Inv4drZm's Build Thread

[Inv4drZm]

More work done this weekend. The LC200 rack is not suited for high speed desert wheelers its too wide especially with the clevis adapters. I've tried modifying the spindle and rack position in CAD it just doesn't work. A guy on Tacomaworld sells cut down tundra racks that are same width as stock Taco and I assume 4Runners which is a better option for the higher speed guys IMO, at $1k though vs $400 for LC200. I'm tempted to swap my LC200 rack for one. I wonder what Marlin's kit has in terms of bump steer, I don't see how you can modify the knuckle enough without running into the brake rotor to use the LC200 rack.

For those that like numbers, the best numbers I have gotten at the extents of 14" of travel is 3.5* toe in at droop and 1.5* toe in at bump, at each tire, with shorter stock tundra inner tie rods, assuming .5* toe in at ride height. I don't think you can achieve that much travel on stock tundra inner tie rods though.

 

[aemravan]

Killing man.. Love seeing updates on this. I've seen that cut down option for the tundra rack.. and yes.. at 1k it puts me back into the whole "if I do anything else it will just be a solid axle swap" camp because I feel like I'm already on the edge of the financial decision between keeping it IFS and just going full blown SAS (granted at a very large on-road drivability sacrifice) and calling it a day.

Obviously I think for someone like me these numbers are significantly less concerning being an on-road rig that won't see the extreme suspension cycling outside of the off-road rock crawling I do infrequently, and at that point having some not very desirable bump-steer and toe numbers isn't all that concerning. But yea, for high-speed desert guys this can, and certainly will, be an issue.


Just curious.. with the way everything sits now, is the wheel pushed forward any from the factory location? Or is the centerline the same but just out an additional 3.5"?

 

[Inv4drZm]

Killing man.. Love seeing updates on this. I've seen that cut down option for the tundra rack.. and yes.. at 1k it puts me back into the whole "if I do anything else it will just be a solid axle swap" camp because I feel like I'm already on the edge of the financial decision between keeping it IFS and just going full blown SAS (granted at a very large on-road drivability sacrifice) and calling it a day.

Obviously I think for someone like me these numbers are significantly less concerning being an on-road rig that won't see the extreme suspension cycling outside of the off-road rock crawling I do infrequently, and at that point having some not very desirable bump-steer and toe numbers isn't all that concerning. But yea, for high-speed desert guys this can, and certainly will, be an issue.


Just curious.. with the way everything sits now, is the wheel pushed forward any from the factory location? Or is the centerline the same but just out an additional 3.5"?

I think it depends on how you accomplish the solid axle swap, I'm sure it can handle the street just fine if we're talking the same tire size and lift as a comparable IFS. It just depends on how the links and steering is setup, it could ride like a factory jeep on 37s, assuming those handle OK.

I think the model is at +2" forward. Could swap my 37 for a 39 in terms of firewall clearance.

 

[4RunnerAquasport]

More work done this weekend. The LC200 rack is not suited for high speed desert wheelers its too wide especially with the clevis adapters. I've tried modifying the spindle and rack position in CAD it just doesn't work. A guy on Tacomaworld sells cut down tundra racks that are same width as stock Taco and I assume 4Runners which is a better option for the higher speed guys IMO, at $1k though vs $400 for LC200. I'm tempted to swap my LC200 rack for one. I wonder what Marlin's kit has in terms of bump steer, I don't see how you can modify the knuckle enough without running into the brake rotor to use the LC200 rack.

For those that like numbers, the best numbers I have gotten at the extents of 14" of travel is 3.5* toe in at droop and 1.5* toe in at bump, at each tire, with shorter stock tundra inner tie rods, assuming .5* toe in at ride height. I don't think you can achieve that much travel on stock tundra inner tie rods though.

Damn, was really hoping it would work out. Not much to crawl on in my neighborhood. Guess I'll look for another option. Spindles are useless for anything but Tundra OTEs now.

