5100's on a 17 Access cab

im looking to add 2-3" to my 17 TRD OR. I was ready to go with 5100's but now I have seen a couple mentions about not setting to #5 if they are installed on a v6 access cab. I can't find any explanation why! Anyone know what is up with that?

 

Supposedly the ACabs will sit higher in the front than DCabs

 

I see what your saying. I think. Basically, setting 5 will result in more than max increase and could cause other issues. Is it safe to assume for example, that setting 4 on my access cab could be the same as 5 on a Dcab?

 

Yes, be advised you may need to go to aftermarket control arms

 

I went with a 3/2 level kit (spacers) and 35" tires on stock rims for my Tundra and didnt really like the ride, had to cut the inner fender, add wheel spacers, and maxed out my alignment. For my Tacoma, Im trying to keep the ride comfort and get 2"-3" max lift without maxing out my alignment or the added expense of UCA's. Also want to keep stock rims so I dont mind adding 1.25" spacers if need be. Guess im asking too much?

 

What size tires are you looking to run?

 

I'm more interested getting to the 2-3" height then I'll see what I can fit without making any other adjustments/modifications except for wheel spacers if needed.

 

Front and rear? or just doing a leveling system?

 

Id like the same lift (2"-3") front and back. Im not sure why the engineers have that lower front end look. But maybe its best to stay with the same rake or stance?

 

There's no harm in leveling it. Usually the rear is higher so it won't sag when you're hauling stuff

 

they lift the rear so when you put weight or tow, it'll sag to level.

 

After I did the 3/2 readylift on my Tundra, I wasn't happy with the ride. Loved the look but when I went off road, it seemed to have a clunking sound under some conditions and the front travel seemed to bottom out on wimpy bumps. I don't go wheeling much but when I do it isnt extreme.
Im just being cheap I guess. I'll have to stop whining and spend some $$.

 

Thanks to those who responded to my question. Here's another one regarding the 5100's. If putting a spacer on top of the spring (preload spacer) is bad according to some people. How is raising the bottom of the spring up (setting 1,2,3,4,5) OK? Isn't it the same thing? Ones on top of the spring and one is effectively on the bottom. Either way the spring is being preloaded. So why spend the $$ on 5100's if spacers are waaaay less?

 

"adding a spacer on top of the strut adds length to the strut assembly, causing the strut to be too long and allowing it to droop farther than what it would factory."

 

Are you talking about the spacer in between the coil and the top plate or are you talking about the spacers that goes on top of the top plate?

 

Yes, I was talking about the spacer that goes between the spring and top plate. Not my choice of lift, just commenting how it seems like they both do the same thing. One for far less $$.

 

Yep!! I agree the spacers that go between the coil are bad and preload the spring making the riding terrible and destroy your suspension components, I had a spacer on top of the coilover design, kind of like a top plate, imo if someone has to get a spacer they should use those instead

 

i was talking about a spacer that bolts onto the top of the strut, the one that goes in the strut is in theory the same as using bilstein5100 and raising the spring plate up to the top notch, same thing.

 

Ohhhh miscommunication!! I've had a spacer lift before that goes on top and it wasn't the worst.. at least for me, I had to get am alignment but it did ride but the spacer that compresses the spring imo