Rethinking my SAS

[SV_Dude]

Here's an option (post #7 and #10): 1998 4runner build - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum

It might work for ya.

I have looked over that build a time or two and I have never seen those slider boxes. They are a pretty interesting idea. You know how well they work or any longevity issues with them?

Also, with there only being one set of spring bushings for the rear instead of two (upper and lower), how does that affect the flex? It will obviously put a LOT more stress on the bushings and the bearings may get a lot of wear and tear (premature failure).

 

[downpour11]

I have looked over that build a time or two and I have never seen those slider boxes. They are a pretty interesting idea. You know how well they work or any longevity issues with them?

I don't know anything about them, nor have I seen them before lol. But yeah, definitely an interesting idea. FOG, you might shoot him a PM asking about them. I'm pretty certain that is [MENTION=47896]ADH8796[/MENTION]'s friend.

 

[ToyoTech]

IFS is the way to go but it does cost money, much more money to build. im not against IFS. since i love my LT and how low i sit.
if your willing to spend the money to constantly upgrade your IFS since its tough to buy it all at once, its worth it. if money is tight, SA is the only option.

you really cant do a leaf SAS and keep it low. even if you build your spring pack, the spring pack would pretty much be flat to get the low stance you want. this will result in lots of neg arch and broken spring. the hanger alone will add an inch to an already low hanging frame.

if you want to keep it low, you would have to link it but that will cost much more. i think a built link will run you around what a completely built ifs would go for.

i know its not the same but look at how many ultra 4 vehicles are going IFS

 

[nevada]

Frenched means to cut into the frame and mount the springs inside of the frame. Then you would reinforce the frame around the mounts so the frame isn't weak in that area. For a front spring setup that is not necessary because the front hangar can be mounted an inch or two in front of the frame. The rear shackle is already drilled into the frame so there really isn't anything to "french" into the frame for the front.

The rear can be frenched in on the frame though. Did you think that my 87 was high? I think that your 4runner is no lower than my 87. So if you're comfortable with that height then there is no reason to start cutting into your frame.

right, that would be for the rear.
and for the front, you can drill the shackle holes towards the top of the frame, instead of the middle, and run extra long shackles.

keeps you low, and still lets the suspension work.

 

[85toy4runner]

the 84 and 85 4runners frame will sit an 1 1/2 or so lower than the IFS frame . so if your not apposed to 1st gen , than that may be a way to go

 

[Footofgod]

the 85 4runners frame will sit an 1 1/2 or so lower than a IFS frame . so if your not apposed to 1st gen , than that may be a way to go

I'd love a clean 85 1st gen, but I'm just a wee bit invested in my current project.

 

[Hyde802]

the 84 and 85 4runners frame will sit an 1 1/2 or so lower than the IFS frame . so if your not apposed to 1st gen , than that may be a way to go

* Higher. Solid axle frames are higher in the front, not lower

 

[SV_Dude]

you really cant do a leaf SAS and keep it low.

That depends on your definition of low. If you're talking a frame height of 20" with 35" tires, then you're hard pressed to accomplish that with leaf springs. But if your definition is 25-26" frame height with 35" tires then that is realistic and easily doable. Heck, I think we can get his frame height down to 23-24" on his 35's.

Either way, let's not forget that he already has a 2-3" lift. Adding a solid axle doesn't mean it's going to be 3" higher than what it already is. We can even make it a few inches LOWER than what it is if he wanted to get extreme with it. We can always cut the frame just before the front body mount and raise it up and build some new motor mounts to accommodate the new frame height. We can also do the same for the rear. Doing that we are essentially raising the suspension into the vehicle more. The military hummers are designed the same way. That's how they're able to run 37" tires and still have a vehicle that is VERY low. Granted, these vehicles are IFS but the concept is the same.

 

[85toy4runner]

* Higher. Solid axle frames are higher in the front, not lower

sorry your right , I meant higher in the front of frame, its arched higher

 

[brifri01]

I wanted to mount my hanger higher but when doing so you point your pinion at the ground. So unless your clocking the the balls or cutting the perches off and re welding. Your efforts in keeping it low result in a pinion angle with vibrations or getting into rocks.

 

[Cartzo]

Total Choas LT! To say IFS is inferior to a solid axle just irritates me. They are both better for their type of use. If you like to crawl over big old rocks and take technical trails then maybe a solid axle would fit you better. But if you like to haul ass on rough trails and drift some corners then LT IFS will take the corners much faster than a solid axle. Like the people above said though, Total Choas still gives about a 3 inch lift and widens 6.5 inches. To me, the wide stance looks mean

 

[SV_Dude]

Here's a good thread to keep you busy for a while. Tons of pics and excellent examples of low toyotas. Some of them are on leafs, some on linked suspensions.

Low riding toyota pics - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum

 

[92-SR5]

Original plan was (is) Trail Gear 3" IFS eliminator kit with solid axle (which I have). After seeing 92-SR5's SAS (which is bad ass, don't get me wrong) and another friend locally, I don't want to be that high.

