Shorter Lift?

[somewhereinla]

I am starting to think about a small lift to add on my 2dr rubi. The only one I am interested in at the moment is the OME, as I have had a positive experience with this particular brand in a previous vehicle. However I was wondering if AEV has ever considered making a 2" or 2.5" lift which still would include both new springs and shocks?

[AEV Jim]

It has been talked about, but not officially pursued as of yet. Depending on what tire size you're wanting to run, our 3" system is sufficient for 35" tires. A 2" system will probably get you on to 33" tires with room for wider ones (12.50's) and full articulation+turn.

Jim

[somewhereinla]

I like 32"/33"... 35" is too big and unnecessary for what I like to do. To me a 2"/2.5" is the ultimate lift, especially since I drive a 2dr, it gives you the extra clearance but doesn't compromise the center of gravity too much.

[JeepinJon]

Could just run a 1" body lift, or front spacer to level out the stance, and fit a 33" tire with room to spare.

[0317_guy]

somewhereinla,

If you just want to go as tall as 33's and you want to add a good winch and bumper then a good spring lift would be the best choice. A spacer lift will get you by if you are not going to add a bumper and winch. The stock springs sag after a while with an aftermarket bumper and winch. I run the Old Man Emu 2" spring lift on my 2dr and it rides great!

[somewhereinla]

somewhereinla,

If you just want to go as tall as 33's and you want to add a good winch and bumper then a good spring lift would be the best choice. A spacer lift will get you by if you are not going to add a bumper and winch. The stock springs sag after a while with an aftermarket bumper and winch. I run the Old Man Emu 2" spring lift on my 2dr and it rides great!

That's what I used to run on my Discovery as well, and as far as I am concern the only good solution for a 2" lift and definitely what I intend to get on my 2dr JK, I was just wondering if AEV had something similar in the works as it would be nice to consider a viable alternative.

Do you run the HD or the Light/Medium load. I am not sure which one to get. I know most people have the HD, but end up getting 3" or more, even with an after market bumper+winch... I am considering the Light?medium dutty but have yet to hear from someone that have it.

[AEV Dave]

We're looking into it heavily right now, but no promises at this point.

dh

[JeepinJon]

Along the lines of smaller lifts (3" and less) is there a polibility that you guys may come out with new front lower control arms that are fixed in length so the cam bolts are not necessary?

[0317_guy]

That's what I used to run on my Discovery as well, and as far as I am concern the only good solution for a 2" lift and definitely what I intend to get on my 2dr JK, I was just wondering if AEV had something similar in the works as it would be nice to consider a viable alternative.

Do you run the HD or the Light/Medium load. I am not sure which one to get. I know most people have the HD, but end up getting 3" or more, even with an after market bumper+winch... I am considering the Light?medium dutty but have yet to hear from someone that have it.

I do run the L/MD springs. It rides great but I think I might swap them out for the HD springs do to rubbing when fully stuffed. The other option would be tube fenders and that would be just as good.

[somewhereinla]

I just read Rough Country is coming out with a 2.5" lift comprised of shock+springs, it will be shown at SEMA.


We're looking into it heavily right now, but no promises at this point.
dh

Dave, I am glad you guys are looking into it. I know it's not as sexy as the larger lift, but there is probably a bigger market for the 2"-2.5" lift ... Not to mentioned that with AEV's/Nth Degree's reputation it would probably be a best seller.I know a lot of people, such as I, that need the extra clearance, that are avid "off roaders " but are not necessarily "hard core" rock crawlers and don't need a supper high clearance. And then of course there are a lot of people that want to mod there jeep just because they have one and get the bug from spending too much time on Jeep forums but don't want to go crazy...

I do run the L/MD springs. It rides great but I think I might swap them out for the HD springs do to rubbing when fully stuffed. The other option would be tube fenders and that would be just as good.

Do you have both an aftermarket front/rear bumper + winch or stock? Are you running 33" or 35"?

