Who has had problems with spacer lifts?

Not arguing, just trying to understand for self knowledge, how did it cause it to break? Did it cause it to bottom out? Is what im thinking just curious.

 

is the kit i posted a top plate spacer lift? will it cause damage to my truck

 

I never one had a problem with mine. Had a 2000 tacoma 4x4 access cab...with about 60K miles, not problems and drove it hard! Now 2009 tacoma 4x4 access cab with about 14K on them, not one problem. I love them and personally don't think think there is any weekness caused from them.

check this post out:
http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/suspension/104348-how-ease-rough-ride-after-3-spacer-lift.html
read #11 on. mainly #11, 13,15,35,36,37,38,39,41,42,43.

It may be a long read, but it a good discusion that will help you make your mind up.

And here's another point...what is the difference between using the TOP PLATE SPACER, or useing an adjustible stut??? If your extending the "unit" lower, then your doing just that with eith one. (Don't anyone bother writing back saying that the replacement extendable one is better because it's stronger/beefier...I'm compairing same size diamitter on the shaft of the shock. I'm not a dumb shit, ok! LOL)

 

no doubts from me I know I like mine stock.... keeps me outa trouble

 

Yes it is. What Cris4x4 said makes sense. But still if your just wheeling on the farm and no hardcore stuff, I dont se the prob. I have had three and all of them had the spacers and have had no prob. And i do wheel it a couple of times a year at wheeling in the country, not hardcore slamming rocks and holes, but hard enough being its still a daily driver.

 

i would buy rear shocks when i order the kit, but i would need front shocks too?

 

X2

 

my first lift was a toytec 3'' spacer with an AAL and the procrap shocks, i regreted buying soon after it was installed. the ride was total shit not to mention it ended up wrecking a couple balljoints on me. the lift your looking at is fine but you should also get the bilsteins to compliment the springs.i also urge you not to go with those rear shocks. i had them on for a year before getting my current stuff and the shocks were blown all to shit and i didnt even wheel that much with them.

 

what do you mean "blown to shit"

 

Chris, I don't want to argue, but I thought we discused this in the other thread. The top plate does NOT lengthen the "whole assembly". It does not lengthen or shorten it. All it does is put space between the top of the strut and it's mount...which inturn is what "lifts" the truck. The measurment between the very top of the strut and the very bottom will be exactly the same weather the spacer is there or not because the weight of the truck has not changed, there is no "pre-loading" on the spring. So the "whole assembly" will not be "lengthened". It WILL be lowered, but not lengthened. NOR will there be any difference in the shocks travle with in the spring, or any difference in the springs travle.

Granted, I will admit that there a greater distance between the lower arm and any "bump-stops" because the lower are is angled more twards the ground, HOWEVER, I severly doubt that Bilstien designed there shocks and springs that close to bottoming out, that "lowering" the top mounting point an inch and a half (that's about a 2.5 inch lift) would allow the stut to break because it did bottom out.

Remember that pic....jhodge83 said "but he also slammed into a hole and it threw him into the air..." then later quoted the dude who did it, the quote was..."I decide to finish up and drive back to my camp and on the way back I hit a pot hole full of water witch apparently was to deep. I launched the Tacoma up in the air and snapped the drivers side shock and bent the stock A-arms."

No matter what you do...stock suspention is not made for "air". Spacer or not, a pot hole that nasty to cause "air" is going to fuck somthing up, even if it just a tie rod.

Again not trying to argue, I just am bring up point as to why I don't think they are bad.

 

Ok, I'm going to answer point by point so I don't miss anything.

1) You said " And it Does lengthen the assembly" It does NOT leenthen the assembly. the struts length is still the same from the top of the strut to the very bottom of the shock. We did not get a magical devise that stretches steel. putting a 1'5 inch spacer plate on top, is absolutly no different then if you welded a new mounting point 1.5 inches lower. The strut length is the strut length.