Honestly it irritates me how trail gear labels their IFS eliminators. They do note that hanger placement affects overall height, but my "3 inch kit" is more like 7 inches in reality. Don't get me wrong, I love my runner, but I never planned on it being this tall. Now I'm stuck saving up money for a leaf conversion. I originally wanted to do the sky's 2.5" kit, but I happened to come across the trail gear one like $450 cheaper than sky's kit.

I don't know if you have considered this, but swap it trying to be low as possible. You won't be able to have hi steer, but you just have to know not to bash it in on a rock. Look at the 5th post down on this.
sas without high steer - YotaTech Forums

 

[downpour11]

The pic in that link is just scary ^^^ that'll get bashed in no time.

 

[92-SR5]

The pic in that link is just scary ^^^ that'll get bashed in no time.

Notice the scratch on the tie rod? haha
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that the same tie rod placement as stock toyota or even jeep axles?

 

[downpour11]

Notice the scratch on the tie rod? haha
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that the same tie rod placement as stock toyota or even jeep axles?

Yeah it's just a basic low steer setup. EB's, ford, chevy, dodge, same low steer. I don't know why you'd run a low steer when you can drop $350 on a high steer setup that comes with rods and pitman arm. Cheap insurance, and you know you'll upgrade to high steer sooner or later.

 

[Rockdawg84]

Yeah it's just a basic low steer setup. EB's, ford, chevy, dodge, same low steer. I don't know why you'd run a low steer when you can drop $350 on a high steer setup that comes with rods and pitman arm. Cheap insurance, and you know you'll upgrade to high steer sooner or later.

Rob,

the reason to run low steer is that histeer requires at least 3 inch lift springs otherwise the tie rod will hit the spring and cause binding. Really the low steer is a good way to go for a lot of people. Some of the advantages of running low steer are that they are much less prone to arms coming loose, there is not binding of the tie rod on low lift springs. the down side is that the tie rod takes a lot of abuse and you loose some cool factor. But honestly some beefy .250 wall tubing will hold the truck up without bending. I have a friend who was like the 3rd SAS in the country on a Toyota and is still running low steer with 37's and has wheeled some of the hardest trails that aren't secret undertaker trails and never had a problem.

 

[downpour11]

Rob,

the reason to run low steer is that histeer requires at least 3 inch lift springs otherwise the tie rod will hit the spring and cause binding. Really the low steer is a good way to go for a lot of people. Some of the advantages of running low steer are that they are much less prone to arms coming loose, there is not binding of the tie rod on low lift springs. the down side is that the tie rod takes a lot of abuse and you loose some cool factor. But honestly some beefy .250 wall tubing will hold the truck up without bending. I have a friend who was like the 3rd SAS in the country on a Toyota and is still running low steer with 37's and has wheeled some of the hardest trails that aren't secret undertaker trails and never had a problem.

That makes sense, especially with leafs. I was thinking the tie rod would be too prone to bashing and just gets in the way. Good info sir :thumb3:

 

[KidVermicious]

I thought about this a lot when I had the '86. Low Range sells a pitman already set up for an LC80 tie rod end, and a reamer sized for the LC80 TRE studs - you could ream out your stock spindles, build a new tie rod from DOM, and run LC80 outer TREs on the outside and on the pitman. SDORI/4Crawler makes a set of bushings for the stock idler, or you could drop coin on a Total Chaos idler, or put SV's mad fabrication skillz to work and make your own from DOM and greasable bushings and run an LC80 tie rod end there too.

I'd rethink the limited slip in front though. Half the times I needed it I had a front wheel unloaded and it was useless anyway. If I had that to do again I'd save up for ARB for sure.

But no matter what you do, the CV shaft is still going to be your weak link, and unless you go to Porsche or RCV shafts there's not much to be done about that except get good at changing them. Some good ideas in this thread, have you considered a 3link SAS? Or if not, like SV says, run the front hangers high, french the shackles, notch the frame for your steering, you can get an SAS just as low as you want if you're willing to do the fab right. Or just rock the IFS, there's nothing wrong with that.

So you know me and my random habit of spitting out ideas with which I have done no research. What about using the IFS off a T100 or Tundra? Are they any stronger, or still just IFS?

The T100 front diff is the same diff you've got, just with longer CV shafts. That's why the long travel conversion works - extend your control arms to match the T100 cv shafts, and poof, long travel.

I guess if I keep the SAS plan, I want it to look like this:

I said god DAMN. That's sexy as hell. But why stop there, when you could have this?

.

 

[BucknutBob]

Just thinking out loud here--I wonder why no one has suggested the old (shhh!) Jeep design of putting the axle above the leafs. Is it that tough to mount the Toyota axles to the top of aftermarket leafs? I mean if you're dead set on having it sit lower, that might be a way to accomplish the goal.