By Mike J. (Mudd) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 06:04 am: Edit

I was going to just start with 245 70 16 BFG AT's but I really want a lift. I have a 95 disco 1 with Bilstiens and stock size AT's. I think i want 2" RT springs and 245 75 16 BFG MT's. then brush bar, sliders, and other protection. Is this the right direction? And can I just change the springs? and trim a little? You guys are all so great I thought I would call on your expertise to lead my loved rover to more mudd, dirt, and strange places. I am ready to move foward with mods. WHAT FIRST? Thanks, Mike

By Ron on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 06:11 am: Edit

This started a big fight last time.

Do the lift, then the tires. Good place to start for sure since you ahve good shocks.

Ron

By Axel Haakonsen (Axel) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 07:59 am: Edit

I would add at least a front diff guard early on, as that is the lowest point on your Disco regardless of lift, and it is a vulnerable spot.

245/75/16 BFG MT's will work, you will have to do a little trimming in the rear, and you might have to adjust the steering stops slightly. I have been running that size for the last 3 years, but will probably go to 235/85/16 next time.

By Mike J. (Mudd) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 08:09 am: Edit

Can I just change the springs with that lift or brakecables and evrything else too.

By Ron on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 08:20 am: Edit

If you keep the stock shocks (or the bilstiens you have now) you will be fine.

Ron

By Mike J. (Mudd) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 04:04 pm: Edit

Is the preference 235/85/16 over the 245/75's? do they fit the same? are they better? Why change?

By Redsrover (Redsrover) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 04:11 pm: Edit

The 235 85 is nearly 32" tall. Much taller than the 245 75. I run stock OME shocks with the OME HD and XHD springs with 245 75s and no rubbing at all with no trimming. I'm going to 235 75 next go round. Get the lift, RT or OME HD's and then fit your tires. Keep the stock shocks so you can avoid new brake lines. FIRST THING you should do is get diff guard up front and in the rear and put on a steering guard.

By Axel Haakonsen (Axel) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 04:28 pm: Edit

Mike, there is no rule for what "the right tire" is. 235/85/16 is taller and narrower, I am considering going to that size because I want a little extra clearance. It is not really a "better" size, my reason of wanting more clearance is not necesarily valid for everyone else. Tires is another black art.....

By nadim on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 04:35 pm: Edit

32" tires SHOULD come stadard on ALL Discoveries from the factory...Range Rovers should have 30", and Defenders 33"...

I know that this is not the topic here, but common guys, we could ALL use larger tires!...why didn't LR realize that?

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Thursday, July 05, 2001 - 08:02 pm: Edit

any lift over 1.5 inch should be able to accomodate 235/85-16.
just some trimming in the rear fender.

once you change to 235/85, you'll want some 4.10 gears.

then you'll see some peopel snap half shafts and break diffs on the trail.
and you'll go calling diff shops and upgrade halfshafts...... and on and on....

By Ron on Friday, July 06, 2001 - 03:13 am: Edit

Nadim,

RR should come with 32s as well.

235 85 R16=

Here is my reasoning. It is taller than 245 75 (by about an inch) but it is also fractionally narrower so that the turning radius is only slightly worse with 235 than 245 and it is closer to tucking in the back where you need to trim. All and all being taller and narrower is a good thing for mud.

Ron

PS you may want 4.10 gears but you won't need them

By Mike J. (Mudd) on Friday, July 06, 2001 - 03:39 am: Edit

245/75 or 235/85 ? 2" RT lift, just springs. New Gears? broken shafts? I'll get the diffguards first, so which is best? I want to do everything based on the experience of those who have tested. and I sooo appreciate this site! I guess the 235/85s could be where my problems begin? where do I find the best steering guard? I check all the sites I can find but I dont get to touch and see and smell the stuff. Thanks again, Mike (I really want to run over jeeps)

By John on Friday, July 06, 2001 - 04:57 am: Edit

Since you want to run over jeeps....Diff guard a must....sliders and a 2" lift with 235/85's fits nicely....then get experience with what you have before spending more money...I do question raising your susp 2" with the same shocks. Raising your susp 2" will result in 2" less down travel with your current shocks. Thats a negative.
Just another opinion.