[0317_guy]

I do have after market bumpers front and rear + a winch. I use the OR-FAB rear tire carrier/gas can holder as well. I figured out I needed an extra 5/8" to stop the rubbing at full articulation so I took a 1" body lift to the band saw and cut it down to 5/8" using a custom made sled for the feed table on the band saw. The body lift is hardly noticable and provides the exact ammount of clearance I needed for the 35" BFG KM2's. I also run 1" spacers on the hubs to run the stock wheels. You can aleviate this by getting a rim with the proper backspacing but it was cheaper to run the hub spacers and I wanted to keep the stock moabs.

You might be able to gain an extra 1/2" of clearance with the HD 4 door springs as they were designed for the CRD version of the 4 door which I hear gives you about an extra 1/2" on the 2 door over the L/MD springs. As for the ride on the HD springs on the 2 door I tend to think it would be a little stiffer then the L/MD springs. JMHO.

[AEV Jim]

Along the lines of smaller lifts (3" and less) is there a polibility that you guys may come out with new front lower control arms that are fixed in length so the cam bolts are not necessary?

Maybe, but probably not. The stock arms and cam bolts do just fine, and the cost of replacement arms would be 10x that of the cam bolts, so they would really impact the kit price if we put them in as standard. It's a lot of money to spend to avoid some cam bolts...

Jim

[0317_guy]

I had cam bolts on my last TJ and now on my JK. I beat the snot out of both Jeeps and never once broke,sheared or destroyed a cam bolt. They never loosened up on me either. Why spend $400 - $600 clams on adj. control arms to gain a 1/4 inch in adj. when a cam bolt will do just as well if not better then some of the top name brand control arm MFG Co's who like to sell high priced paper weights.

There is a HUGE MISCONCEPTION out there that cam bolts suck.

[JeepinJon]

I had cam bolts on my last TJ and now on my JK. I beat the snot out of both Jeeps and never once broke,sheared or destroyed a cam bolt. They never loosened up on me either. Why spend $400 - $600 clams on adj. control arms to gain a 1/4 inch in adj. when a cam bolt will do just as well if not better then some of the top name brand control arm MFG Co's who like to sell high priced paper weights.

There is a HUGE MISCONCEPTION out there that cam bolts suck.

I am looking more for something like the gyro joint system where it offers greater atricualtion, rebuildability, and on vehicle adjustments. Not necessarily concerned too much over the 1/4" as much as I am trying to make the suspension work as well as possible.

[0317_guy]

In my opinion and experience it is good to have rubber; not poly, urethane or the other crap available, bushings in the various suspension links.

Solid pivots, like heim joints - gyro joints or johny joints will transfer/transmit a tremendous amount of vibration to the chassis. At least the JK has rubber body mounts to isolate some of the vibration but the noise, vibration and harshness factor with solid pivots is greater then rubber bushings. I would try to find control arms with rubber bushings.

Just my 671 grains.:D

[AEV Jim]

I am looking more for something like the gyro joint system where it offers greater atricualtion, rebuildability, and on vehicle adjustments. Not necessarily concerned too much over the 1/4" as much as I am trying to make the suspension work as well as possible.

I think the attitude towards cam bolts partially comes from the non-success of using them on the rear-uppers of TJ's (which is rare in the off-road world because they're not enough for a CV driveshaft, but still there are some occasions when it can be used). The problem is that TJ UCAs use tiny 10mm bolts, which are so skinny that they can't generate enough clamp load to keep the cam-type versions from slipping. And the rear-uppers on a TJ are what keep the axle from flipping over under hard acceleration/load, so they get a lot of force when in low-range on high-traction surfaces (Moab slickrock, etc.). So while I have seen no problems with cam bolts on lower arms (TJ/ZJ front lowers have used them, plus of course we're adding them to JK's), I understand if people are extrapolating from experience with TJ rear-upper cams.

Hope that clears it up a little...

