Front 5100 re-adjustment

[sinks88]

Hey folks....

I have my 5100's set at 2nd to the top (1.75)

I would like to go all the way to 2.5....Will I be able to take them off and move the ring without any issues? or will I need new snap rings or what not?

Also....Can I get a definitive answer on if I will need UCA or can still remain stock up front? (SR5) (and still maintain alignment)

 

[Simpleman74]

if the snap ring was installed properly the first time and you take it off properly, YES you can reuse it... I personally would get new ones

 

[jbstrd]

Hey folks....

I have my 5100's set at 2nd to the top (1.75)

I would like to go all the way to 2.5....Will I be able to take them off and move the ring without any issues? or will I need new snap rings or what not?

Also....Can I get a definitive answer on if I will need UCA or can still remain stock up front? (SR5) (and still maintain alignment)

You can keep the same snap rings as long as they are not damaged. They shouldn't be though.

You should be able to get within spec, or darn close to, with 2.5" of front lift. But, you won't be able to push the caster to +4 like a lot of us have done with aftermarket UCA's.

 

[sinks88]

Pic for funs

Pic of my burrito

 

[toku58]

You can compress the coils and move the clip without any need to purchase a new one.

As for UCA's? My opinion is YES! You will need UCA!
But it really depends on how you like your truck to drive??
If you don't mind it being a bit "Squirrelly" at speed? Then you can get by without UCA's.

The only definitive answer is how you'd like your truck to handle!

I have a thread that requested Alignment number with the Bilstiens set at 2.5.

People were unable or barely able to get the CASTER into specs.

Ideally the bigger tires you install the higher in the spec range you'd like you CASTER to be. (It's all relative)

 

[sinks88]

You can keep the same snap rings as long as they are not damaged. They shouldn't be though.

You should be able to get within spec, or darn close to, with 2.5" of front lift. But, you won't be able to push the caster to +4 like a lot of us have done with aftermarket UCA's.

So many choices in UCA's....I dont even know where to start

 

[Simpleman74]

NO you dont need aftermarket UCAs.... I am right at +3 cast on sock UCAs...

 

[toku58]

So many choices in UCA's....I dont even know where to start

I would recommend SPC UCA's they offer the best bang for your buck!

 

[jbstrd]

So many choices in UCA's....I dont even know where to start

Yea, I still run the forbidden LR UCA's due to the adjustability they offer. But, I have been through two different bushing designs and I just purchased the new greasable ball joints since mine were the old design with 38K on them. Haven't had any catastrophic failures. Others will tell you to stay far away from them due to the issues that have come up, but if you maintain them properly they should not fail......in theory.

Bottom line is, all UCA's will require more maintenance than stock UCA's.

 

[jbstrd]

FYI OP, SPC UCA's are the same as the LR UCA's I mentioned.

 

[Stangboy]

I just did this yesterday. Pulled the shocks and went from 1.75 to 2.5. I compressed the spring enough to reset the snap ring without pulling the assembly apart. Funny thing is, it's less twitchy now than it was at the lower height. When I originally put the shocks on I had it aligned at the 1.75 height. I haven't had it realigned yet, but it seems to track better now. Weird.

 

[jbstrd]

I just did this yesterday. Pulled the shocks and went from 1.75 to 2.5. I compressed the spring enough to reset the snap ring without pulling the assembly apart. Funny thing is, it's less twitchy now than it was at the lower height. When I originally put the shocks on I had it aligned at the 1.75 height. I haven't had it realigned yet, but it seems to track better now. Weird.

Hmmm, only thing I could think is that the stiffness from the extra pre-load makes it feel more planted. I would definitely go in for an alignment though since your camber numbers may eat your tires.

 

[toku58]

FYI OP, SPC UCA's are the same as the LR UCA's I mentioned.

Nice! I didn't think anyone here knew that those UCA's were originally called "Light Racing" I had the original run on my Tacoma. I had issue back then with articulation of their ball joints.
They were able to isolate it to the original batch and how they were built.
Their customer service was outstanding back then. Hopefully they continue with their great service!

 

[jbstrd]

Nice! I didn't think anyone here knew that those UCA's were originally called "Light Racing" I had the original run on my Tacoma. I had issue back then with articulation of their ball joints.
They were able to isolate it to the original batch and how they were built.
Their customer service was outstanding back then. Hopefully they continue with their great service!

Yea, seems like they are called both around here. I had good luck with their customer service when they had the two different bushing design changes. They sent them out to me free of charge and no questions asked. They wouldn't warranty the ball joint change, but I feel it was fair since mine had almost 40k miles on them without issue.

 

[Stangboy]

Hmmm, only thing I could think is that the stiffness from the extra pre-load makes it feel more planted. I would definitely go in for an alignment though since your camber numbers may eat your tires.

I'm thinking the toe setting would probably have more to do with tire wear, but I'm keeping and eye on them until I can get in for an alignment check.

 

[Aussiedogs]

I just did this yesterday. Pulled the shocks and went from 1.75 to 2.5. I compressed the spring enough to reset the snap ring without pulling the assembly apart. Funny thing is, it's less twitchy now than it was at the lower height. When I originally put the shocks on I had it aligned at the 1.75 height. I haven't had it realigned yet, but it seems to track better now. Weird.

Alignment has changed. The big one is it has more toe in then before lifting, makes it track better but hard on tires. Just a thought.