Who makes the best over all 3"-5" suspension system? It's for a 2002 Disco. It's going to be used for very rough Canadian oil roads and mild off road stuff.

Thanks in advance,
Mark.

Opinions!?!
I like my RTE 3" Springs (don't remeber the rate but it is what Steve recommends) With Rovertracks Trailing arms.. Bilstien 7100's 80/380 front 100/400 rear. On 35's.
It's pretty flexi and comfortable on the road with enough stability to prevent on road worry.

Keith

3- 5 inch lift is a hard one, anything over 3 inches requires all sorts of other modifications. Up to 3 inches you can do well with just shocks and springs. Im tossed up between RoverTym and Big Blues, tried both and happy with both, RoverTym gets you a bit more lift.
btw, if you are only mild offroad it would seem ridiculous to go 5 inches. Three should be extremely good for your application.

I'm going to run 285/75R16 (33x11.50) tires and need room. The roads are heavily rutted (deep) and the mud sticks real bad. Any opinions on Scorpion racing set up? Looks good to me and I don't care if I have to do more than just change coils and shocks.

2" body lift and 2" suspension lift is what you need. Simple cheap and will work.

A 5" suspension lift needs new shock mounts, springs, trailing arms, radius arms, CV driveshafts, brake lines, bump stops, A-arm brackets.

You need to trim a bunch either way.

2" spring and angle grinder/hack saw/sawzall will let you install 285/75-16 easily.

Tobias

2" spring and angle grinder/hack saw/sawzall will let you install 285/75-16 easily.

Oh this is a Disco 2. My mind was on Disco 1... :emb2:

The roto-flex on the back (most likely) won't like a lift more than 2"... The front driveshaft will be fine if the joints are replaced.

The roto-flex on the back (most likely) won't like a lift more than 2"... The front driveshaft will be fine if the joints are replaced.
you can do the OME 3" inch (which settles to about 2.5) and the rotoflex be fine.

you can do the OME 3" inch (which settles to about 2.5) and the rotoflex be fine.

Oh yeah? For how long???

It seems the D2 rotoflex has a much better life than D1's.
I haven't analyzed why, so just FIY, so far.

Tobias

It seems the D2 rotoflex has a much better life than D1's.
I haven't analyzed why, so just FIY, so far.

Tobias

You ain't gonna convince me that a rubber disc is better than a cardon universal joint. If you're gonna spend the bucks on tires, springs, shocks, etc. it is stupid to retain the rotoflex. The centralizing peg will begin to bind the instant you change the pinion angle. Steps taken to increase articulation can only exacerbate the binding and misalignment.

I have a hard enough time with universals on my truck, the rotoflex driveshafts got eaten up even faster, along with the rotoflex themselves.

Oh yeah? For how long???
ive heard people running it for 3 years+, ive had mine a year and my ujoints have worn out faster than my rotoflex, go figure:shaking:

I'm not arguing for the superiority of rotoflexes over ujoints, just relating the experience with the apperently improved rotoflex in the D2 compared to D1.
We are rapidly getting close to 150 000km on Camilla's truck and the rotoflex is still running strong. The replacement I bought as soon as we bought the truck, in anticipation of the (expected) imminent replacement is still gathering dust in my (new) shop.

Tobias

Why stop at a 5 inch lift? I hear those Canadian forest roads are *tough*!

:shaking:

LMAO !

:flipoff2:

i would imagine the radius arm setup on the D2 helps maintain the proper alignment vs the D1 link setup. Just speculating :D

1) The rotoflex will last in a DII, due to the trailing arm suspension keeping it at a near 0 deg opperating angle no matter the lift.
(I have a customer with 4+" of lift and the rotorflex is fine.)
2) Any lift over 3" may require removal or modification of the bolt in cross member under the bellhousing.
3) Also the front sway bar will be very close to (and probably would hit on articulation) the track arm brace just off of the power steering gearbox mount.
4) Lastly, the watts link on the rear axle will be near or at it's maximum extension, significantly effecting rear axle movement - although Rovertym has just released modified links for it (I have some early production units that will be mounted on a customer's car next week).

My personal oppinion - go with either the 2" or the ~3" OME setup (rear springs ft & rear + spacer in rear) & some 235/85R16 tires. The narrower & taller tire is I believe better suited to mud & rover's low power output & weight. That tire size will fit a DII even with only a 2" lift in case you're wondering. (ok, it will actually clear w/o a lift, but barely - I know, as I've done it once)

Also note that OME shocks have very close to the same travel as stock shocks on a DII.

Just my .02

Jeff C.
JC's Rover & 4x4
Englewood, CO
www.jcrover4x4.com

Wtf evar dudes ... Ther rotoflex is a piece of shit. A buddy of mine eats oner every time we wheel. I'm sure its fine on those pavement princesses :rolleyes:

+1 for the RTE springs

edit: said POS rotoflex is on a DII with small lift. i think it's the actual wheelin' part that ruins them :flipoff2:

I'm not arguing for the superiority of rotoflexes over ujoints, just relating the experience with the apperently improved rotoflex in the D2 compared to D1.


Tobias

Same part number from what I've found! Also, 150,000KM isn't unexpected from a rotoflex on a truck without a lift. I've seen BMWs with stock rotoflexs that have lasted 200K miles! Same part!

I'll say it again, retaining the rotoflex is stupid. There is no way that if one lengthens one side of a triangle, the relationship between the other two sides will remain the same. Go back to your high school trigonometry books boys. The Watts linkage will serve to locate the axle in much the same fashion the a-arm does in DIs-if you lengthen the vertical side of the triangle, by definition, you will affect the other two sides of the triangle. The lengths of the arms may remain the same (for two sides), but the relationships between them WILL change. I'll change my tune IF somebody can provide incontrovertible proof of how Rover engineers have rewritten the laws of trigonometry which have stood for thousands of years.

How anyone can justify not spending the $100 additional to replace the driveshaft with one that accomodates real cardon joints, yet spend a coupla hundred more for shocks, springs and tires is beyond even the Cheap Bastard in me. Shit, even I have a u-jointed driveshaft in the back of my rig! IF the $ are gonna break somebody, buy cheaper tires!

PT