WJ lift kit q's

Cody

Random Quote Generator
Supporting Member
Location
Gastown
built WJ's are rad. Period.

if you don't think this is sick, then you are lame.
 

Attachments

  • LIB1.JPG
    LIB1.JPG
    21.3 KB · Views: 12
  • LIB2.JPG
    LIB2.JPG
    29.4 KB · Views: 13

Bear T

Tacoma free since '93
Location
Boulder, mt
yes, sick when built right, but just slapping in a lift isn't right. I've helped build a few and the ride like sh*t. But i've seen a few built right that made me drool.
 

grandmaster

Let the build Re-begin
Location
St. George, Utah
yes, sick when built right, but just slapping in a lift isn't right. I've helped build a few and the ride like sh*t. But i've seen a few built right that made me drool.

That can go for any rig though. If they are built right they are gonna perform well either offroad or on.... Yeah if you throw a 6" with short arms on the ride quality will be terrible. I am with cody, I have seen some sick WJ's that have been built very well, and some of the best lookin rigs on the trail IMO...
 

Grim

Well-Known Member
Location
Roy, UT
yes, sick when built right, but just slapping in a lift isn't right. I've helped build a few and the ride like sh*t. But i've seen a few built right that made me drool.

do you know what made it ride so bad? spring rate, shocks, short arm...? for what we use our WJ for , i dont want to go any bigger than 3-4" over stock, and i dont want to waste time and $ with pucks. from what im finding out there in the line of "bolt on kits" nothing looks like it would ride nice . i might just have to pice one together
 

STAG

Well-Known Member
IMO
I'd say the #1 reason is people using their stock short arms... This gives a completely wrong caster angle and it will not track very straight and you will have to keep your full attention to the steering wheel. Also the whole radius-travel aspect of long-arms transfer the wheel travel more "vertical" than in an "arc"..

#2 reason would be spring rate as some manufacturers try to compensate with a heavier spring rate when you go bigger because so many rigs get engine swaps and have heavier bumpers/winches etc...

#3 reason would be trac-bar (panhard bar)... people using the stock trac-bar mounts have terrible angles on lifted rigs. Your trac-bar should be horizontal...
 

STAG

Well-Known Member
:rofl: Okay true true... well the rear trac-bar should be horizontal at least... :D .... and if you were running hi-steer your drag-link should be pretty close to horizontal lol
 

Cody

Random Quote Generator
Supporting Member
Location
Gastown
:rofl: Okay true true... well the rear trac-bar should be horizontal at least... :D .... and if you were running hi-steer your drag-link should be pretty close to horizontal lol

It's a WJ so there is no trac bar in the back ;)
 

malcolmzilla

Registered User
I put a 2" spacer boost on my 04 Overland GC, then went to an Ironrock 3" lift with coils, new track bar and Bilstien 5100's, rode well, no vibes, a bit firmer handling than stock but that's an improvement.

I fit 265/70R17 tires with a bit of mudflap trimming and minor rubbing at stuff and wheeling. I used the stock control arms and as a result was about 1.5 degrees short on caster. It wandered a bit but not bad.

You can get balljoint eccentrics that will get your caster back, or adjustable lower arms. I considered oblonging the LCA bolt holes on the on the axle tabs a bit and welding a washer on the outside to get that bit of caster back on a budget.

Also note that the Overland 17" wheels are a bit wider than the standard 16's and have a bit more backspacing, meaning the rear shocks will rub due to the larger body on them. I used 1/4" wheel spacers to provide a bit of relief. I also had a bit of rear shock clunk in cold weather that I was never able to resolve with the adapter hardware they supplied, M10 IIRC.

Also at 3", my ebrake lines were serviceable, but getting maxed.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0370.jpg
    IMG_0370.jpg
    186.2 KB · Views: 4
  • IMG_0371.jpg
    IMG_0371.jpg
    178.9 KB · Views: 7
Last edited:
Top