OK a post on NOR piqued my interest...if I was to weld on two brackets to the axle--thus raising the bottom shock mount by approximately 3-4 inches, and then had a top shock mount welded to the frame--does it matter which side of the axle the shocks are mounted on?? Supposedly not as the leaf springs "locate" so that issue would not come into play...the next issue would be what length and spring rate shocks should one go with?? Any other issues to look out for here?? Seems like it would solve alot of the problems of having the SUA without the complication of lifting the rear too high with a SOA modification...(additionally a low profile/high Ubolt mount leaf pack would replace the OEM one....am I making any sense here???

I saw that too. I am not sure that the bracket in question actually raises the bottom mount. It's my understanding that the mount is level with the center line of the rear axle and a bit further back. The aplication of this that I have seen mounts both shocks on the back end of the axle...or whatever you call it. As far as shocks, you would have to measure...although the Nissan that I know that runs a setup like this has 12 inch piggybacks on it. I am thinking about this too...just have to figure where to mount the top of the shocks.

Yeah axle shock mounts use to be fairly common stock …4 runners, pathys, etc. you can buy the brackets for ~ $25 from several places like foothill offroad.

On the X and many American brands they are placed front and rear to help with axle wrap and what not although I don’t think it makes that much difference SUA with our setup.

On the X if you wanted to run longer shocks best to weld the mounts on the back of the axle and the upper mounts to the tallest sub member (look above the passenger side shock mount to see what I’m talking about). That’s what Ned did with the revolvers.

Might be possible to run 19-20"/34" shocks this way with some bump stop mods although you will need a longer rear drive shaft and cross member mods to take advantage of anything past ~ 11” of shock travel not to mention longer brake, abs, and breather lines.

Let me know if you come up with anything...this is an idea I will be working on as well...thought I don't think I want to go to a longer drive shaft...just want to relocate the shocks and keep approximately the same amount of travel--though I don't mind extending brake lines and such....

I just ordered some UBSkiderz, which raise the bottom of the shock mount point, allowing the same shock travel to give more droop...you can get them side mount which raises the bottom of the shock about 2", or a top mount that raises it more like 5-6".

Yeah...seen those...still leave that shock eye exposed, one shock on the front side of the axle, and the lower shock mount dependant upon the leaf spring perch....would like to solve all three issues...

So TJ, did you get the side mounts or the top mounts? I like the idea of the top mounts, but I wonder if they'll allow the shocks enough room to compress enough at full stuffage.

Mmmmm....stuffage...

Get the side mounts, the top mounts are too high unless you relocate the upper mount too. The side mount coupled with a 3-leaf AAL set works out perfect.

Thanks Brent.

The three-leaf's what I'm running now, so it sounds like side-mounts it is.

Yeah - I went with the side mounts...the Skid Plate pretty much protects the shock, as its tucked up higher than the bottom of the leaves on the side mount...whereas the stocker put the bottom of the shock at or lower than the leaves.

An update to my progress on this project...I had been interested in the width of Toyota leafs as the following will explain...

Toyota leafs are a funny size...some say 2.25, others I asked said 2.36...Moot point however as most toyota owners move to Deaver leaf springs eventually which are 2.5...just like the Xterras...and therefore the T/C ubolt leaf plate WILL fit our leafs... The part on the T/C Toyota accesories page where it says it fits 2" leafs is a typo...talked to T/C this afternoon and they are in the process of correcting it and have updated the thread over on NOR saying that they have 2.5's plates in stock..............So.............I bought a set of those and the axle shock mount brackets that are on that page as well and they should be here next week...so I now have to find someone who does decent welding, purchase a new set of high quality shocks--thinking Fox or RaceRunners, and determine the upper shock location......
The upper shock location is going to be the most difficult due to the X's limited mounting areas and as I have no math skills....so I put my father on the job (engineer who went to school at MIT--Really, no joke) so if he can't figure it out.... Will update this further and the project comes along....

Cough cough...RaceRunners...cough.

You get the idea.

Why the preference?? less cost for same performance??

I've beat the snot out of mine and they're still in great shape. Like any high-end shock you can rebuild them, but I have yet to have the need. I know several people that run them. Fox is good, don't get me wrong. It's less a preference and more of what I am used to. But then again, they work and work well. There's no guess work involved if I decide to get another pair for the rear....which is likely.

OK...this is progressing very nicely...found a good welder only 1/2 mile from my house--I have used this place before for other stuff and this guy is good--real good--drag races mustangs in his down time...AND my calculations on the new position of the rear shocks is near done...here's what it would look like in moving the passenger side shock (which is already on the rear of the axle)...I'll let my fathers comments try and describe this....

"The "ORIGINAL" angles are damn near exactly 20 degrees and 70 degrees for the triangle of the normally loaded 21 inch shock.
The "NEW" shock position maintains exactly the 21 inch length of the neutral shock, and....
The "NEW" angles are damn near 50 degrees, and 40 degrees.
So, other than the following there's not much to say. The sketch says that the original equipment fits exactly with just moving the lower attach point back 6 inches and up 4 inches (given nothing getting in the way). Probably someone planned it that way.

The thing to be interested in would be whether there's enough travel in the existing shock to allow the 6 inch up and down motion of the axle that you say is needed. I can easily see & tell you how much more the NEW shock has to extend or compress [before it meets snubbers] compared to the OLD position. That travel can't be too much, maybe an inch more I'd guess - and possibly the shock on the XTerra now can do that.

The only other item is whether the shock can really work as well at the increased angle. Maybe a more robust shock with the same dimensions would be preferable?"

So essentially (though I have to check the compression and extension of the extended Bil's) is that your extended length Bil's would fit with this movement of the lower shock mounts to the axle with only an added upper shock mount on the drivers side in an identical placement to the one on the passenger side--though its effectiveness would be decrease substantially as the angle of the shock is increasing from 20 to 40 degrees--therefore to compensate you would go to a higher end shock--perhaps stiffer and with a thicker shaft...Will let you know if there are any further deveolpments...

All this to protect the shock eyes? - And keep the same performance?

You'd think it would be easier to just weld a 1/2" thick gusseted steel shelf off the UBSkiderz to come under the eye.

The Skiderz already lift the eye above the plane of the leaves to start with, so they are almost completely protected upon installation...adding the shelf would therefore not rob clearance, and accomplish all stated objectives.

If you do go with the Rube Goldberg thing afterall, Have Father MIT compute the changes in forces involved with the changes in angles, and the resultant rebound and compression rates.

As you seem to be leaning towards re-buildable custom shocks anyway...you can therefore take advantage of that, and calibrate them as needed.



Sounds like a fun father and son project!

Not JUST to protect the shock eyes--how many times have you or someone you are running with get hung up or bump those shock bottoms or the ubolt bottoms?? I know I have seen it almost EVERY time I've been out...This will protect the shock eye, provide 4 extra inches of ground clearance for about a 3 inch section on either side of the axle and will completely smooth out the ubolt plates...Plus...just imagine how cool it will look from behind as I'm flexing back and forth to see both shocks in full behind the axle going up and down!!

Well, not to argue to cool factors...

but the skiderz also raise the clearance to above the leaves, and do all you seem to want with far less hassle....or I'd be all over your break through in suspension geometry.



It just seems so far beyond the point of diminishing return for so little gain.

For example: The shocks alone you are planning on will cost more than modifying the cross member to allow the extra droop you could have gone for...and a more droop would probably get you more terrain advantages than the little 3" gap next to the leaves.



Maybe at least CONSIDER adding some droop?

please?

for me?

Well...OK...just for you...
I am also going to be adding Deaver springs--going to be asking EditorX for how he ordered his and will be purchasing shocks to cover the extended droop and placing them properly...
Perhaps from the diagram you thought I was gonna purchase shocks that were EXACTLY the same length and such as the extended Bil's--that is not the case....I just wanted a diagram to see what happens when you move the shock mount...Now comes the part where I will adjust to get less angle on the shock and adjust for a longer shock as well....

Don't worry...by the time I'm done I should have at least as much droop and travel as you do
And the ass end of my X will look a hell of a lot sexier too!!

Ahhh....quick redesign issue...the initial design is incorrectly set up--it shows the shock angled FORWARD--towards the front of the truck when in actuality it needs to be angled BACKWARDS--towards the rear of the truck...Thought that was too easy...a redesign is in the works...

Uhh, so in your opinions, are the "skiderz" a good thing? They seem to handle the shock mount and ubolt protection challenges adequately enough..

These along with the SAS leafpacks have brought my ground clearance (from the bottom point of the front spring hanger) to 14.75 inches. The Ubolt heads are tucked nicely in between metal sheets and the shocks tightened snuggly to the large mounting bolt you see there.

Actually, the Skiderz I meant were the Darlington UBSkiderz.







I thought one shock angled foward, and the other back, to help fight hop and wrap issues.

On the OEM, the passenger and drivers side rear shocks are at front of and behind the axle top mount points for that reason...if you make them both the same, you lose half the damping in that direction.

With the SUA setup axle wrap should not be an issue...and secondly there should be no "that direction" in the movement of the axle...the axle should move up and down in a nearly straight line with some movement backwards due to the shackles but many, many, setups have both shocks behind the axle...