Zach's 2013 DCSB Build

Haha, did not mean to type that twice

 

It would start getting close at that point. I have read mixed reports.

With the 2.0" shocks -
4.5 BS Wheel and 33" x 11.5" tire rubbing is pretty minimal if at all
4.5 BS Wheel and 35" x 12.5" tire spacers are needed to get rid of the rubbing
3.5 BS Wheel and 33" x 11.5" no rubbing
3.5 BS Wheel and 35" x 12.5" tire rubbing is pretty minimal if at all

With my setup I have 3.5BS wheels with 33 x 10.5 tires so I know the 2.0s won't rub and am pretty sure I can get away with the 2.5s as long as I keep my same tire size. The problem is if I ever go up in tire size from here, the tires are going to be wider simply because anything taller isn't offered in a narrow version. With wider tires and the 2.5" Diameter shocks I would be rubbing the shock body, or need spacers. Spacers with a 3.5 BS wheel is a little too much for me. My wheel bearings would hate me.

 

I got you, hindsight is 20/20, plan for larger tires

 

Yeah haha

 

I got the BAMF kit and 2.5 kings to match it and plan on doing 4.75 back spacing wheels with a 1.25" wheel spacer and 285/75/17 tires. I don't have any of it installed but I'm going off of what people have said and also sorta guessing that it will all fit with no rubbing If I were you I'd do the 2.5 shocks and just take a little more effort making them fit with no rubbing

 

Your 4.75BS wheels with a 1.25" spacer will essentially give you the 3.5BS wheels I have now. You will probably be able to fit the 2.5s with a little rubbing under full flex but any bigger of a tire and its going to rub a lot. With some things like a plastic fender or a cab mount you can modify them to make more room. In this case the shock body and the tire are the things in conflict and there is a certain point with this kit where no amount of planning is going to reduce the rubbing. If I ever go to 35" tires the 2.5s will simply not fit unless I have 3.5BS wheels and a spacer. I refuse to run spacers, especially on wheels with a low BS to begin with. So basically when I buy shocks I either commit to running 33s and get the 2.5 shocks or I get the 2.0 shocks and know that I can make them work with 35" tires.

Or I could forget about the BAMF kit, cut up my bed, build a cage, do a SUA conversion and put in some 14 or 16" x 2.5" shocks.

 

I'm with you on hating spacers but going to match the front 2+ lt if I go that route won't be exactly the same width but I'm wanting to run the smallest spacer I can with out rubbing I personally like the bigger piston and oil capacity of the 2.5's and that's why I went that route even knowing I might rub the shock body a bit... You could always do the tundra rear axle? I believe it's .5" wider but would help to clear the 35's

 

Yep the capacity and piston are the things drawing m towards the 2.5s. I have some cardboard rolls from our large plotter at work that are in the 2-3" range I am going to play with this weekend to see about spacing. A little CAD (Cardboard Aided Design)

 

Let me know how that goes! If you come close to rubbing with your wheel setup then I'm 100% going to rub also.

 

I was wondering if 2.5s were possible since I have 3.5bs but I guess its the 35s that will be the problem. I wonder if the Pelfrey option offers a closer clearance for the shock to run 2.5/35s


Also thanks for the extra hardware, I put it to use for my existing bars and got rid of the phillips head bolts

 

I would talk to @SconnieHailer about the pelfrey kit. He has more experience than most I would guess. No problem with the hardware, should be a nice upgrade.

 

good deal. Yeah the torx is nice to have someone move on if they get curious, ill likely get some tamper proof bolts at some point

 

Another valuable write-up by @Crom

https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads...-4x4-trd-off-road-with-speed-bleeders.368080/

Keeping this here for when I install my rear brake lines.

 

Just ordered my rear shocks from @Downsouth Motorsports now the waiting game begins. Ended up getting the King 12" stroke remote reservoir 2.0s. The 2.5s were tempting but after mocking it up with some cardboard tubes and looking at clearances I would rather have the 2.0s and be able to articulate well than have the 2.5s and always be worried about rubbing them or them contacting the shock buckets under articulation.

I did decide to get compression adjusters though. I asked Micah about them and he said you can expect a 15-17% increase in compression per click. Since the truck is a daily driver during the week with an frequent heavy load in the rear to carry materials for racks and then a test truck/camping vehicle on the weekends it will be nice to fine tune the shocks between loads.

Now I am looking at bump stops. Trying to decide if I should keep it simple with super bumps, or get some hydro bumps.
Input from anyone who has experience with both? @SconnieHailer

 

The super bumps are nice and the best option if you're not going air bump imo. I really like my air bumps, i get into them alot since i have about 2.5" of uptravel before they touch the strike plate. You'll have to get used to the clicking when you get into them but it's not bad. I run 105 psi in mine to help with the weight, 90 would be good with an empty bed. The air bump really makes the bump zone plush and I love that about my rear setup. It's an easy decision if you can afford to do it and done mind hacking off the stock bump stuff.

 

I noticed yours are 4" limited to 2.5" what is the benefit of that vs doing just a 2.5"? Do the 2.5" stroke ones actually start to bump earlier?

 

I'm not really sure about that one. I just know that's what the pelfrey kit called for so that's what i got. I think it's just how it mounts on the frame and having the longer body bump allowed it to be mounted better? Good question for @Pelfreybilt @Socalduckslayer

 

Well, been to busy to do much to the truck. I did end up going with super bumps for the rear. Decided I didn't really need the hydro bumps for my use. Maybe down the road one day.

So today my son and I drilled the Toytec Ubolt flip and tapped the holes to mount the super bumps. Still need to use the spindle sander to notch the mounting plates for the super bumps to fit the ubolts washers and nuts but the drilling and tapping went well.







On another note. I have pretty much decided to get a set of new tires for the truck. I have resurrected my trailer build and I would rather use the 255 85 16 ST Maxx on the truck for the trailer than buy a brand new set for the trailer. I have one tire on the truck that is plugged and patched now so this is a good way to get rid of that potential liability.

Now I am deciding on tires. 255 85 16 has been a great size but prices have increased by about $40/tire since I bought mine. Cooper ST Maxx has been great as well but they have also gone up in price. I have been looking at the 285 75 16 size but I hate to add width to the tire without gaining any height. Since the 255 Coopers are 32.8" high they are almost the same as most of the 285s.

@SconnieHailer has me looking at the 295 75 16 too but the tire choices in that size aren't as plentiful as the 285s. The KO2s are nice but I am also eyeing the General Grabber AT2s. They come in a load range D which means they are lighter and they also are only about $175/tire.

I need some other opinions though.

 

I wheeled with a guy on at2's this last summer on a pretty rocky trail. The tires did great but he didn't escape without a few nice sidewall gouges. Not sure how theyed compare to the ko2 in that same situation. 285 is a great size, 295 has been great too so far. Hardly seems bigger than the 285 MTR. Gonna need some extra castor to clear a un cut rear fender/wheel well with the 295.

 

Yeah that's my only problem with a D range tire. I know as soon as I get them I will beat them up and wish I had the E. I also just got the truck to the point where the tires clear everything so I hate to switch sizes again.