Struts: Tundra BE5-6929
Springs: 05-06 Tundra Double Cab TRD (R/B, R/Y)
Setting: 1st notch
Comments: 2000 4Runner SR5 Highlander Edition 4x4 w/ elocker. Stock bumper, Dynamatted rear cargo area. Being that I changed two variables at once, there are two things I'm trying to isolate. Haven't had it in the dirt yet, so this is my street review. I have hit a few flood dips to get a feel whats its like, but nothing that would give me impressions over moguls or fast divots. The ride is great overall. I would describe it as firm, but not overly sprung. With more weight up front (plate/bar bumper, winch) it would be a great match. Compression dampening is definitely firm, but the Bilstein's digressive valving opens up on larger hits. The rebound is similarly balanced, and combined with the TRD spring, it lets the suspension spring into down travel quickly, for more travel when you reload the suspension coming down (I'll include my strut/wheel travel breakdown on the post below). There is enough dampening force to handle the higher spring rate of the TRD springs.
Someone had noted that it feels controlled, and that it cut the body lean quite a bit... I agree, but I attribute that to the higher spring rate. I was hoping the additional rate of the spring would allow me to not run a front sway bar, but in fast left corners through intersections, there is still a slight floaty body roll that presents itself. Could be my old, worn out front end links though. Overall, it definitely rides better on our local thrashed roads... now I'm just lusting after dirt. ; )
Size comparison; stock 4Runner front vs Tundra Bilstein 5100:
Length difference was around 3 1/2 inches full extended, according to the picture... Sounds too high. Check my numbers with what's below.
Comparison versus a stock 4Runner assembly:
Pre lift measurements (& some post-lift for reference):
Center of axle to flare: 19.5 with stock front/rear
Static length of strut/spring assy at stock height: 16 3/4"
Static length of new TUNDRA strut/spring assy at NEW height: 18 1/8"
Extended length of strut/spring assy: 17 1/4"
Spring length at OEM ride height: 10 1/2"
Inner lca mount bolt centerline to ground: 11"
Outer lca at lower shock mount centerline to ground: 9 3/8"
Space before front and rear bump stop: 7/8"
Dimensions, strut assemblies:
Stock front
Extended length (Strut mount to lower bolt centerline): 17 1/4"
Assembled spring length: 10 1/2"
Passenger side static spring length: 13"
Casing length (centerline bottom mount to top of casing): 12 1/2"
Strut diameter: 45 mm
Tundra 5100
Extended length (Strut mount to lower bolt centerline): 20 1/8"
Assembled spring length: 13 1/2"
Passenger side static spring length: 14 1/4"
Casing length (centerline bottom mount to top of casing): 12 13/16"
Strut diameter: 2", 46 mm piston
Suspension Travel Breakdown:
Just occurred to me I should be comparing the Tundra strut/wheel travel to stock units to get a baseline so I can get a better idea where I'm gaining and losing travel. Wth, right? Good thing I haven't tossed to stock units yet. Will have to measure them this weekend. They did mention 4.5" of travel in the article, which is 7.875 of wheel travel (1" strut travel = 1.75" travel at wheel). Sounds right, but I Should verify instead of assuming.
Looking at Steve's awesome reference chart, I can see using replacement Bilstein 2540 units won't give me accurate numbers to start with like I did with the rears. Check it out and bookmark it if you haven't:
http://www.sonoransteel.com/include...eel/TechArticles/1996-2002ToyotaRearShock.pdf
Too late. Ran with the numbers I had to see what it looked like. So here's what I found:
Big thing is 1.7" more travel at the wheel (~1" on shock). Also shifted the balance of up/down travel and picked up 2 5/8" more down travel, but it did cost me just under an inch of up travel. Small price to pay!
More to the point, the Tundra dimensions were 474 mm extended, 335 mm compressed length, leaving us with 5.47" strut travel. Using the ratio from the geometry from the article, that would mean that the Tundras are capable of 9.5725" of suspension travel at the actual wheel.
On a side note, the 4.76" Taco 5100 Bilstein shocks give 8.33" of travel on the front. 9.57" of travel from the Tundra sounds better now, doesn't it?
Tacoma 5100 front versus Tundra 5100:
But the Tundra only adds 1mm ~ 0.039" of down travel at the strut, or 0.07" at the wheel. So there's no need for limiting straps for down travel (or is there...). There is, however, ~17mm ~.67" more up travel than a Tacoma 5100. That is 1.17" of actual travel at the wheel (no wonder these struts work well for bigger lifts!). So i guess I'm coming to the same conclusion as earlier, except now I have a better understanding of what's going on numerically.
Final Takeaways:
- No limiting straps
- The suspension assembly hits max compression 1 7/8" sooner than the stock setup. Your stock bump stops are too short now to prevent bottoming out
- INSPECT FOR SPRING TO UPPER CONTROL ARM CONTACT! On my rig, the spring was dangerously close to limiting travel at max droop. I ordered some Light Racing UCAs to give myself more clearance.
- Without a plate/tube front bumper, and/or sliders, it rides VERY firm. Think like a 1/2 ton pickup. On small quick bumps on the freeway, the setup does ok but is firm and translates bumps trough the cab. Its like the spring rate is too high without extra weight, so you lose some small bump compliance. On offset bumps, the final spring rates are too high combined with the sway bar. It may be worth disconnecting the sway bar to see how it handles the ride. On low speed compression on road, On the trail, you have to romp pretty hard to get it to use its travel. Once I get a little more tread and can see where I'm going (rte calibrate the headlights), ill open it up a little more on the trail.
More pics on my build thread.
I tried to stick to the data that would be relavrnt to the thread. Hope it helps others. More measurements and pics in my build thread, link in sig:
