885x on bilstein 5100 spacer needed or not?

I'm confused as why you get a lean when you have the 885x on the 5100 for the front on one side. Shouldnt everything settle where you dont need to add a spacer on 1 side to level?

Also
Has anyone ran the 5100 with 885x on 1 step above 0 setting on the 5100. Will that stress the shock out?

Thanks

 

I recall reading the lean is mostly due to the gas tank being on the drivers side. I can't comment on the Bilstein since I'm not familiar much with them.

 

Where I'm lost is the stock suspension is balanced without a spacer on the gas tank side so why wouldnt the aftermarket suspension be the same. Seems weird

 

I believe the stock coils are rated slightly differently between Pass and Driver, so the lean is accounted for in the Stock setup. When getting aftermarket coils, they have the same spring rate, causing D to lean slightly. Add the 1/4" spacer with the 885's

 

That's logical, thank you.
Im going to try and get 285/75/16 k02 on stock rims to fit with keeping my stock UCA. Using 5100, 885x and now 1/4 spacer. I read through the forum and a lot of good info. Seems it's the battle between cutting and not cutting, doesnt seem to get into frame mods when getting the 33s to fit.

 

The "drivers side lean" is caused by the fuel tank, the battery, and the driver all being on the same side of the truck. This is present and can be seen in a stock Tacoma. The OME 88x coils do not compensate for this lean, so some run a 1/4" spacer to fix.

The bilstien 5100's were not designed to run with the OME coils, so neither recommend running them at anything other than the lowest setting (no preload)

Now, some rear leaf springs do have side specific springs, such as the OME Dakars. I believe the OME 88x coils do not because they are a universal Toyota spring that can be run on all generations of Tacoma and 4Runner.

I did not put a spacer on my regular cab when I lifted it with 884's and 5100's. While there is a slight lean, it is undetectable to the naked eye. YMMV

 

To ensure i get enough lift without upgrading UCA, do you recommend a specific spacer combination to get 285/75/16? I'm stuck with the 885x and 5100s for now. Would that 1/4 spacer need to be increased slightly to get that 2.75 to 3 inch lift after settling without any UCA change?

 

I don't think 885s give you that much lift, I had around 2 inches with that same setup and a 1/4 spacer on both sides

 

Supposedly the 885x are stiffer compared the the 885s but I could be wrong.

Why detour from using the stock coil and pushing the 5100 to max compression?
Is that the trade off?

 

I think you're referring to maxing the pre-load on the Bilsteins. If so, then the ride comfort can go bad doing that. Having the taller coils is the better route. My 885's gave me about 2 to 2.25 inch lift for the front. You may want to go for 887's for a little more height. Stay away from 886 unless you're running heavy armor up front.

With the 887's, you'll likely need new UCA's

 

With you 885s what size tires are you running?

 

I have 265/75R16's. You can probably fit 285's with the 885 coils, but you're going to need some trimming.

 

Yeah I see triming in my future. Did you use any wheel spacers?

 

I have 285s on about a 2" lift (884's). Regardless of how much lift you do, you'll have to cut the same. The spring will still compress down to the bump stop no matter what kind of suspension lift you are running.

I have 1.5" wheel spacers to clear my stock UCAs. You might be able to get away without spacers of you have aftermarket UCA's and/or a wheel with a more negative offset than the stock wheels.

 

Good info. Which wheel spacers did you use? also did you get anything for the Tacoma lean to level it off or was it level after your lift with the coil upgrade?

 

Hub centric, think I got them on rough country. People here love spidertrax or other flashy brands. I figured most chunks of billet aluminum are made equal enough, but you do what you feel comfortable with.

 

Thanks a lot. Huge help and makes more sense. Same, form and function first.