Jim

[AEV Jim]

In my opinion and experience it is good to have rubber; not poly, urethane or the other crap available, bushings in the various suspension links.

Solid pivots, like heim joints - gyro joints or johny joints will transfer/transmit a tremendous amount of vibration to the chassis. At least the JK has rubber body mounts to isolate some of the vibration but the noise, vibration and harshness factor with solid pivots is greater then rubber bushings. I would try to find control arms with rubber bushings.

Just my 671 grains.:D

Sorry to quibble here, but don't group GyroJoints with those "non-isolating" joints! I designed the GJ *specifically* to solve the issue of preserving isolation while adding flexibility (the on-car adjustability was a nice side-effect bonus!). The GJ has about 50% more isolation material than a standard TJ LCA bushing - and it's 3/4" thick at it's thinnest point behind the ball. Yes it's urethane, but the white version used in the front GJ's is actually softer than the normal rubber in TJ LCAs (BTW there are six different durometers - or 'hardnesses' - of late Jeep LCA bushings; TJ is the second softest after XJ front lowers). Normally urethane that soft wouldn't survive the pounding of a LCA application, but the design of the GJ (trapped in a box and no possibility of shear or tension loads) allows it to last. The super-soft material isn't needed in the rear GJ's because of the natural ride-improving geometry of trailing arms with a downward slope (i.e. rear axles have 'recession' while fronts usually have undesirable 'precession'). Also GJ's use their isolation material at 50% efficiency (i.e. one hemisphere at a time) versus only about 20% for a cylindrical stock-type bushing (only the area 'behind' the inner metal)...which also allows it to perform better without the usual durability penalty that you'd get if you just softened up a cylindrical bushing.

There...now you've ad the 'pitch' for GyroJoints...;)

Jim

[0317_guy]

Sorry to quibble here, but don't group GyroJoints with those "non-isolating" joints! I designed the GJ *specifically* to solve the issue of preserving isolation while adding flexibility (the on-car adjustability was a nice side-effect bonus!). The GJ has about 50% more isolation material than a standard TJ LCA bushing - and it's 3/4" thick at it's thinnest point behind the ball. Yes it's urethane, but the white version used in the front GJ's is actually softer than the normal rubber in TJ LCAs (BTW there are six different durometers - or 'hardnesses' - of late Jeep LCA bushings; TJ is the second softest after XJ front lowers). Normally urethane that soft wouldn't survive the pounding of a LCA application, but the design of the GJ (trapped in a box and no possibility of shear or tension loads) allows it to last. The super-soft material isn't needed in the rear GJ's because of the natural ride-improving geometry of trailing arms with a downward slope (i.e. rear axles have 'recession' while fronts usually have undesirable 'precession'). Also GJ's use their isolation material at 50% efficiency (i.e. one hemisphere at a time) versus only about 20% for a cylindrical stock-type bushing (only the area 'behind' the inner metal)...which also allows it to perform better without the usual durability penalty that you'd get if you just softened up a cylindrical bushing.

There...now you've ad the 'pitch' for GyroJoints...;)

Jim

I stand corrected on the gyro-joints. For some reason I thought it was just another name for a heim-joint. My fault.

[AEV Jim]

I stand corrected on the gyro-joints. For some reason I thought it was just another name for a heim-joint. My fault.

No worries, you're forgiven ;) Actually if you didn't know what they are then we need to do a better job of showing what they are! Actually that like so many things is in the works. I've attached a CAD model cutaway where the side of the box (subframe) is removed and the top-cover is off, so you can see the ball-in-socket design. The red piece is the urethane that's softer (white) for front GJ's and is harder (black) for rear GJ's. The green part is also made from the harder black urethane in both GJ's. You can see the grease grooves that radiate from the zerc-fitted hole that's on the back. It's not like anything else out there...especially not like a cross-axis-ball-joint (the official/generic term for the various versions marketed as Johnny Joints, SuperFlex Joints, etc.).

-Jim