I have been researching and gearing up to do link suspension on our sammurai. I have searched my ass off on this too. While searching the common 3 link like OKIE zuk's kit or RRO's kit I have found a lot of people complaining about brake dive on the side with one link. I have even gone for a ride in a jeep with the same design as the above mentioned kits. When he hit the brakes the side with one link would slam down and the bumpsteer made for a really uncomfortable feeling!

My question is this. Do any or all of you running this setup have this problem? My wife will be driving ours up to 70 when on the road again so I cant have this problem. Thanks for any input.

My four link does a similar thing just evenly, the whole front end dives. It seems to me to have a lot to do with spring rate. When I add nitrogen to my shocks to help hold up camping gear it lessens...but how to combat that on one side im not sure. can you triangulate the upper link?

Yes there can be brake dive on these as well as any link suspension. Main problem is that with these "kits", the links are not at the proper angle. Meaning that most of the guys with these kits have the 14-175 springs which ends up being close to an 8 inch lift. RRO kit advertises this height for 33-35 tires. At that height, with the design of the front links, you will get dive as the anti-dive numbers (like anti-squat but reversed for being in front) are too high. The few who run the 6 inch kits (same links) don't seem to have the same issues. I have a 3 link front which I designed, and the upper link is on the passenger side and I get no brake dive issues.

The problem that people get with the bumpsteer while they hit brakes is similar to the above. Angles are not correct and as you hit brakes, trac-bar arc causes the steering to follow.

How to make it work properly? Keep the links as close to level to the ground as possible. Might mean to not lift it as high and do a virtual lift and mod the upper spring mounts to make the tires you want fit. Besides, keeping it low is better anyways!!!! :D

I don't have a Zuki (still researching and making decisions) but my YJ has a 3 link on the front and I've helped build a few others, and like catzuk said, if it's set up right you won't have brake dive, and especially not to one side. I run fairly soft springs and no sway bar on my YJ, I do have some weight transfer to the front while braking, but its level and predictable. I also have no bumpsteer or any steering related issues, because I have my tracbar set up correctly.

Thanks guys. I DO know about link geometry pretty intimately. The problem described seems to be more of a problem the bigger and heavier the rig is. I am still wish washing over 3 or 4 link in the front. Leaning more toward 4 link but still researching. Mine needs to be tall enough to clear 33's with out modifying the body as per orders from the wife.(its her car/wheeler) So 8 inches it is. I will however be sacraficeing some ground clearance for my lower link mounts to get the correct geometry. Not going to hurt that much since this is not the hard core crawler.

8" seems a bit excessive for 33's
IMO

id go 6"

I agree. 8" is too much. LOL never thought I'd say that phrase! :flipoff2:
But, 6" is more than enough :laughing: to clear 33's. Just make sure you move the centerline of the axle slightly forward of stock position in the front and slightly back on the rear. Must hammer the inner fender lip flush and the body seams that protrude out on the rear of the front inner fenders. Minor mods that even the wife should be ok with! :p

On my DD zuk, I am going to copy the one I did on my Krawler Zuk. Just a 3 link with trac/panhard bar. Upper link from passenger frame to the top of Diff. Looks like this \
Only issue is moving the fuel lines, but have done it twice before and this set-up works real good. Clears everything. Just have to make sure you brace frame mounts as the thin wall can be ripped easily as there is a lot of torque going into that link.

I agree. 8" is too much. LOL never thought I'd say that phrase! :flipoff2:
But, 6" is more than enough :laughing: to clear 33's. Just make sure you move the centerline of the axle slightly forward of stock position in the front and slightly back on the rear.

ARE YOU SURE? That 6 is enough to STUFF 33s in the fender (s) when wheeling like the rubicon or carnage canyon? 8 is to much even though the track width is going from 52" to 61"? Thats 9 inches wider than stock. Like I have said before 8 isnt that much more than 5. And 5 inches is how much its lifted already with the spring over. With one more inch it dam sure wont clear 33s as I already have clearance issues with 31s. I like my suspension to stuff at least half as much as it droops.

