Atlantic British
- Thread starter pinkytoe69
- Start date
Just to bring some context to this thread: I love Land Rovers, obviously. And I love stock Land Rovers. And I love ETC and TR. But for those of us who primarily wheel, and wheel frequently - as in nearly every weekend - as opposed to greenlaning, overlanding, etc, the limits and weaknesses of ETC are clear. And to bring it back to the original hijack, if building a purpose-built off road LR, defending ETC over locked differentials is simply delusional. And I mean that as respectfully as possible.
And yes, wheels in the air spin with ETC when on actual obstacles. ETC directs power to the wheel(s - CDL) with the least amount of resistance. Look at that pic again and note passenger front and driver rear spinning.
And yes, wheels in the air spin with ETC when on actual obstacles. ETC directs power to the wheel(s - CDL) with the least amount of resistance. Look at that pic again and note passenger front and driver rear spinning.
It is funny to hear about off-road experience of people who likely put about 20 miles of dirt a year on their trucks.
Steve, when you start taking yearly trips back to Colorado in your off-road truck and show some wheeling, we'll revisit the issue. One thing I am grateful to Kyle (vT) is pounding into my head that any vehicle built for a specific purpose is meaningless. I have to admit that it took a while.
Steve, when you start taking yearly trips back to Colorado in your off-road truck and show some wheeling, we'll revisit the issue. One thing I am grateful to Kyle (vT) is pounding into my head that any vehicle built for a specific purpose is meaningless. I have to admit that it took a while.
We can agree to disagree. And I would love to wheel with you in Colorado, though it's unlikely at this point. But if that first sentence was referring to me then you're wildly off-base. I live smack dab in the middle of the best four wheeling in the Southeast and am on trails 3/4 weekends a month.
Regarding Kyle's lesson, he's wrong. If, for example, one wants to rock crawl, one better have a purpose-build rock crawler or it's going to be a short and dangerous day. If one wants to run a bounty hill, one had better have a purpose built rock bouncer, etc. There's much to be said for having a multi-purpose all-around trail rig, but it's not the only game in town.
I've seen both p m and SCSL in action. They're both highly proficient at driving rough trails.
I suspect that they're coming at the the same issue from different directions.
I suspect that they're coming at the the same issue from different directions.
First, no, I have never been personally asked for a 1" kit. But I guess you are at my desk more than I am which is how you've seen me be asked for one.
Second, please tell me where I said the SYA kit was a lift kit. I'll wait. Still waiting. Bueller? Exactly, because I didn't. Obviously I know it isn't a lift, I helped design it. I know what it does. I don't even know who or why you are trying to argue a point here. Everything you said after that about the sensors and calibration is common knowledge that pretty much everybody with an LR3 knows, so congratulations, you read the internet.
The SYA kit is necessary to be 2.5" because many people are now running 33-34" tires, with some people even stretching to 35" tires, so your 1" idea just wont cut it in our world. Maybe it will for your 32's, but people that off-road their LR3 have been over putting 32s on them since 2009. It's just part of the evolution of building these trucks.
Another pro is that the SYA kit also pushes the airbag back down to factory height, creating a much better ride quality. Id be willing to bet that your 1" bump-stop spacer would still create a lot of rub on a 32" tire if you lost the EAS. Is there a market there? Maybe, but you are truly the only person that I have ever seen ask for one. And I'm sorry you don't like the idea of the retention straps, but people that are really using these trucks on the trails appreciate not losing a CV while still being able to run larger tires and not worry about EAS faults.
And WTF is everyone's fascination with needing access height?
I've seen it asked. Maybe you didn't see the posts. I'll agree to disagree.
Blue, and your "Buy an IID tool" comment. Lift doesn't help when it's on bumps.
2.5 is fine for big tires and guys willing to accept the compromises it introduces. Those compromises are unnecessary for 31-32" tires where a shorter simpler kit would suffice.
I bet 32 is much more common due to being the largest size you can run at stock height without major rubbing, fit into the spare carrier, and barely/maybe roll on bumps. The reason you don't see more requests for a shorter kit it is because people don't think about the consequences until it's being dragged onto a flatbed. Educate people on the risk they're taking and sell a bunch of kits.
Steve,
I kind of started with a beater jeep, and built it up to 35" tires, Detroit etc. It would climb mountains (until it wouldn't), and it would put most Rover folks at a time (almost 20 years ago) to shame. But... in two years, I ran out of local trails and rock piles that I cared for. And the jeep was perfectly unfit for anything but rock crawling.
In 2002, there was a bizarre off-road gathering in Ouray, devoted to an unconsequential 40th anniversary from the day the first full size jeep rolled off the assembly line. After pondering my options, I drove the Disco to that meet, all of 900 miles or so.
For the next few days, the Disco was the only vehicle that has not seen its hood popped up for any other reason than hook up jumper cables to restart fuel-flooded jeeps with large tires. It was also one of the few to not have any issues at that ledge in Poughkeepsie, and one to tow others up that ledge.
Kyle was already working on my conscience at that time.
I tend to view off-roading as a marathon sport, not a mad dash up the ledge or mudhole - both in physical distances involved and years I can enjoy it. Hundreds of people came to this sport and disappeared, having burned out after building their trucks into rumbling wrecks excelling in one purpose.
I am pretty sure you're missing Colorado.
I'll tip my hat to the voice of experience, ole buddy. No sense in us arguing.
Who wouldn't? But I hope you're not one of those people who think the South has nothing to offer in terms of off-roading or the outdoors in general. I had that impression before I came out here. But having been here for over a decade now, I would say the wheeling is more difficult in the Appalachians than in CO. Out west, the environment is so tractive and cooperative. The wet rock out here causes any number of difficulties. That said, I was up in Beaver Creek a couple weeks ago and admit to a tinge of homesickness.
I've said this for many years. It's two totally different environments, rock structure, and terrain. While the world of True Tracks and ETC may work well out west, they all but suck here.
Truth.
I ran Carnage Canyon with ETC & 33's. Windrock or AOP (or Crozet, for that matter) would shit that set-up out. Doesn't make Rocky Mountain trails "easy" by any stretch. But to your point, different set-ups for different environments. There's a reason why rock bouncers are built differently than crawlers.
Forgive my ignorance as I am not very familiar with LR3's, but it sounds like you want the inch to keep the body off the tires if the suspension fails?
LOL...yes we have. I have to apologize to ERover82 for thinking that he wanted just 1" of lift for the purposes of an actual "lift". Now I see that he needs it to clear his 32's when the suspension goes tits up.