Long Travel BS Thread

let me repeat - i called them and asked them directly just a few mins ago, no insta, no fb, no twits

 

Edit. Beat me to it.

It looks like the marketing department and sales department have different notes then because halfway through the video they posted on Ig it says it will use any of the aftermarket coilovers you already have ...

https://camburg.com/shop/suspension...oyota-tacoma-16-trail-series-long-travel-kit/

https://www.instagram.com/p/CRRYnSbBkyj/

https://www.instagram.com/p/CRpYT9_Byp0/ This one is a little less clear but they say the following in the post "As you can see this kit runs most after market coilovers"

 

No, I won’t be calling them because I really don’t care that much. But so much of the hype on the kit came around not needing a new CO, which was stated by the guy in multiple videos as well as whoever is running the account. It seems like there’s just a disconnect at Camburg, so I’ll wait and see when it actually rolls out.

 

so…back to how is anything with a stock length CO and stock inner cv’s going to pull 13” of travel ?

 

First glance it looks like the lower shock tab is further inboard on the arm. The giant slapper bump stop might be playing a more active roll in dampening since that’ll increase forces on the shock? Totally just spitballing…I don’t see how it will work and after seeing the range of motion from the 934s I don’t see how a normal CV wouldn’t bind

 

Even a longer CO with a +2 and stock inner cv’s isn’t gonna pull 13” which I was mentioning earlier. The TC +2 pulls 11.5 and my 2.25 pulls 13 only because of 934s. I think it’s just a case of exaggerated numbers. Or maybe only 2wd.

 

So the 8” coilover in my kit is limited to 7.5” at extension and has 1.5” shaft remaining at metal on metal upper uniball. So only using 6” stroke, which really isn’t far off of an OE length. So it’s not completely ridiculous that they’re claiming to have made a +2 LT kit around an extended length OE replacement. Extended kings have a 5.75” stroke.

 

so i think Danielson aka @Dayman Karate might be on to something here…if you pulled that lower CO tab way TF in on the arm then a stock length CO could work huh…? but as someone else mentioned the leverage ratio would be fubar and need serious revalving…but although that may let a stock length CO provide more travel the cv riddle still remains…13” w/ a +2 kit on stock inners ?

 

That’s the main reason I think the 13” number is inflated, the CV’s.

 

How much travel do the Uniballs pull on a 2+ without CVs? Will the uniballs even attain 13”?

 

Close, but it’s “always sunny” where Dayman comes from haha

definite leverage boo boos and a tune/coil swap would negate any coil over savings rather than selling and buying new 8”. If the kit itself was half the cost they'd probably tap into the half ass LT market better. Which is I guess what they’re trying to do? Who knows. I agree, the thought of keeping some pieces is appealing at first, but upon further investigation seems like a negligible trade off.

 

varies, it depends on the style of the misalignments and if it has that flush bolt config vs the thru bolt style w/ misalignments on both sides ( blanking on the proper name for that ) that Solo kit you have will cycle a crazy amount of travel before the misalignments bottom out

 

With the JD Kit if I take the strap off it probably droops another 1.5” and the ball joint hits metal. Pretty sure the worm gear on the boot would hit the shock mount when it rotates too if the boot isn’t grazing the lower arm at that point

 

Hearing that gets me excited. I’m glad I sprung for the 934s for that extra bit of travel. Can’t wait to get this thing installed once all the parts get here

 

The ONLY way they are achieving more travel on a factory replacement coil over is by changing the angle at which the shock sits. The mounts had to be moved further inboard which would increase the motion ratio. But with that said, it should absolutely murder bump travel. Yet they are claiming it increases bump travel. Really this whole thing makes zero sense. I just can’t see how they can pull even 12”.

Also one thing to note here, shock angles are typically set in stone to an extent. At full bump, the shock SHOULD be at a 90* angle to the control arm. No more, no less because it can bind and bend shafts. So yeah. There’s either some serious magic here, or some serious fuckery.

 

Yeah Jerry straight up said it uses the oem coilover on Instagram.

@Supra4x4 they at least have a horizontal uniball spindle they could use for a big numbers race kit they produced for a one off 3.5 kit @Tacomoto23 bought second hand but I get why the r & d was put into the development of a kit that would appeal to a wider customer base in the current market where bolt ons and SOA bring in the $$$.

 

Pretty much it.
Make sure to close the hood and put in headlights/grill while mocking stuff up for the holes as well - I forgot about the hood when doing mine and the gap is a little wider than I’d like between the top of the fenders and the edge of the hood.
Definitely take it one hole at a time, pulling off and re mounting the front fascia for each one.

 

It was to my understanding from Camburg's posts that the kit uses a direct fitment aftermarket shock (stock length) which would imply they increased the motion ration, therefore the forces/leverage on the shock, to obtain the wheel travel. It does sound like their is some confusion internally at Camburg on the matter but I also don't care enough to waste their or my time calling. I'll wait until the kit is released and see what happens.

Can you elaborate on your thought process of how this would "murder bump travel?"

Also, shock angles are absolutely not set in stone. There are general rules and concepts to follow but you can't make generalized statements like that and expect it to cover all basis.

 

@EatSleepTacos use a cutoff wheel for as much as you can to keep the dust down before swapping over to a flapper wheel and a dremel sanding barrel for small detail oriented parts.

 

The more vertical the shock goes the more bump travel is going to be decreased if I am looking at this properly. And when you are utilizing the factory shock mount your angles are pretty well set in stone. Look at any kit out there. The majority of them place the shock at a 90* angle to the control arm at full bump. Changing shock angle absolutely will impact spring rate and valving as well. So its not going to be as simple as just bolting this kit on and going. Simple fact is, 8" coilovers are cheaper than any of the OE replacement kits. One could very easily sell their OE replacement stuff and pay for 8". To me this all seems like a gimmick when you look at the price compared to what you get. Most of the travel gains from this kit are going to be droop. Problem is the factory inner CV's wont handle a whole lot more than stock as its been covered by JD and many others.