Difference in rear stock springs vs 906

[jman11788]

I am very pleased in the 906's compared to the stock rear springs. Not only does it give the truck a better look but it rides a whole lot better. I remember measuring the rear trailer hitch before putting the springs on and it was aprroxmately 10/6 inches of clearance. Result of the 906's is about 16 inches, it's a little too high right now but I know over time the springs will settle down to probably 14/5 to 15 inches.

 

[jman11788]

The rear is too low...

 

[jman11788]

That's more like it!

 

[jman11788]

The main reason I got these coils is to get these stinking bump stops of that freaking axle! There's actually a good amount of travel.

 

[LittleCaesar]

It looks much better. Over time the rear will probably drop 1/2", but not more than that, at least in my experience. If one is not going for a serious off-road upgrade using LC 861s or the like, buy a pair of 906s.

The only drawback in three years is that the rear became stiffer with the installation of the 906s so the ride is a little more harsh.

 

[IanB]

Loved my 906's, they are what should have come factory on these trucks.

 

[jman11788]

Forreal they really should have been. Now i'm trying to think of a new project for the rig. Any suggestions?

 

[madbomber08]

What do you have in the front? I really like the stance. Also are those 265/70 tires?

 

[JohnsD90]

Yeah, the 906's are excellent, i am about to buy another set for my new truck. Ian is right, they should have come standard on these trucks, i ran them with stock springs and it sat with only slight rake after they broke in.

I wouldn't buy them if my intention was to have a lifted truck, they really don't lift the truck so much as a give a slight height change over a new 99 coil. I think many people get dettered from them when they see it say 2" lift, it really isnt though, its just a 1" lift over stock on 96-00 trucks, and it makes the truck not look old and crappy anymore!

 

[jman11788]

What do you have in the front? I really like the stance. Also are those 265/70 tires?

I'm running the 99 talls up front. It was too soft with that and the Monroe struts so I got the Billies and it rides really nice. Yes ithey're 265/70.

 

[Last Man Standing]

I am very pleased in the 906's compared to the stock rear springs. Not only does it give the truck a better look but it rides a whole lot better. I remember measuring the rear trailer hitch before putting the springs on and it was aprroxmately 10/6 inches of clearance. Result of the 906's is about 16 inches, it's a little too high right now but I know over time the springs will settle down to probably 14/5 to 15 inches.

Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but find myself with a 2002 Sport that
has 265/70/16's and no lift nor am lifting in the future. She has 170K on her
and the rear end can easily be moved up and down with my hand so thinking
besides new shocks that are currently installed I need to upgrade rear springs.
With the spare tire and a loaded storage area of odds and ends ( 50/100lbs ) I
don't mind a bit ( 1" ) of final rake, just don't want a bouncy rear end.

Again apologies for such a common question about this upgrade, but the past threads
do not seem to deal with a stock issue that I could find for a 3rd. Gen Any suggestions
/ experience would be appreciated.

Edit: I measured the sag and it is 1" shorter in the rear that front ( tire to top of wheel well )
front is 6" rear has 5"of clearance.

LMS

 

[Brian.]

Again apologies for such a common question about this upgrade, but the past threads
do not seem to deal with a stock issue that I could find for a 3rd. Gen Any suggestions
/ experience would be appreciated.

LMS

The OEM 906 give a 2" lift. I have a '99 and saw 1.5" change between 100% stock at 200k and the 906. I used hub-center to bottom of fender flare (limited), stock was 20.5 and they are 22" now ~ te beauty of this measurement is that it negates the tire size. Measure hub-center up 22" and that's about where your fender will sit (before the springs settle-in). That's with about 50# less stuff than you claim (back of my truck is Empty, empty). Given that the 99's are supposed to be 1" taller than other 4runners, I'm guessing you'd see more like a 2.5" "lift" with these springs.

I'm still on OEM/worn front suspension, but the back feels so much more planted and stable now. Granted, I Also replaced all 8 control arm bushings, so that has a lot to do with my perception.

In the end, I wouldn't say that this is a bad change from stock. Given my lack of experience with other options I can't say there aren't other, better, springs either. I don't have any regrets... yet?

 

[Serge627]

I put the 906 rear springs on my saggy 02 and love how it sits and how it rides. Also changed the rear shocks to Bilstein 5100's and they seem to match perfectly with the 906's.

 

[Last Man Standing]

I put the 906 rear springs on my saggy 02 and love how it sits and how it rides. Also changed the rear shocks to Bilstein 5100's and they seem to match perfectly with the 906's.

Serge627,

What difference is the rake front to rear?

LMS

 

[jross20]

Waiting for the rest of my parts to get everything installed. Glad to hear the 906's ride good. Anyone running them with tundra 5100s?

 

[phattyduck]

I put the 906 rear springs on my saggy 02 and love how it sits and how it rides. Also changed the rear shocks to Bilstein 5100's and they seem to match perfectly with the 906's.

That's because the 5100's where specifically designed for the 906's! (look in the instructions - there is a line for how they will work with 220 in/lb 2" lift springs - the only ones on the market that meet those specs is the 906's...)

-Charlie

 

[Serge627]

Serge627,

What difference is the rake front to rear?

LMS

it sits an inch or so higher in the rear currently, unloaded. I dont haul much in the way of weight so this is acceptable to me.