Sorry! 890 vs. 906 w/ 1.5" spacer

Qyota

Qyota

New member
I just put 906s on the rear of my '99 limited (which came with the tall coils). I got a slight lift (maybe 1") from that. At the same time I put in Bilstein 5100 shocks.

Now that I have put the Tundra TRD coils with 5100s up front, the truck is perfectly level when unloaded. While I don't mind that, I wanted a slight rake.

I have Daystar 1.5" poly coil spacers for the rear, should I just pop those in and call it a day? Otherwise, I have a line on some 890's for cheap...should I swap those in instead?

I guess I'm concerned that the 890s would be too tall. I like the ride of the 906s, and I don't know if the spring rate is terribly different between the two.

Thanks!
 
Register to hide this ad
The 890 has a spring rate of 190#, the 906 is 220#. Longer coils will flex better than shorter ones (890 @ 17.13"/16.73" vs 906 @ 15.35"/14.96").

If I were you and didn't do a lot of wheeling that requires max flex, I would toss the spacers on and see how you like it. That is free except for the time.

If you want max flex, buy the 890s and use them.
 
Gerdo said:
The 890 has a spring rate of 190#, the 906 is 220#. Longer coils will flex better than shorter ones (890 @ 17.13"/16.73" vs 906 @ 15.35"/14.96").

If I were you and didn't do a lot of wheeling that requires max flex, I would toss the spacers on and see how you like it. That is free except for the time.

If you want max flex, buy the 890s and use them.
Click to expand...

Gerdo, do you know how the lc coils would compare to the 906s and 890s as far as spring rate? Stiffer or softer? Specifically I have 7.75 wraps.
 
1985taylor1925 said:
So a lower number is stiffer Im guessing?
Click to expand...

The lower the number, the softer.
So a 180# spring will compress one inch with 180 pounds on it.
A 220# spring will hold 220 pounds before it compresses that same inch.

I had 9.25 wrap LC coils and had about 5" of lift. I changed out to 861 coils and I have a little more than 5" of lift. I changed because when loaded to wheel and camp, the LCs would compress another inch or two. The 861s only compress another 1/2 inch. This makes a huge difference for my type of wheeling trips. With my weight, the 861s still flex great.
 
Gerdo said:
The lower the number, the softer.
So a 180# spring will compress one inch with 180 pounds on it.
A 220# spring will hold 220 pounds before it compresses that same inch.

I had 9.25 wrap LC coils and had about 5" of lift. I changed out to 861 coils and I have a little more than 5" of lift. I changed because when loaded to wheel and camp, the LCs would compress another inch or two. The 861s only compress another 1/2 inch. This makes a huge difference for my type of wheeling trips. With my weight, the 861s still flex great.
Click to expand...

Ok. I asked because I always thought that 906's were the softer coils made by OME. But you said the 890s are 190, and the 906s are 220. So 906s are slightly shorter and stiffer than 890s. In that case I think the 890 is the coil Id like to replace my lc's with. Thanks for the info.
 
I'd throw on the spacers, and see how you like it. You already have the spacers, so you're only out an hour of your time to try it. You can always try 890's in the future if you don't like the setup you have.
 
Qyota said:
Good point. I guess I felt under the gun a bit since the 890s are on craigslist. Hey Mr. Taylor - maybe you should get 'em! The guy lives in Oregon (WI). OME -- Old Man Emu 890 Rear Coil Springs (pair)
Click to expand...

Buy the 890s. Try the 906/spacer combo. Either keep the 906/spacer combo or the 890s. Sell the ones you don't use.

Back to a point I made earlier. When you wheel, do you flex the suspension to the max? If so, the 890s will serve you better. If you do mild trails, the 906/spacers will be fine.

Note: A 1.5" spacer in back will yield 1.5" of lift.
 
Give the 906's/spacers a try it'll surprise you. I'm running that set up in my rig and I find it rides great. I do a bit of trail riding and haven't had any issues too speak of. takes no time at all to slip them in and try too.
 
jamess.sullivan said:
If I were you and didn't do a lot of wheeling that requires max flex, I would toss the spacers on and see how you like it. That is free except for the time.
gu1.jpg
Click to expand...

Dude, what the hell is up with your posts? All of them are a quote of someone else with a ? after it. Are you just trolling? Or do you not know how to post? Or...?
 
Gonna give the spacers a try. So, will I need to remove the shock bottoms to get enough flex to do get the spacers in?

To answer the other question, I don't do much off-roading. Just wanted new suspension components with a slight lift for light towing, an of course the look! So, articulation and travel are not a concern.
 
Qyota said:
Gonna give the spacers a try. So, will I need to remove the shock bottoms to get enough flex to do get the spacers in?

To answer the other question, I don't do much off-roading. Just wanted new suspension components with a slight lift for light towing, an of course the look! So, articulation and travel are not a concern.
Click to expand...

Ya, basically jack and support it from the frame on the rear, unbolt the lower shock mounts and swaybar endlinks, and have a buddy push down on the tire on one side so you can weasel the spacer into place, then do the other side, and put it back together. Easy 1hr job taking your time, and no alignment required. Make sure you support it high enough in the air you have room to push the tires down, 1.5" is a pretty good sized spacer.
 
Right on. The only other question is that I should remove the rubber cone for this install, correct? Seems that's the only way this will work. So, in effect it will be about a 1.25" lift, which would be darn near perfect.

Thanks again for the help. Just got the front end aligned this morning, so things are looking good there.
 
Qyota said:
Right on. The only other question is that I should remove the rubber cone for this install, correct? Seems that's the only way this will work. So, in effect it will be about a 1.25" lift, which would be darn near perfect.

Thanks again for the help. Just got the front end aligned this morning, so things are looking good there.
Click to expand...

My Surf didn't have the cone bump stops that go inside the coil, I had arched pucks that were beside the coil and bottomed out on the axle tube, so I can't answer that one for you.
 
Qyota said:
Right on. The only other question is that I should remove the rubber cone for this install, correct? Seems that's the only way this will work. So, in effect it will be about a 1.25" lift, which would be darn near perfect.

Thanks again for the help. Just got the front end aligned this morning, so things are looking good there.
Click to expand...

Don't the spacers slip over the cones? I had some trimpackers and the cones held them in place. If not, yes, remove the cones and only use the spacers.

The cones are Jounce Bumpers. They actually act as overload springs with the stock suspension. I still have mine but have cut off 2 donuts each so they don't limit my compression. Earlier years didn't have the cones.
 
Qyota, just so you're not expecting it to be too easy.....it's actually kind of a pain to get springs and spacers stuffed in there. It's easier to install just springs (even if they are lift springs and taller) because you can move them, wiggle them, etc...and they are just one piece. You will have to flex the rear axle A LOT to have room to fit 906's and spacers under there without compressing the 906's at all. Getting the springs in place while keeping the spacers in the proper place at the same time can be a challenge.


All that said, I'd try to the 906/spacer route as well. Seems like a decent combo for height and spring rate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 449 (members: 3, guests: 446)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,316
Messages
3,554,111
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top