By Mike B. on Friday, July 06, 2001 - 04:23 pm: Edit

Most of these comments seem geared towards rock crawling. Where are you located?

Thanks,
Mike B.
Florida

By Mike J. (Mudd) on Saturday, July 07, 2001 - 08:23 am: Edit

I'm in San Diego, I do a little more center divider crawling but want the off road ability for better stuff. I think the 245/75 will be best for me now.

By Ron on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 04:01 am: Edit

I am in PA

By Leslie on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 07:08 am: Edit

Okay, a related question:

Let's assume someone with a stock Disco has decided to go with RTE 2" springs and 235/85 tires (and a front diff-guard to boot), but is specifically not changing the shock-mounts.

The shocks that would be used would have to be close to stock, maybe a little longer, if you're not changing the mounts to accomodate the really flexy long-travel set-up types of shocks. Maybe find a shock that loses an inch off the compression end in exchange for gaining an inch on the extension.

Assuming such: which shocks am I looking for? I'm not referring to being brand-specific, but I'm interested in specific sizes for the different brands. I.e., a Bilstein would be such-n-such size to be close-to-stock w/ a bit more extension, or a Rancho X-Y-Z, or OME jkl-size, etc. etc.

I always hear about X brand versus Y brand when it comes to replacing stock springs, or when doing a shock-mount change, but I've yet to hear anyone comment on better shock sizes for Discos with taller springs without changing the mounts.

Looking for LOTS of opinions on what works, what doesn't, pros/cons of different sizes, etc. If you hadn't guessed, I've decided on springs and tire-sizes, but haven't a clue about shocks yet.

Thanks,

-Leslie

By Jeff Bieler (Mrbieler) on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 07:11 am: Edit

Without changing mounts, I am under the impression that you are pretty much limited to Woodhead (stock), Old Man Emu, and Bilstein due to the configuration of the rear mounts.

Someone could jump in...

By nadim on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 07:22 am: Edit

Well!

This is something I have been trying to fix for a very very long time...
I have come to the conclusion that ProComp can accomodate you with the right fittings and the right lengths you need. However, I have no experience whatsoever in their shocks...so anyone who has already, pleae come forward and tell us.

Also, I know that Bilsteins for the front Merc G-Wagons fit on the rear of LRs with a 4" increase...I am not certain though...

Anyhow, that is all I think that can fit in the rear without alterations...

Anyhow...can someone please check again, and tell us...

By John on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 11:01 am: Edit

"I am under the impression that you are pretty much limited to Woodhead (stock), Old Man Emu, and Bilstein due to the configuration of the rear mounts."

Correct, the 18M/M upper attachment point for a Rover is what makes shocks hard to interchange...add to that that the front G wagon bilstein(example) has a totally different valving for what the rear of a rover needs then the ride suffers terribly. Some of the popular shocks arent just dedicated to the spyder legs,flexy concept...they just match to compression and extension needs and loads carried. A lot of rover people look at the alternatives and they are few. Other than the brands listed at the beginning for fitting to std mounts to match lenghts and loads dampened generally requires the non-stock mounting system.
Just an opinion

By Ron on Monday, July 09, 2001 - 11:10 am: Edit

John, all you have to do is change the bushings and you can run whatever you want that comes in an eye top. I don't have the energy suspension PN handy but they make a poly bush that fits the upper rear mount with any kind of eye shock (I hope I am on the same page here) In any case it was like $6 for the pair and the speed shop had them in stock.

Ron

My personal feeling is that I have had the most luck with a retained spring (1/4 metal straps with 1/2 bolts), longer bumpstops (energy suspension) and a slightly longer shock (Rancho Cheapo 5000) which now also has the SG drop kit lower mount on it. Over all the thing works pretty good. The only issue we are having now is that the weight of all the stuff is really beating down the lift. You can avoid the longer bumpstop if you get spring that when stacked are long enough not to reach the compression of the shock (think about it and you will figure it out).

