jped1981

hey TC,

I didnt mean to say that the shock and axles were on the same link, just wondering which one is more is more perishable the shocks or cv?

Yota82

The problem I have with the Downey kit compaired to other kits on the market is that the Downey kit uses the 3 weakest points of IFS, which are ball joints, tie rods and torsion bars. I have said before that if you take a stock ball joint with a 3 1/4" wider TC kit, and cycle it through 12" or 13" of travel, you will not like what you see because the ball joint will try to rip itself apart. If you take a stock ball joint on a 2" wider Downey kit and cycle it through 12" or 13" of travel, the same thing will happen just a little worse than the TC kit. 12" of travel on a wider kit will not move as much as a narrower kit with the same travel numbers. T-100 axles are $50 a pop and are fairly easy to change on the trail if you needed to. I am not so big on running expensive 930 CV's just for the sake of running a 2" wider kit. The only reason why Downey uses a 930 CV is because (as stated with the ball joint comparison) the CV angles will be at more extreme of an angle. A stock CV would not take that kind of movement. Yet again the same compairison can be made with the stock single shear tie rods as compaired to a double sheared heim. A heim is capable of more extreme movement while the stock tie rods are basicly a ball joint for the steering. Stock travel for 86-95 IFS is just shy of 5" of wheel travel, all those components were made for that and IMO the logic that Downey uses in their advertising campaign is not very logical at all, more like a bash on other companies success. As far as the workmanship on the Downey kit, I am sure that is top notch but the a arms themselves have never been the weak point of IFS, the other components are. I have seen the lower a arm on a Gen II Total Chaos break in half but it was not a structural problem, it was caused by a lower ball joint failure.

jped1981

Hey yota 82, thanks for the insight, you seem real knowledgable on this long travel stuff, but I have some questions. Please understand that I havent looked at these long travel kits very long, and am simply looking for feedback and comments from what I heard from Downey.

I understand your idea on the uniball vs ball joint system, but will that apply to the "mega travel ball joint"? Downey showed me one of the ball joints used in their kit and how it was remanufactured by grinding some of the (for lack of a better term) socket that holds the ball allowing for more range of motion. I believe that the uniballs would have a better range of motion overall, however for the 12" of travel, do you think the mega travel ball joint would be sufficient? I also understand how the double sheared heim steering works and how it is stronger, but how necessary is it for a milder long travel application like the downey kit? Do you still forsee problems with it? I guess I still dont understand how the steering gets messed up with long travel... tie rod or heim links from a pivot arm (pitman or idler) to the spindle and pulls on the spindle pivoting it. I see a problem at full compression, and full droop, but I figure for a lighter duty off road situation where one might not always experience steering at full compression or droop all the time, is the heim joint necessary? to As far as the torsion bars, I like them because they are a way cheaper alternative then a coilover kit. I would love a coilover kit, but I dont think my mild usage justifys the need for it. If I can get 12 inches of travel on a torsion bar setup, I guess then why not? I guess it seems that the design criteria for the downey kit vs a total chaos or JD fab is very different. Total chaos and JD fab seem to be more "extreme", hence coilovers.

The thing I dont like about Downey, I dont like the way they push the 3 inches wider as being hideous....I think thats more a matter of opinion than a fact. I would assume 3 inches would provide stability. However they say that there kit can work well on narrow trails... but then you figure both extend the wheel base and the TC kit is wider by about 2 inches overall, is it really that big a difference?

Your thoughts?

jped1981

By the way does anyone know when the downey kit came out vs the TC gen 1 caddy kit? These seem the most similar since the ATS and ESB stuff went out of buisness.

norcalsvx

the downey kit is pretty new TC has been around for a while

elripster

What's up with ball jonits being the weak link? I had about 13" of travel on my 89 with a modified 4" kit and ball joint spacers. The ball joints were replaced when I installed the lift but they were fine 6 years later.

Also, the stock torsion bars held up great so I'm not sure why the would be a "weak link" either. In fact, due to leverage characteristics, they actually function better than coil overs when it comes to absorbing harsh impacts. These same characteristics make them less good for trail flex but you can win 'em all.

Downey's kit might have other drawbacks but it's a bit hard to see ball joints and torsion bars as one of them.

Frank

jped1981

Ripster,

13" of travel and no issues with the ball joints? That makes me question the use of uniballs. I guess perhaps maybe there not that necessary.

According to Total Chaos, they recomended I use a billet torsion bar anchor at the uppercontrol arm due to the fact that the increased leverage of the wider arms would snap the anchors. They said it happened on several of their vehicles. I was assuming that any kit that used wider arms may have this problem due to the leverage caused by being a couple inches longer and tire back spacing.

