| Author |
Message |
    
Jeff (Azroverguy)
| | Posted on Friday, August 02, 2002 - 05:02 pm: | 
|
Hey guys,
I was wondering if anyone with the rovertym lift could post some pics of their rangies. Im ready to order them but just wanted to see how badass it really looks on the RR. thanks again!
Jeff |
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Friday, August 02, 2002 - 06:09 pm: |
|
Jeff
Start with a two inch lift.
Randall |
PerroneFord
| | Posted on Sunday, August 04, 2002 - 09:36 am: |
|
http://www.spanishtrailrovers.com/Tech/Mods/RoverTym_Lift/rovertym_lift.html |
Chris von C.
| | Posted on Sunday, August 04, 2002 - 11:43 am: |
|
Check out Adam Ways Rangie and some of the pictures of other lifted rangies on his site. Although he may be a bit higher than 3".
http://student.fortlewis.edu/~alway/adamwayhomepage.htm
Chris von C |
AdrianS
| | Posted on Sunday, August 04, 2002 - 08:05 pm: |
|
Jeff
If you look on EE's website under Adventures, go to "Camden Expedition" and you'll see my Green(dirty) 91RRC with 3" RTE, rear links, cones, extended shock mounts, 9000's and I'm running 245/75's. There's a close up picture of my truck (my daughter is standing with her friend) so you can see the clearance with the 245's. I will be going to 265/75's next. The white rangie has 3" Big Blues and 265/75's.
Adrian |
Kent
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 11:37 am: |
|
The Rovertym guys are great. I have found them to be knowlegable and helpful. I would reccomend them to anyone seeking to do suspension modification, bumpers and about anything you need. They are an excellent resource. The three inch lift is so cool. I can't recall seeing many of them. I know the Rovertym guys well. I was there recently. They were working on a modified D90 with a five inch suspension lift and modified 330hp engine, this things got to be running 35+ inch tires. Clearance and axel articulation on this thing are unbeleiveable.
I've got a 95 Classic LWB with a two inch suspension lift, Roveretym steering linkage and am 245's. The 255's rubbed to much for my taste.
Soon, I will be adding, by way of Rovertym, 2inch body lift and will be running 285's. Additional modifications will include, front skid plate, dif guard, Rovertym Rock Sliders, maybe the slim Rovertym Front bumper. (I really need a back bumper since that the one I constanstly do damage to.)
Anyway, I would recommend them to anyone, just call John he will be able to direct you to some people he has done this for. I will say this once you do yours I would like to see it. Its really cool and increases your articulation like you wouldn't believe. Good Luck |
Bryan Wainscott (Bwainscott)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 11:58 am: |
|
I also have a question for you all about tires and a similar lift. I have a 89 Rangie with Rancho 9000s, OME MD springs and I am looking to get the RTE 2" body lift and new tires. So with the overall lift of about 3.5"s with only 1.5"s of suspension lift. My question is what tire sizes can I fit? I know I can fit 245/75s but what can I fit bigger than that? |
John Cinquegrana (Johnc)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 12:09 pm: |
|
I was running BFG AT 265/75 and they did not rub on the body. I did install longer bumpstops because it rubbed on the inside fenderwell. The BFG AT is a pretty wide (square) tire. I am running Procomp MTs that are also 265/75 but the tread patter is not as wide as the BFGs. I have 3" Blue Monsters on the Rangie.
One word of advice, when you install the body lift, make sure to check the wire that goes to the MAF, it's not long enough and will stretch and break when you lift the body.
Good luck,
John
BTW, if you go to this link you can see the BFG ATs 265/75 on my 88 RR: http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4291913223 |
Bryan Wainscott (Bwainscott)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 12:50 pm: |
|
Do you have any problems with the t-case or loss of power when fitting 32" tires (265/75s) What about 235/85s a little more narrow, but a little taller? However, then you are running into the E load range as apposed to the d load range on most 265/75s. I don't want to compromise comfortability, that is why I drive a Range!!