I dont believe in body lifts and the wife wont allow for virtual lifting. And when its linked its permanent. The link geometry will be "set" for ride hieght and the way I build you have to start with a new frame to get a do-over on link mounts and crap. So what springs do you go with to only lift it 6 inches? 12 inch 175s? Do those exhist?

Where you at catzuk? I need a reply on my lift hieght.

Depends on how much up travel you run, and limiting that, where your bump-stops are set. 2 feet of lift won't clear 31s if it can stuff to the stock bump-stops. Unlikely and exaggerated, I know, but the idea is the same.

A 6 inch and an 8 inch will have exactly the same clearance problems when flexed, given the same set of bump-stops. It'll just take more articulation before it happens, and therefore won't happen as often with the 8".

Use common sense and a tape measure. If 31s rub, and you plan to have your coils stuff just as high, then 33s won't fit. Can you move the axles forward or back an inch or two to help clearance?

As for 8" not being much more than 5, it's closer to double than the original. I'm on Toys with 35s, and I consider 5-6" too much. Then again, lots of people build 'em high. Look at the RRO setups, they come in 6 and 8, see what spring lengths they're running on what tires, if you want a starting point.

Why not just use the same spring regardless, and change the mouns for your height? the longer spring will give you more flex. How about outboarding it from the frame and raise it up to drop you 2 inches?

One other comment, you said you were willing to drop the link mounts to get good link geometry, but give up some ground clearance. You also said you weren't willing to run a body lift. Now, if you need a couple inches extra lift to clear your tires, but then drop the link mounts down to the same height, what have you gained? Just tire clearance, no ground clearance? And you've made your DS angles worse, and raised your COG 2 inches.

Now if you ran a 2" BL, you'd be at the same tire clearance, same ground clearance, since you wouldn't have to drop your link mounts, better driveshaft angles, and lower COG, since you've effectively dropped your frame and drivetrain 2 inches from the other setup.

Not that I'm a body lift advocate, but in this case it might make sense.

What I meant is that 8" is too much with the mentioned kits. If you design your own you can go 8-9 inches without the dive issue. I still think that for 33's 8" is too much for a zuk. Wider track width will help, but still 8" is uneccessary IMO. For example, I ran 35's on the same zuk I had 33's on. Takes a bit of trial and error to place the tire correctly to stuff without rub, but is doable. I kept that height on mine when I stretched it to 95" with the 35's. A very stable zuk. And yes I frequent carnage, indy and many others often without any trouble. For the record, most winning comp buggies only have 18-22 inches of belly clearence!

Yes there are 12 175 QA1 springs. Thats what RRO sells for their 6" kits. But like mentioned, you could use bout any springs and make the mounts either adjustable or higher. 12" springs will limit flex a little over the 14's but still tons more flex than stock springs, even rears up fronts. I might go with 10-180 QA1 springs on my DD zuk as to keep it low as I made the SPOA only 4.5 inches for a reason.

I understand the not doing a virtual lift. But even with 33's you can get them to stuff very well in stock form. If you keep your links as level as possible, the arc of the tire will not cause the tire to move into the fender as it flex's. For reference, My front lower frame mounts are inboard of the frame, bolt hole of bushing is level with bottom of the frame. So basicly they tuck up nicely. There is a slight angle down to the axle. And the front lower link mounts are just below centerline of the front axle. If they were mounted on bottom of frame would still be good, actually better but for me, that little bit of clearence to get a flat belly was important. Will try to find some pics.

One other comment, you said you were willing to drop the link mounts to get good link geometry, but give up some ground clearance. You also said you weren't willing to run a body lift. Now, if you need a couple inches extra lift to clear your tires, but then drop the link mounts down to the same height, what have you gained? Just tire clearance, no ground clearance? And you've made your DS angles worse, and raised your COG 2 inches.Now if you ran a 2" BL, you'd be at the same tire clearance, same ground clearance, since you wouldn't have to drop your link mounts, better driveshaft angles, and lower COG, since you've effectively dropped your frame and drivetrain 2 inches from the other setup.

Not that I'm a body lift advocate, but in this case it might make sense.