What did you use to get your 13" travel? Did you use a longer arm kit? What kind of driving do you do?

So far this has been a very informative thread for me and how these long travel kits work. Please feel free to post your opinions and technical knowledge here. Thanks

elripster

Well, what I did was very common years ago when those 4" bracket kits were all the rage. SAS was not even out yet, only custom jobs. Basically, you could purchase or in my case fab your own LCA bumpstop brackets. Remember, the arms and more importantly CV's can travel as far up as they can down. Add some ball joint spacers to that and you have a large window of travel.

Now, due to the increased ride height, the IFS flexed like crap on the trail making the truck tippy. However, it could soak up a hell of a hit with all that travel. Could the anchor hardware at some point have failed? I'm not sure, I replaced it because it had fozen up on my old truck and it never gave me issues after that.

The longer control arms are without a doubt the way to go. And, the increased leverage will stress hardware more so failure there is more likely. That added leverage makes the IFS flex much better though and the width icnreases stability so it's a win win.

One note about ball joints. If you run a set for the life of a truck then add a lift which expands the travel window significantly, you will certainly ruin them quickly. They wear in and will have a bit of a lip where the material that enters the socket meets that which does not. If you start with a fresh pair then you should be Ok as that lip will never form.

Frank

jped1981

Hey Ripster,

It seems like you are a fan of these new LT kits. From what I hear from Downey, Total Chaos and JD fab are great kits, but they are overkill for the regular joe public. So he designed his kit without uniballs or heim steering and uses a bilstein shock with torsion bars. Please tell me what you think

http://www.downeyoff-road.com/Suspen...s/1986-95.html

By the way, I was wondering why you thought the torsion bars were better than the coilover. I know they definitely win on price, and should be a good setup for my purposes. Perhaps im reading you incorrectly, but it sounds like you think that the t-bars are better performing. Please explain.

Yota82

A common misconception about coilovers are that they ride better. They do not. T-bars are more plush and provide more comfort, mainly on road. I ran t-bars for years and broke about 8 of them in my day. It was never the actual bar that broke, but the mounting, the sockets and the hardware. I wish my old computer didn't crash or else I would post the pics. It got to the point that I carried extra t-bars and sockets on the back of my truck because I didn't want to be stuck in the middle of no where woth a broken t-bar. It saved me on a few occasions. I thought that a coilover would ride better, boy was I wrong. The only time they are better than a t-bar is in ultra rough terrain and big hits that you don't have time to hit the brakes. There is no doubt that a coilover is more durable than a t-bar. Less moving parts, simplicity. The only way to have problems with a c/o is to break a spring. I have never seen that happen, ever. I am going on 2 and a half years on my c/o's with absolutely no problems. I put LT on my truck in 2002 with t-bars and bjs so in 3 years of that I went through bj's about every 3 months, 8 broken t-bars and 2 different sets of tie rods. Tie rods and long travel scare the crap out of me. I refuse to allow my tie rods to rip apart and have no control of where the truck is going to end up. LT wears out those 3 components at an accelerated rate. My advice is to start small and turn it into something big. It is highly unlikely that you will tear up all those components at first but just know that if you beat on them for too long, it will happen. My truck went through the cycle. If I could do it all again I would have spent a little more money and done it right the first time. I think the Downey kit will do you good. Upgrade as time and money allows.

On a side note. I was born and raised around Downey products. My dad used to be sponsored by Downey in the early and mid 1980's. It has always been a good company and the people are usually top notch. They have always had their own way of thinking, which is a good thing. A little too conserveative for me though. There are and always be Downey products on my truck, but I am one of the toughest critics on their suspension components and misleading advertising. Just remember that this is just an opinion from experence. I have been following Downeys LT set up for about 3-4 years now. I knew it would be available at some point. I ran across one of the prototype kits in the Mojave desert 3 or 4 years ago. I talked to the drivers who were cool but I wasn't sold on the whole concept, although I think that it is a very origional idea.

elripster

I have to be careful when commenting on the Downey kit because I have not run it. However, if there is one glaring problem it is with their torsion bars. They are way too stiff and kill the potential flex of their kit. I bet their kit with stock bars would flex very well on the trail.

Now, on the fast stuff, that's a different story, stiff torsion bars are good. However, that is where that lone Bilstein shock is going to have an issue. You really need a remote resevior shock to disipate heat quickly.


Here's the catch with t-bars Vs. coils. With coils one can vary the thickness and number of wraps to change the spring rates. With t-bars you are stuck with a fixed length. You can increase the diameter to make it stiffer, but you can't easily make it longer which is what you need to do to decrease the strain on any one point of the bar. Therefore, coil kits win in that department.