Also I am thinking of going with the new Goodyear MT/Rs instead of the old BFG AT KOs. |
John Cinquegrana (Johnc)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 01:04 pm: |
|
Yes, I do have loss of power with the 265s but it doesn't bother me much since I don't drive fast. It does become a problem when you are conveying with a bunch of other LRs with their 3.9, 4.0 or 4.6 engines: they always end up waiting for me after a big hill...  Sorry guys..
But that problem will be resolved as soon as I get the 4.6 installed (which looks like never).
I like the BFG ATs (old style) because of their thick sidewalls (our trails are very rocky).
I do have some vibration in the rear driveshaft. In the front I have the OME castor correcting bushings which fixes the castor problem but decreases my flex.
In summary, yes, you open up a can of worms if you decide to lift (suspension) your RR. Some Rangies have vibration problems and some don't. Still, it's better than driving my CJ7.
Hope this helps and good luck,
John |
Bryan Wainscott (Bwainscott)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 01:16 pm: |
|
That is because you lifted the suspension 3"s though correct? I am only lifting the suspension 1.5"s and the rest will be body lift, therefore I am expecting no vibes, hopefully! I am in CO so the trails are rocky here as well. But I have heard nothing but good things about the new Goodyears. My roomate did the 4.6 conversion on his 89 rangie, however he has blown through a couple driveshafts and make sure the entire exhaust is free flow because he had some problems with that as well. Good luck and thanks for the info. |
Larry Grubbs (Larryg)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 04:46 pm: |
|
Here is my truck with the 3" Rovertym Body Lift.
http://pics.montypics.com/lwg/2002-08-05/side_flex.jpg |
Larry Grubbs (Larryg)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 04:59 pm: |
|
 |
John Cinquegrana (Johnc)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 06:25 pm: |
|
now Larry, what else is on your Rangie? longer shocks, drop kit, etc...
fill us in... |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Monday, August 05, 2002 - 06:39 pm: |
|
you are correct, the 235/85 tires ride rougher, as you also need to air them up to about 55 psi to get good wear, if not they feel mush (in my opniion)
so stick with the 265/75, they're basically the same.
i would have to agree that 1.5" suspensio and 1.5 body should not produce vib's. though anything is possible.
rd |
Larry Grubbs (Larryg)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 01:07 am: |
|
Well.... I do only have a 3" suspension lift. Of course there are cones, longer shocks etc, etc. But it is a 3" Rovertym lift! I promise. |
Ho Chung (Ho)
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 06, 2002 - 01:18 am: |
|
larry, you should have said it was just "Stock" |
redrover
| | Posted on Friday, November 01, 2002 - 12:56 pm: |
|
Well the front springs are custom from rovertym. 4.85 inch of lift in the front.
http://groups.msn.com/TheGrafHenleyPages/springcreek091402.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=272
http://groups.msn.com/TheGrafHenleyPages/springcreek091402.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=278 |
Will Roeder (Will_Roeder)
| | Posted on Saturday, November 02, 2002 - 10:49 am: |
|
i saw that adam ways rig was mentioned above......fwiw, thats no where near a 3 inch lift...it started out at around 8, but has sagged to around 6. |
nadim
| | Posted on Sunday, November 03, 2002 - 07:28 am: |
|
Guys, here is my opinion and past experience:
I lifted a total of 4" front / 5" rear before, by the way of Military LR springs (285lbs/inch) and blocks, extended my Blistein shocks. That was a nice hight, since nothing hit anything, but I did have a hell of a lot of vibration. Also it felt extremely scary to be that high and without going wider (I had 235/85 Trac Edges).
After reading in some magazines (mainly 4Wheeler/Patersons' 4 Wheel Mag) about the "low lift, tall tires" idea, I decided to give it a go with my "new" TSL 265/80 on D110 5.5x16 rims. I took out the blocks, and remained on my then newly installed OME HD suspension (with N76 rear shocks).