I am only talking about lowering the lower link mounts maginally lower than the sub on the afore mention link kits. It wont make my d-shaft angles any worse than the guys running waggy springs for like 10 inches of lift and 36-37 inch tires. I personally STRONGLY feel that a body lift does raise your COG with little to no benefit to performance. Thats only my own building style and I have no problem with others running boddy lifts on the trail. Some people evn have to to do various engine drivetrain swaps. You are correct in your description though. But for the twisty trails I run with this I need lots of articulation and vertical travel as well.

What I meant is that 8" is too much with the mentioned kits. If you design your own you can go 8-9 inches without the dive issue. I still think that for 33's 8" is too much for a zuk. Wider track width will help, but still 8" is uneccessary IMO. For example, I ran 35's on the same zuk I had 33's on. Takes a bit of trial and error to place the tire correctly to stuff without rub, but is doable. I kept that height on mine when I stretched it to 95" with the 35's. A very stable zuk. And yes I frequent carnage, indy and many others often without any trouble. For the record, most winning comp buggies only have 18-22 inches of belly clearence!

Yes there are 12 175 QA1 springs. Thats what RRO sells for their 6" kits. But like mentioned, you could use bout any springs and make the mounts either adjustable or higher. 12" springs will limit flex a little over the 14's but still tons more flex than stock springs, even rears up fronts. I might go with 10-180 QA1 springs on my DD zuk as to keep it low as I made the SPOA only 4.5 inches for a reason.

I understand the not doing a virtual lift. But even with 33's you can get them to stuff very well in stock form. If you keep your links as level as possible, the arc of the tire will not cause the tire to move into the fender as it flex's. For reference, My front lower frame mounts are inboard of the frame, bolt hole of bushing is level with bottom of the frame. So basicly they tuck up nicely. There is a slight angle down to the axle. And the front lower link mounts are just below centerline of the front axle. If they were mounted on bottom of frame would still be good, actually better but for me, that little bit of clearence to get a flat belly was important. Will try to find some pics.

I do definately see what you are saying. But I want enough up travel to stuff for semi-high speed bump hitting too. Not just for articulation. I have 7 inches of vertical uptravel in the front of my flattie with no bumpstops whatsoever. I let the spring do all the limiting. The tire just barely hits the fender when the leaf spring and shackle hit the point at wich they will no longer flex any higher. My link mounts will be under the fram sorta like the kits but made differently the way I like it. The links will be flat and straight and I am going to outboard the springs cuz I think they will fit out there for better clearance for link mounts. So how much vertical uptravel would I have with 33s and 6 inches of lift? I will adjust bumpstops as needed, but I have seen aplications where if you limit with bumpstops so under full articulation the tire doesnt cause body damage. Then only have 1 1/2 inches of vert up travel before the bumpstop takes over. Not acceptable for a road cruiser. I think I may be able to use the tj/xj springs outboarded wich are 16.5 inches tall and will be even with the top of the frame in an outboarded bucket.

You should be able to get close to 6" of up travel. I dropped mine a little last fall and am at 4.5 inches of up travel. If I turn up my rancho 9000's I can fly down dirt trails pretty good, but now I do hit bumpstops. But for me, the benefits to the stability of being lower far outweighs the benefits to flying down dirt trails anymore. On the Zuk buggy anyway. Costs a bit more, but air bumps are the ticket! Something to save for in my honest opinion! They are awsome. When I redo mine, they are on the list of needed items.

My Heep coils are level with the top of my frame. I did cut my frame and inset a bucket for them that is now part of the frame. Mine are outboard the frame a little, but I left room as my shocks are on top of the axle almost touching the "C" of the knuckle. they angle slightly inward (3 degrees I think)and go up into the engine compartment. Makes for a much more stable ride. Using the QA1's saves a lot of room as compared to the heep coils. Much narrower and easier to work with.

One thing I have learned that makes a difference is this. On the front, where the lower links attach to the axle, you want those points to be directly under where the pan-hard/track bar mounts are. This helps keep everything working smoothly without bind. Even if it means bending the lower links and braceing them. Some will argue this, but it is a proven method. Unless you have a very short trackbar.