I suppose if the torsion bar kits got popular, one could design a stronger mount which could be located farther back along the frame railt to accommodate a longer torsion bar. However, the kits would have to get popular first which might not happen if something like this is never designed so you have a chicken/egg scenario there.

For someone who is not hardcore desert wheeling, I suspect the Downey kit with stock torsion bars would make for a nice compromise as far as price and capability are concerned.

Frank

tc

If your coilovers are riding worse than tbars, your tuning must SUCK.

elripster

There's a good chance the coil over kit might have had too much damping. To high of a spring rate will do it too but typically you'd know that was the case because the front end would be jacked up way high with no down travel. Actually, that can kill ride quality too all by itself.

Frank

ewong

Some things to remember having been around watching all the IFS stuff...

(the following is opinion on what happened, not "facts")

Toyota HiTrac IFS comes out in 1986.

I've been told (un-verified by me) that they have (had) a patent on the torsion bars to the upper A arm - which is why no one else does it (aka Nissan etc).

At first - the only lift kits are bracket style (TrailMaster with the Orange spindle spaces, another brand I cant recall the name of right now)

Around 1988 Rancho comes out with the odd ball longer / bent upper A arm lift.
They relocate the upper pivot point "closer" to the engine and bend the A arm to allow clearance around the frame.
Me thinks it puts a very odd twist on the torsion bars as the bar "moves" instead of rotates.
Downey at the time made "billet" style A arm sockets for the torsion bar....

By 89/90 SuperLift comes out with the VERY weird/tech bracket drop/ moved upper A arm to outside the frame rails but liked to the stock torsion bar location with a actuator rod... looked way complex.

Around this time Downey makes a hybrid kit - the Rancho upper A arm and their hybrid axles...
-- inner 930 CV
-- splined axle shafts
This allows the "longer travel" than stock (the OEM tripod tulip has a limited amount of plunge travel).

BTW - the OEM uses a inner Tripod tulip CV because it has less drag than rezeppa (930) type.
Oh - the outer CV is arleady a rezeppa type.

Note - so Downey is now making/stocking a 930 inner CV adapter in the early 90s...

Around 1995 WestCostOffRoad (WCOR) - which I understand was a "professional" (as in Doc/Lawyer not pro off road racer) comes up the realization that
-- T100 axles will bolt up.. IF
-- longer A arms are made.
He has upper and lower A arms fabbed up.
He uses the stock lower ball joint cast piece by drilling out the rivets on the lower A arm..

Once the "idea" is out (he doesn't want to be an off road fab shop) everyone takes it and runs...

So - WCOR was the "first" with a publicized pro-type.
All the rest (Total Chaos, ESB, ATS etc) all "borrow" the general idea and add their tweaks (which BTW are not "insignificant")

By the turn of the century - Rancho ? stops ? making the upper A arm leaving Downey w/o the parts to sell their "kit"... so they develop... their new kit

jped1981

These are some newbie questions,
1) Questions on the shock system: Does the remote reservoir provide any sort of extra dampening? If its there to dissipate heat, how hot do these things get? Is it possible to run a remote reservoir on something like this (if needed)?

2) Ewong, you pointed out an interesting point that these kits are a way to use up old stock. however even if its just using up old stock of rancho arms, what do you think about the additions? (megatravel ball joints, and retaining stock steering?) I think these additions keep the truck easier maintenance for a daily driver. (greasable zerk fittings and suppsely "highly perishable heim steerig?).

3) I was reading an article regarding torsion bars, and apparently there are progressive rate torsion bars i guess by using different cross sections throughout the length of the bar. have any of you guys seen something like this for our yotas?

4) The total chaos gen 1 kit uses torsion bars. So I called Total Chaos to see what they thought about the downey kit. They say that there kit rides so much better than downey and that there is no comparison. hence the name "caddy kit." However, I wonder if this kit is using torsion bars, wouldnt they ride similar? Assuming that a 2.5 remote reservoir shock is valved the same as the bilstein. (Can this be done?) neglecting heat dissipation, would they ride the same?

5) Yota82, I appreciate your input alot because you seem to have alot of experience with downey parts being that your father was sponsored by them. What do you think about Ewongs theory of the recycled arms and axles?