By Leslie on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 04:06 am: Edit

Okay, for the sake of argument (like we need that for a reason!):

Let's say that we're not going with the Woodheads, so we're looking first at OME and Bilsteins. What are the part numbers for direct size replacements for stock shocks? And, what are the part numbers for these shocks with the aforementioned 2" spring lift with stock mounts? Are there ones that give a bit more on the articulation end, even if sacrificing a bit on the compression side?

Now, Ron, if you change out that upper bushing, that throws Rancho and all of the others into the mix, right? What sizes are then appropriate, if the bottom shock mount is still left stock?


TIA...

-Leslie

By Ron on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 04:47 am: Edit

L

Any place that sells OME or Bil will know the number if you want stock length. Beyond that it gets tricky.

Now first question is:

Can I run a longer shock with the stock mounts:

Answer: Maybe. Warn, Decarbon and other LR shocks are available in longer shocks but the problem is that w/o longer bumpstops upward compression is limited by something. To have it limited by the shock is bad, but if you have longer stops or the springs themselves are long enough stacked to limit upward travel sufficiently you are ok. If you install a 10in shock you will have 4in more down travel at a cost of 2in of up travel (in theory) but this usually works out because 1. Stiffer springs don't compress as much 2. Bigger tires foul on the wheel wells sooner.
Final issue is that you might have enough down travel to unseat your springs. In which case for about $10 and an hour of your life with a drill and something to cut strap metal you can make a set of retainers, or you can buy cones.

What else is available in shocks if I buy new upper bushings.

Answer: in the rear anything with an eye at one end and a stud at the other BUT some shocks are made like this but are valved so that the eye end should be down (not up) so unless you have 50/50 valving they will not work properly. IN the front anything with two studs will work. I believe stock is an 8in travel shock so try looking at specs and you will find one.

Ron

PS don't hold me to the length numbers I have not verified them.

By Simon on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 05:26 am: Edit

narrow tires suck in mud.. plain and simple..

in "real" mud wider is better...

I run 265's 75's MTs that are wider than 235's and still act like 4 giant pizza cutters until my diffs are burried in Goo.

even stock michelins perform a lot better in mud when the flotation is the "thing" that gets you going...

5K lbs + pizza cutters in bottomless mud = big trouble.

now if you call mud some 12" deep whaleshit with some rocky bottom well yes pizza cutters are the shit..

Simon.
in south florida "real" MUD..
Simon.

By Leslie on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 06:46 am: Edit

I'm running trails usually, rock buried in dirt; usually the mud around here IS more surficial... even on the mine-sites it's mostly a foot or so of mud w/ something firm underneath... 'nothing' like Florida mud. For my locale, 'pizza cutters' are ideal. The extra clearance helps for the occasional rocks and common logs.

Actually, the stock Disco isn't bad at all for my uses... I'm just wanting to add a margin of safety w/ the taller tires. I don't need a flex-competion champion, so I'm not going to go the whole nine yards changing shock mounts, etc. I'm just adding a bit of spring to get the 235/85s under there (and a bit of trim), and need suitable shocks to go along with.

I'm not particularly keen on even going to the point of changing the bushing, would rather keep it stock, too, and select a shock that'll do based off that. But if there isn't one that's suitable, then the bushing change isn't THAT big a deal, and we'll go that route. NO lower shock-mount changes, no flotation tires, no BIG trimming -just a bit of trimming....

Ron, didn't Warn quit the shock business??

-L

By Ron on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 06:51 am: Edit

Warn quit the US because there was no margin in it. They were selling to a clientel that wanted Ranchos and Pro comps with lift blocks and warn was selling custom made fox shocks and coil over suspensions for YJs and CJs. The XTs were great shocks.

Ron

By Robbie on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 07:38 am: Edit

And still available if you really want them. Got a set of 4 XT's for my 95 from Terrain Master in the UK. With conversion rate and shipping it was only around $260USD (this was a month or so ago). I still haven't put them on yet cause I am saving up for the springs too, but you can get both the Warn AT and XT from them.

-Robbie

By Ron on Tuesday, July 10, 2001 - 07:40 am: Edit

Thats a good deal. Make sure to get the XTs as they are longer and better than the ATs.

Ron