 

[Inv4drZm]

Damn, was really hoping it would work out. Not much to crawl on in my neighborhood. Guess I'll look for another option. Spindles are useless for anything but Tundra OTEs now.

I'll probably end up measuring my bumpsteer with my digital angle gauge and comparing it my brother's bumpsteer with the LC200 rack.

Just need to remove coilover and cycle the suspension.

 

[4RunnerAquasport]

I'll probably end up measuring my bumpsteer with my digital angle gauge and comparing it my brother's bumpsteer with the LC200 rack.

Just need to remove coilover and cycle the suspension.

My suspension is mocked up, just need to install the rack and the diff. But Im working w the TV crew on the Barrett Jackson in West Palm this week, so I cant get to it till Monday unfortunately. Like to see how you measure the BS so I can see just how bad it will be.

 

[aemravan]

I think it depends on how you accomplish the solid axle swap, I'm sure it can handle the street just fine if we're talking the same tire size and lift as a comparable IFS. It just depends on how the links and steering is setup, it could ride like a factory jeep on 37s, assuming those handle OK.

I think the model is at +2" forward. Could swap my 37 for a 39 in terms of firewall clearance.

My brother has a jeep on 37's. Obviously it is drivable on the street, but certainly a difference in the way it handles. The biggest difference I find is offroad comfort when you're going over dips on either side. The IFS eats up the bumps like no other, the solid axle throws you around quite a bit. To properly do a solid axle swap the way I would like to do it I would be nearing 15 grand.. me no likely that.. especially for something I dont actually need..

With a more affordable long travel kit for my rig though this is more than doable and would get me to my "ultimate" goal of having a unique-ish build and be able to run 37's without losing capability over 35's by limiting travel and all that fun stuff.

 

[Inv4drZm]

Saw these fender 'flares' the other day and at some point will try my hand at making a set. I've had a similar idea in my head for years and now that I see it, it doesn't look as ghetto as I thought it might. That and you can get an easy 4" if not 5" of flare, more than fiberglass fenders and without the added width. Rear set might be tricky on the 4runner but possible. Should be able to achieve huge uptravel with these as well as some protection. Stage 2 of my long travel plans...

 

[aemravan]

I’m working with n a set of fiberglass flares for the rear, mine are more (well.. completely ) for aesthetics rather than function. I remember seeing this build, it’s a local company to me, pretty wild.. I really like the doors.

On my McNeil racing fiberglass tacoma fenders they are 2 inch bulge and 2 inch rise and even with that it looks like my limitation for up travel currently will be the fender apron underneath the fender.. I have a bit more up travel left to the fender , and even if that was up another 2 or 3 inches I would be limited by the apron. Now I have no idea how much that will change on a +3.5 inch wider long travel.. if the tire clears the apron at full bump at that point then having higher fenders I can absolutely see a functional advantage.

I’m not complete against cutting out the aprons altogether and tubing the front end.. just don’t feel like redoing my snorkel route on the custom snorkel which sits just about as low As the apron behind it. For me, if needed, I could quite easily trim a larger radius arch into the fiberglass fenders. With that said I would absolutely love to see something like you posted some on a 4th gen.. I think it would look super unique and awesome.

I agree that the rear would be more challenging with the trim piece integrating into the door.. but it could be done.. I cut mine off the door to separate from the horizontal piece, but unless you want to modify the door panel itself there isn’t much clearance to be gained there. It would be much more reasonable to extend the links another inch or two and push the axle back quite a bit and just trim the bumper to accommodate the full bump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Inv4drZm]

I’m working with n a set of fiberglass flares for the rear, mine are more (well.. completely ) for aesthetics rather than function. I remember seeing this build, it’s a local company to me, pretty wild.. I really like the doors.