Thank you again to all who are reading this, I believe all your opinions and presentation of facts have really enlightened this thread.

jped1981

Ewong, after reading your comments about the downey kit and how many people have ran it in another thread, see how this kit is brand new and how not many people have ran it. Perhaps it would intrigue you to know that this kit has been off the market all of 2008 due to the fact that the control arm fabricators have been unable to manufacture the control arms. Hopefully someone who has the kit can chime in. I have tried searching through the TTORA forums and desertrides forums, and it seems that no one has posted on the Downey long travel kit either. However, I was very amazed at how the downey company truck ran. as it stands, it has the Long Travel Kit, downey headers, exhaust, and armor. It sits on 33 inch tires with 4.88 gears. It was a totally different truck than how my stock 88 4x4 runs. I read in a previous thread that you have the downey pro desert kit and you have issues now with changing oil. Other than that maintenance issue, how well has the dual bilsteins held up for you? Do you think that having dual bilsteins solves the heat dissipation problem without running a remote reservoir?

jped1981

Ripster, you were talking about the stiff downey torsion bars vs the stock bars for flex. You said that in a go fast situation, the stiffer bar is better. I guess this newb question comes up, are you saying that you dont need the flex in a go fast situation? Or is it that it will only flex in a go fast situation? I am assuming that the strength of the larger bars is necessary for the added eccentricties in a long travel situation so a larger diameter bar is always better. Your thoughts on this?

elripster

The main difference between crawling and prerunning is the magnitude of the forces on the vehicle. When crawling, the main force is from the weight of the vehicle which is quite low compared to landing from a jump or absorbing a large bump at speed. To illustrate, think of a hammer. Set it on your hand slowly and it does not hurt. Let it fall on your hand and it hurts a lot.

What this means to the spring is that you often cannot absorb enough energy in a soft spring when driving fast through the desert. There the thicker stiffer spring is good. On the flip side, when going slow, you can't apply enough force to flex the spring much so you lift wheels a lot more and lose traction.

So, to conclude, a large diameter is not always better, in fact for most of us it will kill what little flex our IFS has. It will certainly make the truck ride more stiffly which is not usually desirable for ride quality. Whith longer arms, you need to realize that the added travel will allow the stock t- bar to absorb more energy. The added leverage will increase the compliance and help to keep tires on the ground when crawling. Depending on how you wheel, you might decide you need a stiffer t-bar, or if you added winch/bumper combo you might also need the stiffer t-bar. However, for most of us the stock bars are stiff enough if not too stiff.

Frank

jped1981

Hey ripster,

Great post really cleared things up about the bar stiffness and ithe of road uses. Downey sells an econo kit which is 2" rear springs and their 26 mm torsion bar they say not to lift the front beyond 1.5 inches. Would this kit be ok for a desert running situation?

I was reading an article about tbars, and they concluded with something to the effect that a smaller diamer tbar cranked up 1.5" would be very stiff, however a larger diameter bar cranked up 1.5" would not be as stiff, untill it was cranked further around 2". They liken it to a small tire inflated to its max. that would be a rough ride, howeverif you take the same volume of air and put it inside a larger tire, the ride would be much softer. So far ive read that the downey torsion bars are way to stiff etc. Is this because they are just overcranking these things? Is the tire analogy sufficient to describe the spring actionin a torsion bar?

jped1981

Ripster or anyone else who can help,

My truck has a bent upper control arm due to an accident, so I will most likely just get the grand slam kit, but with your off road experience, what do you think of the downey pro desert kit?

48686-SPD Torsion Bars 48186
86-88 Pro-Desert 2" Rear Springs 48279-2
Front Shocks (two) 8434D
Rear Shocks (one each) 8166D & 8231D
$528.96
Shock info: front shocks Doetsch -tech shocks
"Pre-Runners outperform the competition because they have actual race course features not found in other shocks. They use an upgraded shaft for extreme toughness. They have a built-in nylon shaft wiper above the oil seal, boots not required. They include tough polyurethane mounting bushings. They feature “high velocity speed sensitive” valving which reacts to terrain condition much quicker than normal velocity sensitive shock absorbers. In fact most popular shocks go from soft to brutal on the slightest bump - - - not velocity sensitive at all!! "

Again im asking your opinion based on my usage probably some day trips, but more a daily driver. Im thinking this thing might not ride to well because it will have the same large torsion bars with none of the extra leverage as with the long travel kit. But, I believe the doetsch tech shocks are suppose to offset the stiffness? Can that shock do that much? It will definitely not have the same wheel travel as the grand slam kit, but is it a viable option?

How do you think this kit would ride on road? The long travel kit was very comfortable, any experience with these shocks? I know the bilstein brand name and I know those are great shocks. What about these doetsch tech ones? Ive read customer service complaints on this forum, but assuming that the shock works as its supposed to, is it any good? Can you explain how and what shock valving numbers are?