Wanna do me a davor then please? I have more confusion and questions everytime I here from you catzuk. What is your ground clearance and tire size please. I dont believe I had 6 inches of uptravel with 5 inches spoa and 31s. It had spidertrax's soa kit and then some lift shackles to add up to 5. The problem with it stuffing before was as the leaves compressesd they went into a negative arch and the tire came back at the same time it was coming up so maybe there is my confusion. But I had to limit uptravel to 4 inches to keep from cutting the tires. Air bumps would be nice but not in the budget for this year.

As for track bar placement. I thought the track bar was supposed to be as close to the same length as the drag link as possible. And at the same angle. That would mean running the track bar to the nuckle or close to it. I am keeping my link mounts inboarded as far as I can. So that I can clear the deepest backspacing wheels I can and clear them when steered to lock. My front axle is a narrowed fullsize dodge narrowed to 61 inches. This is to get a diff offset of 5 1/2 inches instead of 9 like the waggy or scout. That would mean my track bar being fairly short because the 4 link mounts on the axle are going to be narrower than the leafsprings are from the factory on the sammy. Not by much but if I were to use leaf springs they would be directly under the frame instead of out boarded 1 3/4 inches. My axles are 61 inches wide but both front and rear have the same diff offset from center as factory sammy. Because they are so wide with such narrow spring pad spacing I can easily fit the coils completely outside the frame without cutting it. And have room for the shocks out there too. My plan is to have the coils be set back from the center of the front axle with a custom mount surface on the axle. That way the track bar can go to the pass side inner-c without hitting anything. I am definately doing four link with panhard in the front. If the diff was on the driver side instead I might try the 3 with panhard. For clearance I am going to have 6 inches vertical seperation on the links at the axle making the upper link no higher than the top of the diff so I dont have interferance wiith the frame. This is of course all still open to interpretation and change as nothing is permanent yet.

:laughing: My appologies on the confusion. I think our definitions of up travel got misqued! straight up and articulating travel are indeed different. I was inadvertently using the term of articulation up travel to define that. Sorry. But point is the same. either way you see it, you can keep it low and stuff the tires up there with out cutting anything up. Just a few wacks with the hammer. :D

My track bar is the same as the tie rod in length and is parallel. You are correct in that thinking. Mine is longer i guess. My tie rod goes almost out to the passenger knuckle. That distance is the same width the lower axle mounts. Keeps the geometry the same. Thats all. Nothing too special.

The zuk in the avatar has 35" MTR's and has a belly height at the frame of almost 20 inches. They stuff up into the fender nicely!

The rest of your plan looks solid. I also had to off set the coils rearward from center of axle as well for track bar placement.

However, on mine I did a three link off the passenger side. I made a truss that goes over the pumkin so I could tie the upper link to it above the pumkin. I wheel it very hard and never had any issues, even with several roll overs. A fourth link would be a pain to do in my opinion as the exhaust is on that side.

My lower axle mounts are about the same width as the stock sammy leafs. Which is why my track bar and tie rod are nearly the same length. My lowers are inboard the frame and go straight then bend out. They are very heavy walled and sleeved and I have not bent them. They clear the tires, and keep geometry proper. They have poly leaf spring bushings on the frame end and heavy duty 3/4 inch rod ends on the axle end. On the upper, axle end is a bushing, and same 3/4 rod end is at the frame. Flexes real good, has great road manners, next to zero maintenance issues in over 5 years.

Ok sounds like I understand. Is your drag link conected to your tie rod? Or is it true crossover with the drag link going all the way and attaching to the outer knuckle? Mine will be true crossover with high steer cuz I am oh so lucky and my front has the factory right side flat top knuckle. I have a machinist friend that will mill and tap it for free. As well as make my high steer arms for free. My only cost is material. My tie rod will go past the inner-c so the tie rod will have to go at least to the inner-c, and be outboarded of the frame on the driver side a little to make up the difference in length. No problem. I am using 1 1/4" 3/8" wall 4140 chromo for the tie rod drag link and track bar. The link material is 1 1/2" 1/2" wall 4140 chromo. With jony joints at the frame and polly bushings at the axle's. For cosmetic reasons I am going to use fox 14 inch 175 springs. The wife has specific color wishes and she wants blue springs. As well as powder coated blue links and anything else we can throw in. It would be barby pink but she cant find decals the right color so lucky me its dodge viper blue to match our tow rig truck. I think that my link mounts being under the frame will clear a 4 link on the exhaust side. If not I may reconsider the three link. For this one I think 30 inch lowers will do her:D. The uppers will be slightly shorter as they should be. What do you think about 4.88 gears and 4.16's in the t-case? That with a strong 16v 1.6 with the lower high range for high waying it? Thats what I got already lying around so I am going to try it anway. If I dont like it I guess I will change it later. Thanks catzuk!

Thats awsome your wife is into the Zuk and wheeling!

I did a high steer on mine. I found a flat top knuckle and drilled and tapped it myself. took some 1" stock and shaped it, drilled it and tapered it to use HD tie rod ends. Currently my tie rod ties into the drag link. Due to budget reasons at the time, I used the stock Waggy steering linkage shortened up, strengthened up and used HD tie rod ends. In over 7 years of running that steering, No issues except for replaceing one tie rod end. I did drill out my pitman arm to use a rod end on it from the tie rod. Was just easier. Sits up pretty high so I have only brushed it on rocks.

The 30" lowers should prove to be more than enough for a great ride with awsome flex.

The gearing should be good with the 33's. One zuk I built we put in a 1.6 16V and it had the 4.89 t-case and 3.73 axle gears. It ran great. On road it had good power. On the harder more technical trails, lower would have been nicer. But did pretty good with some good driving. So I think you will be good with your gearing as it would be close to that. Like you said, you could always change the t-case later if you want and as money warrants.

Yep very lucky to have her. She is the one that got me into suzuki's in the first place. Before we got hers I was of the opinion that sammurai's were the volkswagon beetle of 4x4s. Now when I am done with hers if I can hauk my heep I will be building a sammy of my own. Another couple of questions catzuk? How much vertical separation do you have on your front links? At the axle and at the frame? How much distance between the bottom of the frame and the top of your axle tubes? Lastly does anyone know the compressed hieght of 14 inch 175's under an outfitted sammurai? Thanks again for all info!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I will have to get the exact measurements, but.....

Front axle separation, lowers are just below centerline of axles, and upper is just above the pumkin so I think thats near 6-7 inches on mine. The frame end the separation is about 4 inches.

The last time I asked the compressed height of the 14-175's I was told about 12 inches. I'm thinking it may be more than that.

If you would or could for me please. Measure the distance from the top of your axle tube to the bottom of the frame directly above the axles. I would really apreciate it. Can you get to your springs to measure compressed hieght on the tj coils? Also I want to know how much yours is lifted. My front is mocked in and looking good. Its wider than I expected but I am going to make it work with the deepest backspacing wheels I can fit. Thanks!

bump for catzuk

Sorry I did't get back to you, last couple of days were very hecktic at work. I will see what I have on the measurements or will measure it all tonight for you.

Thanks I apreciate it. Also I am curious how your upper link on the pass side clears anything/everything. With your low ride hieght isnt your truss realy close to the oil pan?

Ok, measurements look to be this:
Frame to axle, 10.5 inches.
Compressed spring length, 13 inches (again, I cut my coil buckets up into the frame)

for comparison, on the SPOA zuk I just did, with stock axles and It is a 4.5 inch lift, the axle to frame distance is 8 inches.

So looks that the total lift on the buggy zuk was close to 6 inches. And I was running 35" MTR's. I will see what pics I have and post them.

everything tucked up nicely. Diff fit between frame and oil pan. Some tight clearences, but a little patience and mocking everything up, tacking in place and cycleing it all made it all work. I only adjusted things once in over 6 years of running this front.

Thanks again catzuk! I still have a stock one and it measures about 4 inches between the axle and frame in front. So you are only lifted 6 inches. That gives me some confidence in keeping it lower. I have found some pics of yours while searching but I would like to see how you did your fender trimming better. What engine and other wieght adding mods do you have in your zuk? I really apreciate you getting those measurements for me. I know it can be a PITA to get some of that crap.