On my McNeil racing fiberglass tacoma fenders they are 2 inch bulge and 2 inch rise and even with that it looks like my limitation for up travel currently will be the fender apron underneath the fender.. I have a bit more up travel left to the fender , and even if that was up another 2 or 3 inches I would be limited by the apron. Now I have no idea how much that will change on a +3.5 inch wider long travel.. if the tire clears the apron at full bump at that point then having higher fenders I can absolutely see a functional advantage.

I’m not complete against cutting out the aprons altogether and tubing the front end.. just don’t feel like redoing my snorkel route on the custom snorkel which sits just about as low As the apron behind it. For me, if needed, I could quite easily trim a larger radius arch into the fiberglass fenders. With that said I would absolutely love to see something like you posted some on a 4th gen.. I think it would look super unique and awesome.

I agree that the rear would be more challenging with the trim piece integrating into the door.. but it could be done.. I cut mine off the door to separate from the horizontal piece, but unless you want to modify the door panel itself there isn’t much clearance to be gained there. It would be much more reasonable to extend the links another inch or two and push the axle back quite a bit and just trim the bumper to accommodate the full bump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I figured you would immediately trash your flares in anticipation for an Inv4drZm DIY fender kit. out:

If the inner fender limits travel then I'll remove or modify it as necessary, but it looks like with 40s or whatever size tire the Fab Fours taco has the inner fender is unmodified, but I need to watch the whole video on it and the axle width helps too.

My thoughts are the similar to yours on the rear flare. Remove the vertical part of the plastic clip-on flare from the door to make the transition look smooth, and cut the body higher and add the metal finishing strip to the edge. Move the axle back as necessary to center it with the new wheel well.

 

[aemravan]

I figured you would immediately trash your flares in anticipation for an Inv4drZm DIY fender kit. out:

If the inner fender limits travel then I'll remove or modify it as necessary, but it looks like with 40s or whatever size tire the Fab Fours taco has the inner fender is unmodified, but I need to watch the whole video on it and the axle width helps too.

My thoughts are the similar to yours on the rear flare. Remove the vertical part of the plastic clip-on flare from the door to make the transition look smooth, and cut the body higher and add the metal finishing strip to the edge. Move the axle back as necessary to center it with the new wheel well.

I wouldn't take the Fab Fours taco as a base line for up travel it's not necessarily a function over form type build lol. Everything I've seen on stuffing a 37" tire on the 4th gen up front at full bump without having to limit the travel involved at least beating the ever living hell out of the apron, and in majority of the cases it was just cut out altogether in favor of a tubed front.

As far as the DIY fender kit, don't tempt me I may very well go to a hybrid tacorunner fender haha

 

[Inv4drZm]

I don't think my build thread gets much traffic but does anyone think there is a market for fabricated spindles using the factory mounting points? In the $1500 range.

Good option for those with standard LT kits that need more strength.
Sourcing unbent spindles on Ebay:$300
Spindle gussets and double shear tabs: $150
Paying a welder: $250
Total: $700 for alternative

Unfortunately need at least 10 people interested in order to make it work financially.
Like this but for the factory style UCA:

 

[4RunnerAquasport]

I don't think my build thread gets much traffic but does anyone think there is a market for fabricated spindles using the factory mounting points? In the $1500 range.

Good option for those with standard LT kits that need more strength.
Sourcing unbent spindles on Ebay:$300
Spindle gussets and double shear tabs: $150
Paying a welder: $250
Total: $700

Unfortunately need at least 10 people interested in order to make it work financially.
Like this but for the factory style UCA:

I may be forced to look for another set if the BS spec is unacceptable and I cant use the 200 rack. Already opened mine up to accept the Tundra OTEs.....

 

[Inv4drZm]

More findings about bumpsteer: I messaged the guy at Dirt Designs (who builds fabricated spindles for multiple vehicles) and says he tries to keep bumpsteer under 1/2" on trucks with antidive (angled uca mounts like toyota) and 1/4" on trucks without antidive. He measures this from the center of the tire to the edge of the tire.

