ICON & King 2.5s

Bumbo

Bumbo

New member
I currently have a lift but am exploring various options to take me to that next level of performance...

I am actually pretty content (for now) with my 6112 front suspension, so my immediate needs are for a rear suspension upgrade where I am running a 5100 as I feel thorough field use that there is room for improvement.

Has any owned actually owned both, or switched from one to another?

If so, I would really like to hear your experiences with both. Or perhaps why you switched from one brand to another and what your driving applications are.
 
Register to hide this ad
Bumbo said:
I currently have a lift but am exploring various options to take me to that next level of performance...

I am actually pretty content (for now) with my 6112 front suspension, so my immediate needs are for a rear suspension upgrade where I am running a 5100 as I feel thorough field use that there is room for improvement.

Has any owned actually owned both, or switched from one to another?

If so, I would really like to hear your experiences with both. Or perhaps why you switched from one brand to another and what your driving applications are.
Click to expand...

I just switched from 5100 to icon2.0 in the rear. The difference is staggering. So much more dampening. And so smooth. It's makes me want to upgrade eventually to the icon 2.5 rears down the road to see what they feel like.
 
The only difference between the Icon 2.5 and the King 2.5 is the brand experience/ colors.

Each manufacturer will valve them however you want.
 
Major difference between the two manufacturers:

King: progressive
Icon: digressive

Some prefer one vs. the other. There are a metric shit ton of threads about it across the forums. I would give you my preference but I've only ran progressive Fox 2.5s (which I loved). My icon 2.5 suspension is waiting to be installed once it warms up!
 
I don't have the experience with either to back this up at all either but I'd imagine they are all pretty similar given they can be anything you want (so many specs to change at your request). If you're talking off the shelf part numbers it seems like people prefer King the most, just from reading various forums too much. I chose Fox myself and don't regret the cost for the improvement over the 5100's at all. Not to knock on Icon but I think they sell more because they advertise more and can be found on sale almost all the time. Plenty of members here have had great experiences with them. So yeah, pick your color :pound:
 
Ya... I've already done a ton of reading but was hoping to hear from someone who has actually owned both...

All I know is that I dont want a 2.0 anymore, and for the longest time have been eye balling some of the higher end ICON stuff but after really thinking about it my 4Runner spends a good deal of time in the desert on dirt and sand and started to think King shocks might be a better overall setup for what I do.

At slower speeds I think I might enjoy the softer more plush ride and as the shaft speed increases it would generate more force with a progressive shock... Seems to make sense for desert driving to me but I have no idea what its on-road manner is going to be like either in comparison.
 
Bumbo said:
I currently have a lift but am exploring various options to take me to that next level of performance...

I am actually pretty content (for now) with my 6112 front suspension, so my immediate needs are for a rear suspension upgrade where I am running a 5100 as I feel thorough field use that there is room for improvement.

Has any owned actually owned both, or switched from one to another?

If so, I would really like to hear your experiences with both. Or perhaps why you switched from one brand to another and what your driving applications are.
Click to expand...

I went from 5100s + Superflex to 2.0 extended travel Icon remote reservoir + Metal Tech LT. The difference was immediately noticeable. The 5100s suck with anything more than a 1.5" lift in the rear. I abuse the hell out of those 2.0s in the rear and with just about 25k miles on them I have not had an issue with shock fade or leaks. I will say that the metal tech springs ride better with a fully loaded rig vs empty, but even empty it's still an awesome ride on/off road.
 
Drunner97 said:
I went from 5100s + Superflex to 2.0 extended travel Icon remote reservoir + Metal Tech LT. The difference was immediately noticeable. The 5100s suck with anything more than a 1.5" lift in the rear. I abuse the hell out of those 2.0s in the rear and with just about 25k miles on them I have not had an issue with shock fade or leaks. I will say that the metal tech springs ride better with a fully loaded rig vs empty, but even empty it's still an awesome ride on/off road.
Click to expand...

Would you happen to know the spring rate of the metal tech rear springs?

I think stock is 180
ICON is 200
My OME 2" rear coils are 260 lb.

Even if I change the shock I have my concerns that I may have ended up with a but too much rear spring rate.

Originally I thought I would really like the firmer ride and the overhead to carry load overland style, and would keep adding weight including off-road passengers, but I have sort or tapered off any dont think I will be adding bumper or skids... even then I think it still might be too much spring.
 
Bumbo said:
Would you happen to know the spring rate of the metal tech rear springs?

I think stock is 180
ICON is 200
My OME 2" rear coils are 260 lb.

Even if I change the shock I have my concerns that I may have ended up with a but too much rear spring rate.

Originally I thought I would really like the firmer ride and the overhead to carry load overland style, and would keep adding weight including off-road passengers, but I have sort or tapered off any dont think I will be adding bumper or skids... even then I think it still might be too much spring.
Click to expand...

This is what I found on the Metal Tech site...

" The bottom half the coil is rated at 250lbs of spring rate and the upper portion is at 105lbs of spring rate. With this combination the spring can stay in it's compressed position at ride height and expand out to it's full free height on down travel. "

That being said, I don't feel that the rear is overly stiff. I still hit my bump stops easily going over speed bumps (although I do hit them hard) at work, it just so happened that I was finally completely loaded down in Death Valley a couple weeks ago and I really noticed how much smoother the ride was. That's 5 days worth of food, beer, water, gas, camping gear, wood, and then some. I still had to get up to about 50 mph on Racetrack to smooth out that road though and I was aired down to 20 psi. That road sucks, nothing will make that road feel nice.
 
[MENTION=144483]Bumbo[/MENTION] you can't get the Metaltech 2" springs anymore. Just a new 3" spring is all they offer.

My old 3" Metaltechs I have no complaints about. Rides fine even without a rear bumper and extra gear.
 
4loco said:
I just switched from 5100 to icon2.0 in the rear. The difference is staggering. So much more dampening. And so smooth. It's makes me want to upgrade eventually to the icon 2.5 rears down the road to see what they feel like.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I switched form icons to 5100s in the back half a year ago and prefer the 5100s. the digressive valving on the icons made for a harsh ride day to day around town.
 
Rocket61 said:
Interesting. I switched form icons to 5100s in the back half a year ago and prefer the 5100s. the digressive valving on the icons made for a harsh ride day to day around town.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the 5100 also have digressive valving?

You comment makes me scratch my head... the valving on a 5100 is very street-centric and offers a stiffer than factory ride.
 
Bumbo said:
Doesn't the 5100 also have digressive valving?

You comment makes me scratch my head... the valving on a 5100 is very street-centric and offers a stiffer than factory ride.
Click to expand...

Confused me too. The Icons are definitely smoother than the 5100s. Might be the 895s he has on the back making it too stiff.
 
Rocket61 said:
Interesting. I switched form icons to 5100s in the back half a year ago and prefer the 5100s. the digressive valving on the icons made for a harsh ride day to day around town.
Click to expand...

How harsh? Like unloaded half ton truck harsh?

I have 2.5" Icons all around, fronts have CDC and 700# springs. I have the CDC adjusted all the way firm with no extra weight other than skids and sliders, and find the ride fine. A little "firm", not "stiff" or "harsh" for a DD. Psi at 35 with LT Duratracs.

Then again my 21 year old butt dyno could be miscalibrated as I havent found a huge difference in CDC settings either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 396 (members: 4, guests: 392)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,307
Messages
3,554,056
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top