Best Way to Beef Up Rear Suspension

[COShadow]

I've got the Sonoran Steel suspension kit w/ the '99 height springs and tokico shocks. Just got back from a trek through SW Colorado and besides the warped rotors (which I'll change soon), I want to boost the rear suspension so I don't get so much sag when loaded and with spare tire. Does anyone have any experience with air bags? Has anyone tried an OME lift spring and shock with the '99 coils still installed in the front? Does a heavier duty '99 stock height spring exist? I don't really want to lift it, or replace everything I bought not too long ago.

Thx

 

[CarrieP]

You know there is some kind of recall on the rear springs. I saw the post on here last week. I think the recall was back in 2001.

I have always wondered why they sagged in the back...

 

[brian2sun]

I love my heavy duty OME 891 coils, but they give 3" of lift and you'd have a huge rake. I think the OME 906 coils are rated med. duty (and are still heavier than your stockies) and they give ~1.5" of lift which would not look so bad IMO against your '99s in the front.

 

[COShadow]

Thanks for the replies. CarrieP, I don't think I'd qualify, the springs aren't the factory springs. brian2sun, I was thinking those might work and not look too bad. I actually like a little rake. I don't really want airbags because I'd still like some suspension travel. I may give the OME a whirl in the next couple of months. Anyone else try some emu lift springs with stock 99s in front?

 

[alp]

I have the same dilemma with mt 1999 SR5. I have long springs and I just
have installed Bilstein's standard shocks. There is almost no rear sag without load but anything heavier than 50 lbs behind the rear seats will send the rear down. I wonder if 1" or 1.5" spring spacers will work. Anyone tried it?

 

[Qyota]

Any updates here? I'm wanting to do the SS 3.0, but want to nip the rear sag in the bud right away. Steve @ SS mentioned air bags too.

 

[COShadow]

I haven't got around to buying/installing the OME springs. I say go for it, if you beat me to it, post up some pics.

 

[1800AskMatt]

I have the same dilemma with mt 1999 SR5. I have long springs and I just
have installed Bilstein's standard shocks. There is almost no rear sag without load but anything heavier than 50 lbs behind the rear seats will send the rear down. I wonder if 1" or 1.5" spring spacers will work. Anyone tried it?

I have 2.5" spacers in my lift kit. "FatBob's Garage".

Lift looks great except still using the same crappy springs.
I still have the drop when the 50# or more is added to the truck weight.
I am going with the stiffer springs.


Also, I am worried about airbags getting stabbed by road and trail debris and collapsing.

 

[COShadow]

^Those rubber springs are tough hombres, so I wouldn't worry about them rupturing.

 

[Gerdo]

My first "lift" was a pair of airlift air bags. They mount inside the rear coils. You cut off the stock rubber bounce bumpers (the rubber cones inside the rear coils)(don't cut off as much as the instructions say to). Then you slide the air bag into the coil. The airline goes thru the lower coil mount ( there is a hole that you make bigger). They carry extra weight great and ride great, but... If you wheel they have one flaw. As the wheel droops and the coil extends the bag floats in the middle of the coil. This pulls the airline thru the hole. Sometimes the airline catches and gets pulled off of the bag. I'm not sure how to get around this problem.

I replaced the bags and my stock coils with tundra TRD fronts and OME 891 coils.

 

[Pikeman]

I just read on another thread that Twitchee is running the airlift 1000 kit and likes it... was his thread about Found the Gremlin. Might ask him for more info if you are considering the air bags option.

 

[alp]

I am going with the stiffer springs.
QUOTE]

So, which "stiffer springs" would you recommend as a replacement of my 99 OEM rear long springs to battle the sag?

 

[COShadow]

Just installed some Old Man Emu 890 coil springs today. I also put on some new rear axle lower control arms (from toytec). I like the rake alot, and it's no longer mushy like it was with the stock springs. I'll post a pic tomorrow, but here it is before, sagging with the weight of camping gear (It was worse than it looks):

 

[twitchee2]

Well i just saw this thread, and nice rig COShadow one of the few non limited red ones. I currently have OME 890 with the air bags in them and i love them. with my best guess ive had somewhere around 7-800lbs in the back of the car, Bikes on the carrier and a towing my jetski. It sagged about 1.5-2in, respectable in my opinion. The air lift kit i got came with blocks that made up for the my lift. I dont really use them unless i have some weight in the back, they will make the ride very stiff with full pressure. All in all i think they are a great feature to have.


This is what prompted me to get the bag in the frist place. This is me moving out of the dorms my freshmen yr.

This trip had 5-600lbs in the back + bikes + ski. you can see its sagged a little but not bad. In cab weight was more then ^^^ that pic

 

[jrm]

I opted

for the OME 906s in back combined with the 99 talls up front with bilstein HDs all round. Results in about .5 to 1.00" rake but i actually like the rake when the trucks unloaded and loaded the rear susp wallow is gone.

 

[COShadow]

Thanks twitchee2! That first picture looks like mine used to as well. I won't be doing any towing, even took the hitch off, so hopefully I won't be needing the air bags. Here are some pics of how it sits with the '99 front coils, trekmasters all around and OME 890s in the rear. IMO, this is how 4runners should sit. Rake is my friend!

 

[Gerdo]

It's a balance between... ride, load capacity and flex.

The first springs that I had were 890. they flex pretty well, rode well and handled a load well. Then, and still, I have 891. They are a little stiffer, handle a load better but don't flex quite as well. The 891 compress when flex and tend to bounce/push back more than the 890 did. I almost went back to the 890 but have stuck with the 891 for the capacity. I'm glad that I did. I have been doing longer wheeling/camping trips and it holds the rear up better. The 891 flex great with this extra weight. There may be some new coils coming out that are 4" and 220# (891 are 3" and 210#). These may be in my future.

LC coils flex great, ride soft but don't handle loads well.

You will like the 890. Much better than stock coils.

 

[Qyota]

Very nice, COshadow! I like the rake, but it's a little too much for me. With the 890's in the rear, I'd be inclined to put a 1" spacer on top of the tall '99 coils in front. Otherwise it looks perfect.

So the 890's aren't too stiff with the trekmasters? I didn't know the trekmasters could handle a lift coil...

 

[theizzardking]

lol, my stock '99 talls loaded....

 

[COShadow]

Very nice, COshadow! I like the rake, but it's a little too much for me. With the 890's in the rear, I'd be inclined to put a 1" spacer on top of the tall '99 coils in front. Otherwise it looks perfect.

So the 890's aren't too stiff with the trekmasters? I didn't know the trekmasters could handle a lift coil...

I don't think the 890's are all that stiff, but then I'm used to the OME Dakar leaf pack w/ add a leaf (heavy duty) on my Tacoma. While the OME shocks probably pair better with the coils, the trekmasters seem decent in conjunction with them (note, these are the aftermarket trekmasters, not the stock shocks). No trouble with the length of the shocks (yet anyway). I'm not sure how much the coils lifted the back, but I don't think the figure is too much greater than my '99s were when brand new (Toytec said it would only be 1" more than the '99 coils). They agreed I should be fine with the shock length.



izzardking, that's quite a load:jaw drop: