Newb question on UCAs

Hi everyone, so I am not new to tacomas but am new to proper builds on them... I am curious on the purpose of aftermarket UCAs. I have an 03 xcab offroad and i put a 3 inch lift on it a couple months ago. I recently put 33" tires on and im under the impression that if i go higher then i will need them. Why is that and what do they do? Allow more travel?

 

More travel and you usually can get better alignment specs. Even on a 3" lift it is nice to have them.

 

I currently have bilstein 5100s on the front with eibach coils and a aal in the back with 5100s as well. the front shocks are set lower so its probably more of a 2.5 lift. if i were to put coil spacers on top and blocks on the back for a little more lift, would UACs be enough for that kind of travel?

 

I don't know what Eibach coils you have but I have the 3" Eibach 620lb coils w/ the adjustable 5100's on the lowest setting. And it gave me 3" of lift by just using the coil. I had mine on the 2nd setting for a little bit, to get more height but the ride was terrible! So I lowered it back down. It said not to pre load the 3" Eibach springs but just like anything else I had to learn the hard way. I have had the Camburg UCA's on before I put on the Eibach/Bilstein combo. I also have regular 5100's w/ an AAL in the rear of the truck. Although I just bought Icon ext travel coil overs a couple days ago to replace the front combo I have now. So I'm not sure what size coil spring you have but if it's set lower and you only have 2.5" w/ a 3" coil something is off. I wouldn't put coil spacers on top of your set up and you'll need to find out how long your rear 5100's are before you go higher cause you could blow out the shocks. Stacking stuff is always a bad idea

 

that's a good point! You may be right on the coils... they did say they were 3 inch coils. I bought the whole kit from toytec

 

That's

That's where I purchased mine from too. About a year before that, I just wanted to get a 3" lift any way I could so I bought a ToyTec 3" spacer lift. It came with a 2" aluminum spacer and another 1" spacer that you sandwiched together in between the stock coil overs and the shock tower. That's when I purchased the rear 5100's & AAL. Spacer lifts suck so I kept the rear of the truck the same and bought the Bilstein / Eibach combo. But lots of people run 3" lifts without aftermarket UCA's. I got lucky and bought them for $641 from downsouthmotorsports.com. I looked just recently and they're a lot more expensive. But now I'm going to try the Icon ext coil over and it says you have to have aftermarket UCA's too

 

I definitely don't have the $$ for UCAs right now lol. I would like to get a little more overall lift somehow but I dnt think I can do that without UCAs... :/

 

3" is max lift with factory suspension geometry.

 

I just got back from a shop that does the best alignments on modified suspension. They say the caster could use another 2 degrees, which Ucas would provide.

 

The primary purpose of adding a suspension system is not to net lift.
And even if that might be a by-product of that install.
It is not the intended purpose of upgrading the suspension syst.

--------------

But the powers that be and whom sell their wares to unsuspecting folk
are in it for the profit and tend to offer their buyers what they want.
Regardless as to whether it is right or wrong.

Same scam used on those whom think that 92 octane
improves their engines performance with a computer controlled fuel mapping system.

Truth...
If the engineers designed their engine to run on 97 octane...
spending more coin for higher octane fuel is nothing more then wasted money.

92 octane fuel may be required for high compression performance engines/vehicles...
But it's not advantageous on lower compression engines/vehicles
that have been tuned for(programmed) and are noted by their manufactures.

So in other words:

Follow the mfgr's fuel recommendations and stop wasting your money.

-------------

Adding an improved suspension is about improving control
and the handling of that particular vehicle likely sporting oversized
and heavier tires.
Doing it right also improves the vehicles ride quality and stability.
Thus being more comfortable for the operator when driving.

If lift is all one is after... then just put the junk on stilts
and ride around with a buckboard like suspension.
Matters little if the vehicle is just a street queen that never utilizes off road terrain.

The real purpose of a performance suspension - lift
is to take advantage of pushing the suspension's articulation window
to it's maximum allowable capability when lifted...
while staying within its mandated(engineered) alignment specs.

IMO the majority of folk have only one concept in mind...
and that is to increase their vehicles ride height.
And tho' I feel this is fubar'd thinking in my world...
it's not my junk so I normally ignore what others do.

The purpose's of using a Uni-Ball UCA is threefold maybe four.

1. The Uni-ball UCA can articulate farther then a std. ball joint,
thus allowing for more droop when an extended length CO is utilized.

An ext. length CO is not required to net an improved ride and alignment setting.
But will allow for slightly more droop which is avantageous off road.

The engineers whom designed this suspension did not push the susp's articulation window
to its max. capability because reliability is more important then pushing that,
but many folk attempt to push that envelope as far as they can.
And often screw things up more... then getting it right.

I would recommend that 2.5" lift be max for 4X and 3" lift be max for PreRunner's (2wd).
Pushing lift above this will likely cause premature wear/damage to some components and CV boots.

Diff drops are purdy much useless IMO. And likely do more harm then good.
But some folk think installing them reduces CV boot fin contact and can benefit by installing those when lifting the susp. excessively.

2. The alignment parimeters (window) will likely be degraded or maybe even unattainable
if the stock UCA's/Ball Joints are retained and combined with an extended length CO.
Remember there is an engineered amount of window travel designated to meet the alignment spec. criteria.
Tho' it can be pushed to it's limit... It cannot exceed it's engineered travel limits without causing more issues.

3. The original caster setting should not be set less then 1.5* either side.
Using the Uni-Ball UCA's will increase that caster capability from 1.5* - 2.5*
thus allowing the alignment professionals more leeway when making their adjustments.

The alignment specs are intertwined and require detailed adjustments that also alter the other align. settings/specs.
And so using a Uni-ball UCA's can compensate for this alignment leeway and still be adjusted within specs by the alignment tech.

But realize that too much caster can be bad as well...
and push the front tires (when turned) rearward into the trailing edge of the Ft. fender
causing interference (scrub) to that.

Alignment specs. mininally require 1.5* of caster. (1.9* is more ideal)
But using an aft. mkt. Uni-ball UCA will allow for improved steering re-centering.
Tho' there is a limit as to how much one should push that.
Think of caster the same one would if they were observing a grocery cart.
Too much caster can be just as bad as too little and create excessive osillation.
As well put more stress on the steering rack.

The final improvement is that the ride will become more compliant and softer
and improves steering control over the minimal setting of 1.5* caster that can be attained
if utilizing the stock UCA's.

In other words:
I am barely able to net 1.5* caster utilizing the original UCA's
And that caster setting is right at the minimal spec. required.

And so... Aft. Mkt. Uni-ball UCA's can compensate for some lift installed.
But not if that lift exceeds the engineered capabilities.


I'm sure I missed explaining some details...
but my point is... if done without regard or done wrong...
there will be a price to pay eventually.

Do not stack anything above or below the CO.
It gains nothing but ride height and fubars the CO's window of travel.

jm $ .02 (rant over)

 

@TacoDell holy cow that was a lot!! lol I completely agree with not pushing too far and just to obtain a higher lift... However where i am now i dont have the money for UCAs although i would very much like to get some for specs and performance aspects.

 

sorry 'bout that... not sure what overcame my senses
or maybe I was just bored and forgot to stop typing

I too am floating in the same low buck boat. (dammit)
But am living acceptably utilizing my stock UCA's.
Still net about 4.5" of over-all susp./chassis-body lift.
My 295's (34") tire height increased the axles/diff. ground clearance.
So some valuable improvement can be had.

IMO tire height is more crucial to improving the axle ground clearance...
then raising the chassis ride height, and increasing it's roll center (COG).

Cutting the fenders/wells for improving tire clearance is the right way
by keep the COG as low as possible.
Increasing the suspension's lift for/in compensation of taller tires
is the less then ideal approach IMO.

My stock suspension alignment can be set to it's borderline spec
So I saved myself a nickle momentarily by not ponying up
and just haven't really ever looked back since.

But uni-ball UCA's are really nice and worthy of what they do/offer...
The cost is not excessive if they net ya what ya hoped/paid for.

You know you want them ! Lol

Just realize that utilizing racing components will most always require more
maintenance and upkeep then would stock components.

So basically the old skool verbage applies...

"If ya wanna play, ya gotta pay"

but the DIY folk, attempt to thwart the later


~ oops, guess I did it again ~ (dammit)