(Bumpsteer is impossible to adjust or screw up with typical long travel kits if they keep the stock spindle and steering rack)
Measurement in inches doesn't make a lot of sense to me vs. degrees but its what the automotive industry does. The measurement is taken from the distance between the front of the tire to the back of the tire when looking towards the grill of the truck. Or half that from the center of the tire to the edge of the tire.

Drumroll please, the LC200 rack gives over 2" of bumpsteer at full droop before adding the clevises to the width. 1" from center of tire to edge of tire.

I measured the stock steering rack and put it into the model, it gives around 1/2" of bumpsteer at droop and bump.....1/4" from center of tire to edge of tire.

 

[Inv4drZm]

I'll be selling my LC200 rack if anyone wants to buy it from me. It's probably fine for rock crawling because it's used in the Marlin kit but I like the geometry of the modified Tundra rack more.

 

[Inv4drZm]

Bumpsteer findings 2.0:

The last page of Marlin's install instructions confirm you can't run rotor dust shields with the RCLT kit and that the steering arm is 'longer than factory and positioned as close to the brake rotor as possible' to try and fit the LC200 rack and reduce bumpsteer. Some aftermarket rotors don't even fit and they need shimmed outward on RCLT according to the instructions. I'll re-run the numbers adding roughly 3/8" to the tie rod lengths but I doubt it'll reduce bumpsteer by much. I'm getting the impression RCLT isn't optimal for high speed wheeling at least with the LC200 rack.

 

[awhitney1]

Interesting observation on what you have measured for bumpsteer. So what about this Tundra rack that you speak of? Can you use it with stock width LCAs or have to do LT?

Bumpsteer findings 2.0:

The last page of Marlin's install instructions confirm you can't run rotor dust shields with the RCLT kit and that the steering arm is 'longer than factory and positioned as close to the brake rotor as possible' to try and fit the LC200 rack and reduce bumpsteer. Some aftermarket rotors don't even fit and they need shimmed outward on RCLT according to the instructions. I'll re-run the numbers adding roughly 3/8" to the tie rod lengths but I doubt it'll reduce bumpsteer by much. I'm getting the impression RCLT isn't optimal for high speed wheeling at least with the LC200 rack.

 

[Inv4drZm]

Interesting observation on what you have measured for bumpsteer. So what about this Tundra rack that you speak of? Can you use it with stock width LCAs or have to do LT?

I don't think wider control arms have much of an affect on reducing bumpsteer. So any width of rack is just as good or bad with any length control arms. I could draw it up and check though.

Here's the thread:
Modified Tundra Rack Swap Preorder | Tacoma World

 

[awhitney1]

Oh gotcha, I was worried about bump steer with a stock width Total Choas LCA with a LC200 rack. Would a modified Tundra rack be 'better'?

I don't think wider control arms have much of an affect on reducing bumpsteer. So any width of rack is just as good or bad with any length control arms. I could draw it up and check though.

Here's the thread:
Modified Tundra Rack Swap Preorder | Tacoma World

 

[Inv4drZm]

Oh gotcha, I was worried about bump steer with a stock width Total Choas LCA with a LC200 rack. Would a modified Tundra rack be 'better'?

Here's the data:

Same bump height for all arms fully stuffing a 35" tire up to the stock fender, but more droop for the longer arms. Unless otherwise specified degrees are toe-in at each tire. Double the numbers for total toe. Stock geometry spindle and rack position stayed the same. Assuming .5* toe in each tire at ride height.


My analysis: Bump numbers are all the same and close to ride-height toe. The more downtravel you have the worse the LC200 rack bumpsteer is. And for the love of Toyota don't put a clevis on a LC200 rack without optimizing the rack position and spindle geometry.

(With a 35" tire, 1* is equal to .6" of bumpsteer. My rookie guess is that under 1* to 1.5* or .6" to .9" is optimal for all driving conditions.)

I ordered from best to worst: