Okay. I'm just going to peacefully agree to disagree with you, as I simply see no conceivable way that you can be getting more wheel travel using the same shocks, shock mounts, and bumpstops, especially when the amount of travel you personally measured matches what I measured.

Also, I'm not sure where you got the idea that the CV shafts are limiting the suspension travel and binding...I have had no such problems.

I have the RSX shocks. They're not adjustable and have strange behavior. Actually, the rears seem OK, but the fronts are definately not valved right. I get a pretty rough ride on little bumps and expansion joints, etc, but the front end wallows around and floats pretty bad when I'm going through lumpy areas. I also get quite a bit of squat and dive and the front end bottoms out easily on the trail. I could certainly benefit from the stronger torsion bars and different shocks.

Turn a front axle by hand.
Jack the vehicle up until the front wheels are off the ground.
Try and turn an axle by hand again.
Post your results here.

Well this isn't meant as a flame but this has got to be the biggest load of horse crap I have ever read on this board.

Regardless of what each of the companies claim about gained suspension travell....well it is false advertising, Period.

Follow this link here--> http://www.downeyoff-road.com/ Go to the "mag article" section and then take a good look at the 89-95 lift for the yotas. It is axle replacements, cv replacements etc. etc. Why...To gain more suspension travel. Look they have roughly the same amount of suspension travell as we do..7". With this lift they(Downey)gain 3" to give a TOTAL of 10"

Now do either of these lifts(slr & AC) do this. NO, they don't. Obviously you guys are missing something very simple here. The upper a-arm replacement does nothing more than allow factory spec alignment when the wheel has been adjusted downward of a couple inches and allows the upper balljoint to rest in a neutral postition. That's it.

Also have you replaced the lower a-arm?? No, and you would need to do so for the arc of the suspension travell. For example look at a 2wd lift kit from Fabtech. They replace the a-arms and give them longer length and new angles for up to 12" of suspension travell. These kits are highly modified and you guys think that with a simple uca replacement you are gaining gobs of travell??????

Like I told Goth on the other board, remove your bumpstops if you want gained travell. Stupid choice IMO but that's about your only choice.

Sorry but people will be reading this thread thinking they will gain all sorts of magical travell and they won't.

Later
Brian

I clicked on the Mag Articles section and only get "Coming soon" at the top. Also, they spelled "axles" wrong on their ad (they spelled it "axels"). :p

sorry: current add :p

Sorry Brian, but you are dead wrong.

If you want to come over and measure it, you're welcome to, we live in the same area.

The aftermarket upper control arms are straight, not flared like the stock arms.
They are also thinner in cross section than stock. They are also longer.

This changes the angle of the arm by a large amount before it contacts the upper bumpstop. This allows greater downward travel than stock.

By increasing the downward travel, the suspension can lift the vehicle, and still be sitting in the middle of the travel arc.

Can you explain why my stock shocks, and the Rancho 9188's are too short when my suspension is at full droop ? It's off by an inch at the shock mount, which means almost 2 inches at the centerline of the wheel.

I guess I'll have to post some pictures to prove it to you.

[ 10-05-2001: Message edited by: xoc ]

Look at Downey's ad again... what do you see ?
Rancho upper arms. That's it.

The birfield to u-joint replacement does nothing to alter the suspension, it simply stops the birfields from exploding at extreme angles.

SLR solves the extreme angle problem by lowering the differential, which is a much better solution, since Downey's kit can't be used at highway speeds, because they have only one u-joint.

U-joints speed up and slow down when they rotate, which is why the double cardan and CV joint were invented.

Ian give me a day or two and I should be able to shoot some shots of the AC kit with the Rancho's(same shocks as yours) disconnected and see if they are in fact too short as well. The shocks were already installed so I never checked if they were too short. Honestly everyone talks about the CV angles being a limiting factor on the X which is definetly true but I think our main problem is the steering system.

From what I can tell looking at the control arms offered by each kit (SLR & AC, the Calmini arms are different), they are the same piece. Same size, exact same design ...?

Close, but not the same, some subtle differences. For starters, the SLR tubing is curved.




[ 10-05-2001: Message edited by: xoc ]

I'm talking about the AC arms vs. the SLR arms. You posted a pic of the stock arms and the SLR arms ... ?

Again, the AC arms and the SLR arms look the same to me.

I know that. I posted a picture of the SLR arm (ignore the stock one next to it).

Your job was to go find this picture...



...and notice the differences, without me posting it.

FYI - Here is Mosi's picture of the AC A-arm... This should help show the differences with SLR / AC designs.



[ 10-08-2001: Message edited by: stormy ]

the SLR one be prettier.

This coming from someone with a "Big Dumb Rack" on his X...

Fine see if I let you help me install any more mods!