95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners 4th gen pickups and 3rd gen 4Runners

Rear Bumpstops on '99 4Runner

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-14-2004 | 07:34 PM
  #1  
dragr1's Avatar
Thread Starter
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 1
From: Auburn, AL
Rear Bumpstops on '99 4Runner

I have Old Man Emu rear firm coils and shocks. I did not remove the factory spring isolator cone when I installed the lift.

Am I losing rear travel by having it in?

Should I trim the isolator shorter? or

Should I remove it and get Steve's super soft rear bumpstops?
Old 07-14-2004 | 07:48 PM
  #2  
Albuquerque Jim's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,549
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
I doubt you are losing any stuff because it's in there.

I left mine in there (1/4" lift) and I have Steve's Supper Soft Bump Stops...
Old 07-14-2004 | 07:57 PM
  #3  
dragr1's Avatar
Thread Starter
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 1
From: Auburn, AL
Originally Posted by Albuquerque Jim
I doubt you are losing any stuff because it's in there.

I left mine in there (1/4" lift) and I have Steve's Supper Soft Bump Stops...

So the axle hits the isolator and the frame mounted bumpstop at the same time, I'm assuming. In this case then, the isolator neither helps nor hurts, it just gives 1/4" lift with the springs?
Old 07-14-2004 | 08:02 PM
  #4  
BruceTS's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Leave the stock bumpstops and Isolators, you don't need to change them. The only issue you may have is the driveshaft hitting the fuel tank skidplate, just clearance the plate.
Old 07-14-2004 | 08:11 PM
  #5  
dragr1's Avatar
Thread Starter
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 1
From: Auburn, AL
Originally Posted by BruceTS
Leave the stock bumpstops and Isolators, you don't need to change them. The only issue you may have is the driveshaft hitting the fuel tank skidplate, just clearance the plate.

I've had this setup for about 20,000 miles now and I've had the rear maxed out numerous times and have never had the driveshaft hit-that is one reason that I thought there might be some more flex to be had in the rear.
Old 07-14-2004 | 08:41 PM
  #6  
RTdawgs's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,068
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Originally Posted by dragr1
I've had this setup for about 20,000 miles now and I've had the rear maxed out numerous times and have never had the driveshaft hit-that is one reason that I thought there might be some more flex to be had in the rear.
ive never hit the gas tank either and im confident its the shocks thats limiting the rear travel.
Old 07-15-2004 | 04:26 AM
  #7  
dragr1's Avatar
Thread Starter
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 1
From: Auburn, AL
Originally Posted by RTdawgs
ive never hit the gas tank either and im confident its the shocks thats limiting the rear travel.
So maybe we should get rid of the isolators, notch the gas tank, and run longer shocks. I have seen a little part that allows you to convert from the type of rear shocks we have to a conventional style shock (eyelets on each end), that would open up all kinds of shock lengths for us.
Old 07-15-2004 | 05:04 AM
  #8  
aowRS's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,755
Likes: 45
From: Ellicott City, MD
Originally Posted by dragr1
So maybe we should get rid of the isolators, notch the gas tank, and run longer shocks. I have seen a little part that allows you to convert from the type of rear shocks we have to a conventional style shock (eyelets on each end), that would open up all kinds of shock lengths for us.
I would vote to leave it in. The shocks limit your down travel and the frame-mounted hard rubber stops above the axle tube limit your up travel. The rubber used on the isolator cones is so soft and compressible, I would doubt it has any affect whatsoever.

Andreas
Old 07-15-2004 | 05:28 AM
  #9  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
Mine are totally gone, and I get a good bit more stuff than dragr does on the same inclines. I also don't get enough droop to come close to hitting the gas tank, but that's going to change really soon... I vote for at least taking a hack saw to the bottom button on the bumpstop - maybe even the bottom three and add some air bags for towing - you'd be VERY suprised w/ the difference. When you go offroad, you simply remove the stem from the valve for the bags and they completely compress w/o limiting travel. I'm seriously considering getting some more air bags for the rear coils. If I do, the conical bumpstops will go back in (trimmed) and the bags underneath them.

