After lift- Is Tie Rod Supposed to Limit Droop?

My tie rod seems to be what limits my droop/downward travel. Is that normal? Here’s backstory:

Just installed 6112’s and JBA UCAs on the front/ Dakar leafs and 5100’s rear.

When I tried to install the 6112’s, I couldn’t get the lower arm to go down enough to fit it. Tried the bottle jack trick- on top of the stock UCA between the fender well and still nothing. I was on the verge of crushing the fender well so I stopped. I popped off the outer tie rod from the knuckle and thought “duh” ‍. That’s what was limiting the downward travel. At first I thought it might’ve been the stock UCA ball joint binding but I left that connected till I replaced it with the JBA.

Now that I have these things installed, and set at “2.4 inch lift” per Bilsteins instructions, am I correct that the inner tie rod is carrying the brunt of the force at full droop?

I also hope I didn’t stress anything in the steering by having the tie rod connected when I was on the bottle jack working against it for a bit. I know I won’t have that answer though. So far, no weird noises.

Also, I’ve heard of people using channel locks on their passenger side inner fender to gain clearance for the UCA bolt. I just grabbed it and was able to gently pull it out by hand. No scratching or damaged paint to worry about rust later.

 

Did you disconnect the antisway bar before lowering the LCA?

 

I did. Should’ve mentioned that. With the 6112’s set at #10/#9 clips, it yields a 2.4” lift on an extended cab. At that length, at full droop, the lower shock mount was still about a half inch off. Could only achieve it by popping the outer tie rod from the knuckle.

 

You need to loosen the LCA bolts....if you crammed a lift in there by forcing them down, they are now under a bunch more torsion and they will just tear. They need loosened, and retightened under the normal load of the truck. Thats how they work.

Also, no, tie rod ends do not limit travel at all, but when working on one side alone, disconnecting it does help maneuver around better.

 

Aren’t the bushings designed for full articulation? The outer surface is static, pressed into the arm and the inner hole should have a metal sleeve the bolt runs through/where everything pivots, am I wrong?

 

In my experience, what @iwashmycar said has always been the case. I typically replace shocks following this order of operations:

1) Remove tire
2) Disconnect sway bar end link
3) Disconnect tie rod end
4) Remove old shock
5) Loosen front and rear LCA bolts
6) Install new shock
7) Reconnect tie rod end
8) Reconnect sway bar end link
9) Install tire
10) Snug LCA bolts, place truck on its own weight
11) Torque LCA bolts to spec
12) Repeat this process on other side

All your work fighting with that bottle jack on the UCA likely could have been averted if those LCA bolts were loosened a bit

 

Much appreciated. I’ll loosten it up and retighten to unload anything bound up.

Based on what you’re saying, this caused resistance. However, it was like hitting a wall. It 100% was up against something like a wall. As soon as I popped the outer tie rod, it dropped.

 

Yes… outer tie rod ends can and do bind at full droop.

 

The middle sleeve gets clamped tight with the LCA bolts....all the pivot on a OEM bushing is twisting of the rubber bushing. Thats why they like to rust and seize to the LCA cam bolts...there is no movement there.

And like bkg just noted they CAN bind of course....at the end of the inner tie rod pivot angle...but its a decently large angle, so its not likely to stop a strut install in most cases.

 

The answer is yes, the stock tie rod (inner joint first I think) does limit down travel. Maybe some aftermarket brands have less range of motion than OEM, that may be what your situation is. The bushings on the LCA will resist travel, but won't stop it hard like you described. That's because the rubber is bonded to the inner sleeve on factory bushings. As they twist away from the position they were torqued in, they resist motion like a spring. One more reason to ditch them for aftermarket poly bushings that have full range of motion.
Order of down travel limit and solutions on a first gen:

1. Upper ball joint -> Aftermarket UCA. Ball or Uni-ball, either will travel more than the inner CV
2. Inner tie rod end. Might depend on the brand. The OE ones in my truck limited out just after the UBJ. -> Heim tie rods, or Total Chaos lower uniball conversion, which flips the tie rod to the top side and gains a couple inches of travel
3. Inner CV joint bind -> Long travel or aftermarket axles (RCV, custom Tundra inners, or TrakMotive)

 

I appreciate all the responses folks. I learned a few things about these trucks! I'll look into that lower uniball conversion. Not that I NEED it, but it seems like a pretty thin part to be taking the brunt of all that force.

I'm not sure if my tie rods are factory but I do know (think?) my CV's are stock "green axles".

Of course, something HAS to limit down travel. My next question would be, "What is best for limiting down travel if given the choice?" I know limit straps exist...

 

IME the inner binds before everything else on the different parts house brands I checked (Napa/Moog/AC Delco/Carquest all seem to be the same). if you ignore it they will bend lol. never broke one but its no fun ruining the alignment.

I added limit straps by welding tabs on the frame and repurposing the sway bar mount on the LCA.

As an added benefit, even though my CVs weren’t binding before the limit straps adding them has seemed to help prolong their life when wheeling locked/35s.

as always ymmv, no 2 trucks are exactly the same

 

As @Wulf mentioned, limit straps are the ideal component to limit travel. They will prolong the life of your inner CVs and keep any hard drop outs from damaging suspension components.