I will try to get some pics this weekend of the fenders, but basicly what I did was drill out the spot welds on the fender flare holders, then under them there is an indentation in the body. I just cut along the lower side of that and took the inner fender up to it and welded it there. At that point I choose to not put the fender flare holders back on and left the flares off completely. Still looked good, but no flares to get ripped off. Still looked stock, but without the flares. Gave about an inch to an inch and a half of room I believe. They looked good when I did them, years of beating, rolling and dragging them along the rocks took its toll on the fenders. :homer:

for an engine, I was running the 1.3 for many years. Then last year did the 1.3/1.6 hybrid motor. Then tried the auto tranny. When I did that swap, I lowered the engine an inch and then had to move my bumpstops to keep the 1.6 oil pan from touching the axle.

But now that engine is in my DD zuk and I am sourceing a v-6 for the buggy zuk. So time for some upgrades. It had a great many years of wheeling the way it was and a lot of what I did will end up back into it as well as the DD zuk.

Other than that, a 6000LB short drum winch is the only other thing I had for weight up there.

What I have found is that with radius arms, and 3 links that go to the pass side only, can give you brake dive as well as "jacking". (NOT always though). But my upper link goes from the pass frame rail about where the bend is in the frame and connects to the top of the pumkin (looking down) looks like this \ My pumkin sits just about exactly where the stock one did.

My lowers angle in at the frame kinda like this\ / Axle stays very centered through its travel. the "forces" from braking or wheeling hard have never posed a problem. Have not experienced the "jacking" common in front link set-ups.

Crappy pics, but its what I have saved on computer.

One is a comparison with my zuk on 35's sitting with my buddies toy tacoma with 32" BFG at's.

The other pic is looking down the upper front link. Engine and part of the floor is missing in the pic, but ignor that. :p Shows where my upper and lower tie in.

Shocks were mounted on top and as far out as possible, slightly tilted inward at top, 3 degrees I think.

Ok I have looked at these pics for hours and still need to ask. What do you have your upper link frame end attached to? As in how did you brace it so it doesnt rip off the frame AND not be in the way of the driveline and t-case mounts and crap? I have played with the tape and eye balled it and the only way I can picture making ours work is to make a 3 link front like you did. Also after more searching it sorta seems like doing it the way you did with an actual upper link is what keeps it from brake diving on the side with 1 link only. Instead of making the upper link come off of the lower link like the kits. Having actual vertical seperation at the frame and not just the axle. Judging by your bump stops in the pics how much vertical uptravel do you have? Looks like only maybe 3 inches? Thanks again for your time I know these questions can get annoying.

Truely, I don't mind the questions at all. Glad I can help out, just hope some of it helps you out at least a little.

The upper link frame mount is a piece of 1.5" diameter 1/4 wall tube about 6-7" long total. I drilled a hole thru the frame so that it goes through the frame and is welded on both sides solid to the frame. then I braced it on the top side and back side of the tube with triangle pieces of 3/16. Then its just two tabs welded to the tube for the rod end so its in double shear. Its not going anywhere unless it bends the frame.

With the 5 speed tranny, there is a lot of room actually. The link goes just over the driveshaft. Goes right by the clutch arm and can tuck right up with out hitting anything. In the pics I have the Auto tranny in there which was a much tighter fit, but still cleared just fine.

The bump stop pics are decieving as I had to make bumpstop extensions to keep tires out of fenders as I was trying on a set of my buddies 37's. I was flexing it out to see what I needed to do to make them fit.

Where do your lower links mount ot the axle? I'm putting toy axles under my tracker and am having a hard time finding a placement that will clear the frame at full stuff. Thanks

Travis

Where do your lower links mount ot the axle? I'm putting toy axles under my tracker and am having a hard time finding a placement that will clear the frame at full stuff. Thanks

Travis

PM me your email adress Travis and I will send you some pictures of mine. The lowers are easy for clearance because they should be attached to the axle housing somwhere below the center line of the axle. The uppers need to be well above the top of the axle so fitment on those takes the extra effort. I dont have my uppers done yet but I am working on it.

