Fitting 35’s with minimal trimming NOW ADDING LONG TRAVEL AND 934 CV’s

He made as many excuses as possible and ignored a lot. He was complacent in the 3.5 kit being available and said he thought it was though Big Mike says he's one of 4 prototyping it. When called out about jumping in line he says he didn't though obviously he got a kit that's still unobtanium from the normal folks. When people called out his panhard length and geometry he took offense and told them they didn't know shit. Do I think he was completely to blame for the MC scenario NO but I do think he didn't do his due diligence in vetting the company or what he was actually getting and knowing the whole scenario. When your in business like that you really ought to do a better job making sure all your Ts are crossed and Is are dotted. It was funny watching the Auto Edits video where he rode with both mike and Nate. You could hear his tires rub like crazy in the front and see how little suspension movement there was in the rear. Neither of those things he nor MC will address. Funny how so many things are coming out as actual people are getting their hands on these kits. Mike's too concerned with guys like Nate and continuing this what seems like ponzi scheme to keep running his business and galivanting around to all the shows and push his influencers to go out and market for him.

 

Yup. And doing some research on springs.
So, the
3x16x650 has a travel of 8.15 with a block load of 5292
3x18x600 has a travel of 9.15 with a block load of 5496 204lbs higher than the 650x16
3x18x550 has a travel of 9.50 with a block load of 5231 61lbs less than the 650x16 and much closer to matching while using the longer spring.

Numbers to ponder.

 

I will say that I give both Mike and Nate props for getting out there and trying to push the boundaries of their knowledge. Where they both fell very short (specifically Mike) was trying to push their lack of knowledge as fact. I find it almost comical that a company that’s never made a single IFS suspension product to come out and say they have now created the worlds best IFS kit. The world of off road is constantly evolving and in order to create a truly remarkable product it takes years of trial, error and desire to make something better. We have been making production IFS kits for over 20yrs now and the wealth of knowledge that’s comes from that is priceless. The same goes for Camburg and Chaos... literally decades of production IFS kits. The obvious success of those companies comes from the years of experience, lessons learned and desire to improve the products. My hope is that potential customers see the intrinsic value in that not in marketing hype.

I wish them both the best and hope they have what it takes to make it through decades of learning experiences because ultimately competition will always breed products that provide the most value for the customer.

 

If you haven’t seen it already, accutune has a chart with all of this info on their eibach spring product page. It’s some good info.

 

I used to be able to find it. But they re arranged their articles and I cant find the chart anymore. So, I just used Eibach's website.

 

At the bottom under “specifications”.

Edit: no mention of block load, only block height.

https://accutuneoffroad.com/product/eibach-3-0-id-springs/

 

Yea, I was trying to find a matching block load. The total force to compress the spring fully. So, the longer 600# takes more weight than the shorter 650.
But, like you found the perfect by using the longer 550#. Which matches the 650# very close as far as force needed.

 

I hadn’t heard of the term block load before but it make sense, I assume that’s measured in ft lbs of force? And I have 18”x500 but likely would have been fine with 18”x550 or 16”x600. The slow speed stuff I do is way less particular to spring rate I guess and the 500 articulates nice and smooth.

 

I thought you were on 550#. But, yes block load is total 'lbs force to fully compress the spring'. BTW, the 18x500 is 4780

 

if you need the load, springs follow a simple relation F=k*x where F is the Force (block load), K is the spring rate (like 650lb/in), and x is the displacement from spring's natural length (so for the block load we'd use the travel length or the [natural length - block height])

For the 3x16x650
using the travel number
F = 650 lb/in * 8.15in = 5297.5 lb (in cancels and left with units as lb) ~ 5292lb from the chart

using the natural length and block height
F = 650 lb/in * (16-7.85)in = 5297.5 lb

these are of course numbers on paper. real life will have some variation

 

You can’t take those charts as an exact science. Eibach spring rates are different than King springs. A 600lb Eibach is not the same as a 600lb King spring

 

That’s surprising, I thought that A) an XYZ pound coil would be the same across the board and B) that eibach made the springs for king but in blue.

 

From lots of personal experience they are always a little bit different

 

True. Since I'm using Eibach springs. Im using their numbers. Since the truck seems to a bit high. Am I in the right direction trying to match the block loads. Granted I do just have the 16x650 still.

 

I know right?

 

I swear it’s the Mandela effect with Randy’s coils. He’s told me at least once they’re 500’s not 550’s and even today I was thinking about getting 550’s because I was so sure that’s what he was running. Shit’s getting weird or I just have bad memory. Glad it’s not just me though

 

Yeah but who gets more likes on YouTube?

 

I find it amusing because you’re not the only one. Multiple people think I’m on 550s even though I never have been.

 

This guy deserves to get more likes on YT
https://youtu.be/ejQ5SDlk-fY?start=676&end=703

powerstrokehelp (I bought a 7tree)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQz2vFEc1m-WGKf6g-pz9DA

 

I’m just gonna say 700# springs is life.