Granted, the rear bumper was 3" lower, the front 2", and my transfer case was closer to the ground, but the truck's performance enhanced 2 fold. The same tires were use, albiet with more butchering in the rear quarter panels.
The thing I got to understand was that the distance from the Disco's center of gravity to the axles was so great with the prior 4"+ lift, that the power of the engine was not transfered to a point were the rear wheels were, but rather a good distance in the back. Its physics. I'll need a pencil and paper to show it better. But I think it is logical enough.
Not only did the performance increase, but the stability on the road got better, the scary feeling was almost flushed down the drain, and the vibrations ended. Granted, if you have the cash and the ability to go with better driveshafts, that is great, and I'd do so even with a 2" lift. However, living in lebanon, its impossible to find what I need/want, and absurd to ship from the US (cost is very prohibative).
Therefore, I'll be staying with this 2" suspension lift (changing fronts to OME 764 with N71), and add a 2" body lift from RTE, and go with the flares that ECR introduced in the US. I know they aren't pretty, but "form follows function", and theirs is to get the 35s with a better finish.
Now all I need to do is ship some drivetrain parts from GBR...hehehe...
I do not thing a D90 'needs' a 5" lift to accomodate 35/36s, I have already modified a D110 in Lebanon with an OME HD and slapped on 35.4" Simex on it and it performs great. At certain twisty articulation, the rear tire does pinch the rear flare just a bit, but nothing to tear anything apart. We were going to go for 37 MTRs, but the owner is not willing to get into changing his R&P, so that may be implemented once he is. I think all we'll need to go is cut the flares a bit at the edges, and maybe lower the bumpstops an inch or so.
That is my honnest opinion, and I am not trying to bash anyone. I use RTE components and respect John's work. However, I enjoy the fact that LRs are made from aluminium and that we can cut without fear of rust or structural integrety (to a certain extent), and that the aluminium allows for a low center of gravity, so lets stick to that...
I hope this does not end up into a soap opera like Dee's in teh Disco Forum...hehehe |
Larry Grubbs (Larryg)
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2002 - 11:51 pm: |
|
FWIW.
With my 35's and the "Truly" 4" lift on my truck it still fits into a 7' garage with a few inches to spare. With that said, I have had my truck to 40 degrees off-camber and stayed shiny side up.
Just thought I would add something.
Larry |
nadim
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 02:03 am: |
|
Larry,
Are you running wider wheels with less backspacing?
I wonder what should be the ration of "Lifted Inches:Widened Track"...anyone? |
Larry Grubbs (Larryg)
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 02:18 pm: |
|
Nadim,
I am running the Gulf Coast Rovers 15" Steelies. I agree with the notion of taller and wider = shorter and narrower. It's just basic physics. Just about any Land Rover will take side angles better than any Jeep, barring the occasional D60 conversion with 14.50" wide wheels on the Jeep.
Larry |
nadim
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2002 - 02:39 pm: |
|
Larry,
Jeeps cannot get into any side angles since physics, as you put it, is not in their favor. Their weight is no in the bottom, rather at the top, their chassis is not as heavy (advantage?), and their body is heavier than ours. Now, considering the fact that most of the Jeeps we see on the trails do run D60s or at least D44s with wider wheels/tires, we cannot really compare...
Anyways, I have experienced the tall and narrow, and it seemed very tipsy (not the good alcoholic kind...)...so now will be going with the 2" sus + 2" Body + Flares to install 35s or even 37s if Bill at GBR gives me their blessings...on a wider footprint...
Wish me luck... |
Larry Grubbs (Larryg)
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2002 - 05:03 pm: |
|
Good Luck!
You'll be fine. My only advice, stick with 35's. I don't see any reason to go to 37's on a Land Rover. You really don't have the power to turn them very well. Plus the extra clearance is not needed. Unless of course, you swap in a 350 and go mud boggin'.
This is just my opinion of course. If you do go with 37's I want to see some pics. That would definitely have a certain "cool" factor to it.
Larry |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page