? For those with ICON extended travel coil overs

[wfo9]

Anyone happen to know what the measurement is from top of the mounting surface to center of lower mount on the ICON extended travel coilovers?

I just put them on my truck. I previously had an OME lift in place and it looks like I gained a whopping 1/2 inch of drop (if that) with the ICONs.

The only reason I'm even asking here is related to the fact that the part# they sent me is actually listed for the 07-09 FJ/4Runner, but when I called about what appeared to be a mix-up with the order, they assured me it was the same as the 10+ FJ/4runners. They claimed the only difference was the swaybar relocation bracket which they swapped out of the box.

I've heard the extended travels only provide an additional 1 inch of drop, so I was not expecting much, but this is actually less than that. However I am comparing OME to ICON.... Not ICON to ICON....

I know... I'm worried about a 1/2 inch?.... But I paid for that 1/2" darn it ;-)

These ICONs sure do look sweet. Some serious quality workmanship on this stuff. I just hope they go without ever needing a rebuild like the OMEs.

 

[mikey's2010SR5]

They will settle. And they are adjustable.

 

[Jeremy556]

I think it really is closer to 1/2in than 1in in wheel travel. My upper uniball is the down travel limiting factor on mine.

 

[st8rocks]

[MENTION=106176]wfo9[/MENTION] my extended coils are sitting in garage waiting to be installed if you want me to take some measurements.

 

[bimrunner]

I think it really is closer to 1/2in than 1in in wheel travel. My upper uniball is the down travel limiting factor on mine.

This^ and also the extended CO really only give more if you go to the TC LT kit.

 

[wfo9]

They will settle. And they are adjustable.

Not asking about ride height... Just the fully extended length of the shock.

 

[wfo9]

[MENTION=106176]wfo9[/MENTION] my extended coils are sitting in garage waiting to be installed if you want me to take some measurements.

That would be useful. I know it is hard to get it accurately, but I was curious about mounting surface to center of lower eye.

 

[wfo9]

I think it really is closer to 1/2in than 1in in wheel travel. My upper uniball is the down travel limiting factor on mine.

I seem to have a little more travel left in mine. Not much though. It would probably stress it to add more.

 

[wfo9]

This^ and also the extended CO really only give more if you go to the TC LT kit.

I think you mean LT coil overs, right?

 

[gm350reratliff]

It might only be .5" CO to CO but actual wheel travel will be more like 1". The limiting factor is usually the UCA though.

 

[bimrunner]

I think you mean LT coil overs, right?

There are no LT CO from Icon. The extended travel gives the max travel for the front suspension only if you go to the extended axle shafts, LCA and UCA from Total Chaos. Otherwise you only gain the little bit but will be limited by UCA uniball. You aren't maxing out the ext travel icons with even a stock replacement UCA and/or LCA. This was how MetalTech explained it to me and why they were running the TC kit in addition to the icon CO. They told me they got 2.5" additional wheel travel out of that setup. Not a cost effective route by any means, but it's currently the "best" option.

 

[wfo9]

There are no LT CO from Icon. The extended travel gives the max travel for the front suspension only if you go to the extended axle shafts, LCA and UCA from Total Chaos. Otherwise you only gain the little bit but will be limited by UCA uniball. You aren't maxing out the ext travel icons with even a stock replacement UCA and/or LCA. This was how MetalTech explained it to me and why they were running the TC kit in addition to the icon CO. They told me they got 2.5" additional wheel travel out of that setup. Not a cost effective route by any means, but it's currently the "best" option.

Oh, I see now, I assumed the LT kits included longer travel COs. I guess all the travel is just from the change in geometry/movement ratios.

Man, even a little down travel is extremely painful to get with IFS. I knew this, but I did not realize how little even the LT setups would yield. If I'm reading this right. For 2700 you could gain 2" of down travel and that does not include the axles or all the other headaches with the fenders and more up travel....

I just checked again. My ICONS measure 22.75" fully extended. My OMEs were 22.25". The thing I forgot was that I had a .25" top plate spacer on the drivers side of the OME to take the lean out. So, I did gain almost an inch with the spacer out of the equation.

The wrong part numbers had me a little concerned, but this seems about right.

 

[bimrunner]

Oh, I see now, I assumed the LT kits included longer travel COs. I guess all the travel is just from the change in geometry/movement ratios.

Man, even a little down travel is extremely painful to get with IFS. I knew this, but I did not realize how little even the LT setups would yield.

I just checked again. My ICONS measure 22.75" fully extended. My OMEs were 22.25". The thing I forgot was that I had a .25" top plate spacer on the drivers side of the OME to take the lean out. So, I did gain almost an inch with the spacer out of the equation.

The way I calculate it, each 1" of suspension movement up front costs about $1k. Lol

 

[Landy]

Britt I remember looking at your Runner. You have the Camburg ball joint UCA's, right? I wonder what the difference would be if you had Uniball UCA's. I just ordered my suspension so we can compare soon.

 

[gm350reratliff]

Britt I remember looking at your Runner. You have the Camburg ball joint UCA's, right? I wonder what the difference would be if you had Uniball UCA's. I just ordered my suspension so we can compare soon.

I have the "ET" Icons with the Camburg BJ UCAs as well. I would assume there could be a little downtravel gained by switching to uni-ball UCAs. At full droop, the BJ cup of the UCA hits the CO. It really isn't a problem so far though. At some point, I do want to install some different UCAs just to try it.

 

[wfo9]

Britt I remember looking at your Runner. You have the Camburg ball joint UCA's, right? I wonder what the difference would be if you had Uniball UCA's. I just ordered my suspension so we can compare soon.

I see no issue so far at all, in fact there is more room than some of the uninall UCAs I have seen. I think they angle it a little more for the ball joint design. I talked to several people with FJs running with this setup. Stock UCAs are obviously a no go.

 

[Landy]

I see no issue so far at all, in fact there is more room than some of the uninall UCAs I have seen. I think they angle it a little more for the ball joint design. I talked to several people with FJs running with this setup. Stock UCAs are obviously a no go.

I wasn't suggesting a "problem" with it, just was curious to compare. :thumb:

 

[wfo9]

I wasn't suggesting a "problem" with it, just was curious to compare. :thumb:

Right, I was concerned about this specific issue (ball vs uni-ball UCAs) going in to it, so I verified with several sources that there would not be an issue. A few people claim it can still be an issue long term, but I got verification from someone with 50k on the same setup that wheels it frequently. Only reason I'm going into the detail here is that I'm sure someone else will be looking for the same info at some point.

The funny thing is this post would have never happened if I had just received a box with the correct part numbers on it, LOL.

 

[wfo9]

I have the "ET" Icons with the Camburg BJ UCAs as well. I would assume there could be a little downtravel gained by switching to uni-ball UCAs. At full droop, the BJ cup of the UCA hits the CO. It really isn't a problem so far though. At some point, I do want to install some different UCAs just to try it.

I thought the same thing, but a feeler gauge proved there is a decent gap (although small) between the cup and the coil over (However, that gap may change as I adjust the pre-load).

At the moment, I don't see how a different UCA could change anything. The shock is fully extended... I'll report back after adjustments.

 

[gm350reratliff]

I will add that, even though the UCAs do contact the CO on my 5th gen, at that point the balljoint itself looks to have very little to no range of movement left. If the area around the uniball was smaller and the uniball had more range of movement, then possibly there could be more downtravel. There's only so much range of movement with OEM length UCAs though.