2) you said "Think about this. Your adding another 1.5" to the top of the assembly. THEN mounting it into the location it mounts in. Install a Top plate onto a shock/spring assembly, then measure how long it is. Its about 25.5" long. Stock is just under 24" long." So what!?? The spacer has absolutly no compression or travle in it; it is benine. The strut is still 24 inches long with or without the spacer sitting on top. And there for, still has the same travle, the same compression, the same spring rate....the strut itself has NOT changed. Again, no different then if you welded a new mounting point 1.5 inches lower.

3) You said "Being as the stock shocks are designed to work their whole stroke, given the OEM geometry, you then add 1.5" to the length. Now, the shock can travel 1.5" MORE down than before." Lowering the position of the strut does NOT add "travle" to the strut. The strut is the strut, it is not magical, it can NOT grow in length because it is mounted lower on the frame (again, that is the same as a spacer plate on top). AND the shock can NOT "travel 1.5" MORE down than before." If it could, then that would mean that it is BENDING the lower control arm every time the truck is in the air; weather that is because you are jumping the truck, or you have it on a lift or jack. I serverly doubt that the distance between the hup and the fender is 1.5 more with the top space then it is without it, when it is sitting on a lift. If that is the case, then Toyota has the weakest lower control arms and lower control arm mounts ever made. And if that is true, then everyone who has a true suspention lift (adjustable coil-overs) is fucking up their lower arms and lower arm mounts.

4) You said "Meanwhile, the geometry hasnt changed, and only allows for the original 4" stroke (a little less, but whatever). Now then.....You hit a hole, the suspension rebounds, and the geometry (UCA's) try to stop it at its nomal droop. BUT, the shock still tries to push down, because its now longer than OEM. Something is gonna give." This is where it is really confusing, because here you are saying that the travle of the coil-over HASNT CHANGED [with the spacer being used], but earlier you said that "the shock can travel 1.5" MORE down than before." Which one is it? I'll help you out here, the travle of the coil-over HASNT CHANGED. It's still the same coil-over.

.....4.1) you said "Now then.....You hit a hole, the suspension rebounds, and the geometry (UCA's) try to stop it at its nomal droop". Rebounds refers to the spring opening or de-compressing. And I'm taking "stop it at its nomal droop" to mean that the upper control arm is angled down twards the ground and not pushed up into the fender. And so, YES, that is what the upper conntrol arm will do, it will "droop" when the suspention de-compresses. But are you saying that the lower control arms are that week that they extent beyond their natural factory "droop". And if so, again, then everyone who has a true suspention lift (adjustable coil-overs), is going to fuck up their upper control arms just the same.

.....4.2) you said "BUT, the shock still tries to push down, because its now longer than OEM. Something is gonna give." Well, ofcourse the stock shock/ spring are going to want to push down, that is their job, just like an after market one. But I believe you are implying that it is pushing down with more force but it is not, because the spring still has the same "spring rate", which for all intensive purposes is the same as an aftermarket true suspention lift that has the same "factory ride"; not one that is suposed to be a "soft ride" or one that is suposed to be a "hard ride" "OEM ride quality' is "OEM ride quality" and therefor has the same rebound "force" as OEM. So, no difference there.

5) you said "Sometimes, its the ball joints. Some times, its the shock. Either way, its damage done, due to a $5.00 part lifting a $25k truck." Well, as we all know, the spacer is not a 5.00 part, but I know what your trying to say. However, weather it is a spacer or a true suspention lift, it does not matter because everything you are tring to argue that is bad about the spacer, holds true then about the true suspention lift, because of one very important fact...no matter which one you chose (spacer or true suspention lift) the distance between the factory mounting point on the frame and the factory mounting point on the lower control arm, has increased! It is litterally "six of one and half a dozen of the other".


oh, and your comment below this one I quoted, the one that reads "And a 1.5" spacer yields 3" lift. " Proves my point even more. I had said "Granted, I will admit that there a greater distance between the lower arm and any "bump-stops" because the lower are is angled more twards the ground, HOWEVER, I severly doubt that Bilstien designed there shocks and springs that close to bottoming out, that "lowering" the top mounting point an inch and a half (that's about a 2.5 inch lift) would allow the stut to break because it did bottom out" I have a 2.5 inch lift, which means my spacer is less then 1.5, and there for "less damageing" according to your argument.

 

your post is too long