Alright catzuk I hope you dont mind but I stole your front 3 link design. Thanks for the pics and the advise it worked out great. With out you pointing it out I wouldnt have figured out on my own how to do the upper frame side mount like you did. I still have a ways to go but geometry turned out nice and I think the anti dive should be fine.

Now are your coils flush with the top of the frame in front? I'm using TJ front coils front and rear. Thanks again!

Glad to have been able to help.

Mine are level with the top now, but I am useing XJ front coils and I ended up cutting a coil off of them to lower it some. The XJ front coils were the same height as the TJ's, but were a little stiffer. On mine the TJ's were just too soft and was bottoming a lot and just didn't feel balanced as it seemed to want to transfer weight too quickly to the front. The XJ's elliminated that. I really don't remember the coil rates but there was a difference.

lets see some progress pics!

Glad to have been able to help.

Mine are level with the top now, but I am useing XJ front coils and I ended up cutting a coil off of them to lower it some. The XJ front coils were the same height as the TJ's, but were a little stiffer. On mine the TJ's were just too soft and was bottoming a lot and just didn't feel balanced as it seemed to want to transfer weight too quickly to the front. The XJ's elliminated that. I really don't remember the coil rates but there was a difference.

lets see some progress pics!

I read the rates somewhere on here but cant remember exactly. Seems like tj's are 170 lb while xj are 180 lb. The xj springs I have in my hands are 1 1/2 inches taller than the 4 tj front springs I have. I dont want to cut the spring so if they are to tall I guess I can pony up for some qa1's or similar. As for pics I can email them if you want to pm me your address. I am waiting till the project money is done going out to trade in my special black star for a red one so I can post pics the right way. Unless I wouldnt be a douche for photo bucketing some pics on here?

Glad to have been able to help.

Mine are level with the top now, but I am useing XJ front coils and I ended up cutting a coil off of them to lower it some. The XJ front coils were the same height as the TJ's, but were a little stiffer. On mine the TJ's were just too soft and was bottoming a lot and just didn't feel balanced as it seemed to want to transfer weight too quickly to the front. The XJ's elliminated that. I really don't remember the coil rates but there was a difference.

lets see some progress pics!How much does your front end way have you gotten a chance to measure it?

Haven't weighed it in a long time, but the front end is pretty minimal on additional weight. Only additions I had on it was a 6000LB short drum winch with 50 ft of cable. 50 LBS max additional weight from stock, not much of a bumper as I made the winch plate part of the bumper itself.

I didn't really want to cut mine, but didn't want the extra height and they were free, so I figured what the heck, try it. I still have enough to max out the rancho 9012's so I don't think I lost anything. I still run limiting cables to keep things from over-extending.

How high was the rig before you cut the coils? As in how many inches of lift do you think it was?

I only took out an inch and a half or two out of the total lift height when cutting the coils. But I had a set goal of what I wanted and the coil buckets were already on there so it was either cut the coils and try that or cut out the buckets and re-do them. I had no issue cutting free coil springs. It worked out just fine for me. Again, I get the full use of the shocks I have on there, so it was no worry or suspension loss.

The only problem I see with cutting a wrap of coil off the bottom of the springs is you then loose the flat-ish bottom. Now when you sinch them down doesnt it try to kick the spring off to one side? It doesnt matter for me I guess cuz I have you to measure off of. So I will just raise my spring bucket up higher and not mess with cutting my free coils. I have changed my mind worse than a woman so many times on this thing its getting hard to keep up with myself.:shaking:

LOL, I know how you feel. When I was done with it all, I kept asking myself, why didn't I just do the QA1's again? 34 bucks a piece would have been worth it in hindsight. But money was tight and I had them to work with sooooo.... I'd do it again given the same situations. It wheeled very well for me for many years and I cannot complain about that, it worked!

I cut them at the top, but the retainer I made holds them just fine. They sit a little cocked, but you can only tell when they sit in there with no weight on them. Haven't had any issues to date.

Hey catzuk what steering box are you using?