bilstein shocks, so I decided to upgrade.

I researched and researched, and researched. And what I found out, and ultimately has still been screwing me is this:

Everyone's idea of a "good" ride is incredibly different

I wavered back and forth between progressively valved King's and Digressively valved Icon's.

I ultimately decided on the Icon's. Based on more data (Icon's are cheaper than the Kings, so more people have them) I went with Icon's, figuring that since more people had them, and I found nothing but rave reviews, that at least some people would want a ride like I do.

Well, wrong.

What I had envisioned was a Caddy-esqe ride. What I got was a "firm" ride. I am the odd one out. I don't want to feel the bumps. I want the suspension to soak up all of it. If I have to run sway bars to overcome this, I was fine with that. Most people want their 4runner to ride like a "truck", which to me, means "brick with essentially zero suspension at all". Mine is better than a "brick" but every manhole cover, road crack, what have you, you feel and deeper pot holes are like getting punched in the back through the seat. I feel the stock suspension is even too stiff in some cases.

The problem is, most people want the truck to ride more like a sports car: more planted, less roll, etc... While I agree less roll is nice, I can just take corners slower. I don't really want to feel the road while I'm commuting around, and I definitely don't want to feel the washboards when I'm out wheeling or camping.

With the Icon's in their factory set up, the truck rode better than with the bilsteins, but not much. Certainly not enough for me to feel good about the cost.

What I got was:

Icon 2.5 internal reservoir fronts with 650 lb/in coils
Icon 2.0 rears - Thought they were internal res when I bought them, turns out, they are emulsion.





A month after install, the passenger front was blowing oil out everywhere and so I was going to have to send them back to Icon. Since I wasn't happy about the ride, I decided to send the fronts and rears back together and have Icon do their one free re-valve. I talked with their tech dept on the phone, who were awesome, and very helpful, and very patient.

I told them what I wanted: A softer ride, and that I was okay with more sway in the corners. They said no problem, and I shipped them the shocks.

Got them back 2.5 weeks later, and put them on expecting amazing things, and couldn't tell the difference at all.

So, I decided it was time to learn a thing or two about shocks. Luckily I found a great guy locally who has been doing shocks for years, and he was able to help me out in trying to understand what I wanted to do.

So, I took them over the first time to have them valved, and had to have the truck down for another two weeks since we had no idea what shims Icon had put into the shocks, and couldn't order new shims until the shocks were apart.

This was also when I found out that I had emulsion shocks in the rear. Bummer part about emulsions: not digressive. Not totally sure why, but working on that.

The other issue with emulsion shocks is that they have to be charged pretty high with N2 in order to work. With an internal or external reservoir, to reduce some of the "harshness" you can drop the N2 pressure a bit, but with emulsions, if the pressure is too low, the shims won't crack open, and the ride stays very harsh.

So, we pulled a few thousandths out of the compression stacks on both the front and rear shocks, and in the front, we decreased the spacer shim on the compression side as well (this is the spacer that dictates how convex the shims are: the more convex, the more digressive it is.

This improved the ride a bit, but it was still too stiff.

As I said, Icon sends all their shocks with 650 lb/in springs. Since I had 620's before, and felt they were stiff, I was a bit worried about the heavier spring.

The other issue was, I was running LC 7 wrap coils in the rear with the bilsteins. When I went to the icon's, I swapped back to Old Man Emu 890's. However, the truck was still very raked, so I was forced to adjust the front adjuster nuts down a bunch. The truck still wasn't level, but it was better.

However, Icon recommends that you do not put more than 1 inch of preload (so nuts adjusted down more than 1") on their shocks. And indeed, they ship them this way from the factory. I was at 2". Too much preload on a spring causes harsh ride characteristics as well.

So, my first order of business before the next revalve was to swap in taller, softer coils.

Icon's 650's are a 13" long spring. I ordered up some Eibach 600 lb/in 14" springs, and tossed those on. I'm now at 1.5" of preload, and the truck sits level with the OME 890's.

Now, things were better up front, but the rear was still pretty harsh. So I began taking notes on when exactly the worst behavior was observed (day job is a scientist so what did you expect, LOL?). It was worse on "dips" rather than "bumps".

So back over to the shock guru and we talked it over. We took a 3 thousandths out of one of the middle shims in the compression stack, and added 5 thousandths to the rebound stack.

The reason for this is: if the shock is rebounding too fast, the tire falls too far into the dip and the hit is a bunch harder. If the rebound is slowed down, the tire will not fall as far and will not feel as harsh.

This worked pretty well. At highway speeds, I barely feel the bumps in the rear (YAYYYYY!!!!). I'm feeling the fronts more, which means I'll probably add some rebound up there as well. I think the rear needs a little bit more rebound to help with the 20 mph range bumps and dips, but I'm finally getting closer.

So, the moral to this story for me at least: I would have been far better off calling the guys at AccuTune, taking the time to make all the measurements they call for, and having them tune a set of Kings for me to start with. I could have done some of this fine tuning, but would have been much happier if I'd started with some custom shocks rather than a "one size fits all" tune.

Once I get these Icon's kinda dialed in, I hope to pull them, sell them, and then get a set of adjustable resevoir shocks with the custom tune I have worked out, but then be able to add compression stiffness to the the shock when running loaded or towing a trailer.
 
Last edited:
I first had an 87 which some may remember from other sites:

Dual ARB's, factory IFS, custom steering built with 80 series tie rods, DOM tubing, and a total chaos idler, 35's, flat belly, dual ultimate marlin, 488's, blah


I remember you from over on Yotatech when I had a 2nd gen. Good to see you're keeping with a similar, no frills build that will tackle anything. Also jealous of your fab skills.
 
I remember you from over on Yotatech when I had a 2nd gen. Good to see you're keeping with a similar, no frills build that will tackle anything. Also jealous of your fab skills.

Thanks! Though the 99 is a bit more frilly, just haven't gotten to that part yet, LOL! :D
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
278,310
Messages
3,554,080
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Trending content

Back
Top