Here's some pics with the rear stuffed. That's Downey 3.5" rears w/ OEM shocks. I'll be ditching the OEM shocks soon...

http://4rnr.net/rides/tellico-07-10-04/images/t-04.jpg
http://4rnr.net/rides/tellico-07-10-04/images/t-05.jpg
http://4rnr.net/rides/tellico-07-10-04/images/t-06.jpg

Last edited by bamachem; 07-15-2004 at 06:12 AM.
Old 07-15-2004 | 05:31 AM
  #10  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by aowRS
I would vote to leave it in. The shocks limit your down travel and the frame-mounted hard rubber stops above the axle tube limit your up travel. The rubber used on the isolator cones is so soft and compressible, I would doubt it has any affect whatsoever.

Andreas
I disagree 100%. On a NON-LIFTED runner, cut off the "soft" conical bumpstops and replace them w/ air bags and see how the ride changes. Night and Day. Those things will give on a slow stuff, but they DO limit travel.
Old 07-15-2004 | 05:34 AM
  #11  
aowRS's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,755
Likes: 45
From: Ellicott City, MD
Originally Posted by bamachem
I disagree 100%. On a NON-LIFTED runner, cut off the "soft" conical bumpstops and replace them w/ air bags and see how the ride changes. Night and Day. Those things will give on a slow stuff, but they DO limit travel.

Point taken. I humbly shuffle away with my tail between my legs...

Andreas
Old 07-15-2004 | 05:39 AM
  #12  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by aowRS
Point taken. I humbly shuffle away with my tail between my legs...

Andreas

LOL... don't take it that way... I'm glad you posted. It's good, honest, opinionated discussions like this one that make this board so interesting and helpful.

I just respectfully disagree. I had a 2wd that i put some TRD bags on in the rear for loads and towing and it was MUCH better than the bumpstops...
Old 07-15-2004 | 05:56 AM
  #13  
sschaefer3's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 5,278
Likes: 0
From: Tempe, Arizona
Originally Posted by RTdawgs
I'm confident its the shocks thats limiting the rear travel.
Gee Wiz Skippy you think? You can be more than confident, you can be certain.

Originally Posted by bamachem
I disagree 100%. On a NON-LIFTED runner, cut off the "soft" conical bumpstops and replace them w/ air bags and see how the ride changes. Night and Day. Those things will give on a slow stuff, but they DO limit travel.
They bottom out harshly too. MOST people don't get the bump stop thing, but it is one of the more significant improvements.

Now there's 2 ways to do it, the cheaper way and the completely bolt on way.
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:03 AM
  #14  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by sschaefer3
They bottom out harshly too. MOST people don't get the bump stop thing, but it is one of the more significant improvements...
No kidding. They'll jar your damned teeth just going over speed bumps. Take them out ( or just trim them an inch or two) and the ride is less "controlled" but MUCH less HaRsH.

Last edited by bamachem; 07-15-2004 at 06:10 AM.
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:22 AM
  #15  
RTdawgs's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,068
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Andy - compare your Crawfords flex pics to mine. im runnin OME 890 and N86C.

http://community.webshots.com/user/rtaylor84
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:33 AM
  #16  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
Won't load... VERY SLOW.

I've seen them, and you've got some NICE flex. I'll check them out and edit this when I can get them to load.

Last edited by bamachem; 07-15-2004 at 06:37 AM.
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:34 AM
  #17  
RTdawgs's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,068
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Originally Posted by bamachem
Won't load... VERY SLOW.

I've seen them, and you've got some NICE flex. I'll check them out and edit this when I can get them to load.
i just loaded them since my website has taken a ˟˟˟˟ on itself.

its working for me now.
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:37 AM
  #18  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
you must have gone to breezy's hosting... lol ouch.
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:39 AM
  #19  
RTdawgs's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,068
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Originally Posted by bamachem
you must have gone to breezy's hosting... lol ouch.
yea i did, WTF happened? he wont respond to my emails or PMs!

Last edited by RTdawgs; 07-15-2004 at 06:42 AM.
Old 07-15-2004 | 06:43 AM
  #20  
bamachem's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 0
Likes: 1
remember those computers he was selling? he said in the ads that he was getting out of the business... lol that's why he made him self look like the "good guy" and offer free hosting. he knew when he made the offer that he was getting out of the buisness anyway...



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:33 AM.