I am currently collecting parts to put some 35's on my 2000 D2. Have any of you guys used 35's with a Greg Davis rear bumper? I know I will have to trim my wheel wells and possibly my sliders, but I really don't want to modify my rear bumper. Any ideas if they will fit?
35's and Greg Davis bumper?
- Thread starter bmxer06pa
- Start date
i had to trim the fenders and still rub pretty heavily on the wheel wells.
also need to trim my RTE front bumper as it hits hard at full stuff with the tires straight.
also need to trim my RTE front bumper as it hits hard at full stuff with the tires straight.
front more than the rear, but there is some in the rear. bumps are probably not tall enough. or maybe too much flex.Mongo said:
I need to hammer down the pinch seem on the front foot box.So I am looking at trimming the front bumper (possibly), the sliders, and wheel arches, but my rear bumper will be ok?
Are flexi flares the way to go for the cleanest looking install? I can't hack my truck up too much if I want to keep the old lady happy
Are flexi flares the way to go for the cleanest looking install? I can't hack my truck up too much if I want to keep the old lady happy
With a steady hand and practice you can get a clean cut.. I ordered my flexes before I cut much. I say try to cut a bit and see how it goes.
Why stop at 35's? A little more trimming and you can fit 38's.Running 38's will automatically add 2" to your ding dong.
Don't forget to add 6" bump stops to your list of parts.
You should only have to trim your sliders.
You should only have to trim your sliders.
Why doesn't a D2 have a lot of down travel?
to give you a heads up, you will need 6" bumps in the front and 8" in the rear. Or you can have targets made for the axles and use 4" pro thanes. You are not going to be able to bolt the bumps on the frame without a lot of work. As far as I know there is a prototype set of 4" D2 bump stops somewhere in New York.
OR you can just weld some DOM to the frames and use some stud style bumps on the ends.
The measurements I give are based on 36" tires, and at full stuff they are a hair from touching the flares.
I'm curious what you mean about the D2 not having a lot of down travel.
to give you a heads up, you will need 6" bumps in the front and 8" in the rear. Or you can have targets made for the axles and use 4" pro thanes. You are not going to be able to bolt the bumps on the frame without a lot of work. As far as I know there is a prototype set of 4" D2 bump stops somewhere in New York.
OR you can just weld some DOM to the frames and use some stud style bumps on the ends.
The measurements I give are based on 36" tires, and at full stuff they are a hair from touching the flares.
I'm curious what you mean about the D2 not having a lot of down travel.
Maybe I have done something wrong. I have 12in 7100s front and back, 3in rovertym springs, robertym radius arms, and their extended watts. I have cones and retainers because I assumed my springs would just fall out. After putting my new setup in I went to the cove for a weekend. I hit the rti ramp after the trails and neither my front nor my rear springs came off my spring perches. I hit the ramp in drive and reverse. Maybe the cones just did their jobs on the trail and I never noticed, but I assumed on the ramp would exaggerate anything I could hit on the trail. What am I missing?
I've brought this up before, but it fell on deaf ears. Your extended watts linkage does nothing more than allow taller springs.
The last time I brought that up it was argued that the radius arms are what limit the flex, which is true only due to the fact that rover used a watts link to center the axle. In fact riding behind Justin's P38 I noticed the panhard rear (on the P38) allows more flex than a D2. You'll see a lot of hot rod and muscle car guys using a watts because it is a very easy solution to keeping the rear axle parallel to the body and it is compact.
With radius arms front and rear and adding a watts link you are creating a more stable on road behavior, which allows the traction control and abs to work more effectively...the downside is when you design a live axle truck to handle better on road i.e. more stable, it makes less flexible off road.
The next time you get a chance to put it on a ramp, go up until the driver rear unloads. Have someone take a picture of the watts, you'll see that it is completely bound.
With watts
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v...ew¤t=DSC_0656-1.jpg&mediafilter=noflash
Without watts
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v.../seventyfive/?action=view¤t=Image-6.jpg
Granted its not the exact same line, but without the watts and radius arms, the tires do not come off the ground, I picked several lines to try to get a tire unloaded but they wouldn't.
The last time I brought that up it was argued that the radius arms are what limit the flex, which is true only due to the fact that rover used a watts link to center the axle. In fact riding behind Justin's P38 I noticed the panhard rear (on the P38) allows more flex than a D2. You'll see a lot of hot rod and muscle car guys using a watts because it is a very easy solution to keeping the rear axle parallel to the body and it is compact.
With radius arms front and rear and adding a watts link you are creating a more stable on road behavior, which allows the traction control and abs to work more effectively...the downside is when you design a live axle truck to handle better on road i.e. more stable, it makes less flexible off road.
The next time you get a chance to put it on a ramp, go up until the driver rear unloads. Have someone take a picture of the watts, you'll see that it is completely bound.
With watts
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v...ew¤t=DSC_0656-1.jpg&mediafilter=noflash
Without watts
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v.../seventyfive/?action=view¤t=Image-6.jpg
Granted its not the exact same line, but without the watts and radius arms, the tires do not come off the ground, I picked several lines to try to get a tire unloaded but they wouldn't.