Don’t Forget the Rear

Could you be more specific about my contradiction? I made that post a few weeks ago as I started my plunge down this rabbit hole and I was weighing the differences between RR schools and bypasses

I’m pretty sure I want to go bypass rear shocks since they’re only like $500 more than clickers (regardless of brand) and would allow me more adjustability no matter my use case. I’m also getting more comfortable with the idea of dumping the air bags in favor of off road capability. I’ll prob end up installing hydraulic bumps at some point, too.

I think where I’m at now is trying to figure out if it’s worth the effort of relocating shock mount points or just running something like the mcm/ads/Deaver kit with the triple bypasses. If there’s a compelling reason to relocate shock points and gain more travel over what stock locations and the mcm kit can provide, I’m just trying to find it.

the reason I posted in this thread was because my question involves the possibility of relocating the shock mounts and thus getting sorta kinda maybe (but not really ) into LT territory.

 

Contradiction being towing TT and "off-road" performance.

You're in search of a goldilocks setup...you need to settle upon a path...

Pick your path:

• Do you want to go fast over long distances with big hits?
• Do you want to crawl over reasonable obstacles?

Other Considerations:

• Are you willing to sacrifice N.V.H.?
• Are you prepared for increased maintenance?
• Do you have a realistic budget?
• Are you of mind to want to deal with constant variables on shock tuning? Or are you a set it and forget it kind of guy?

What do you expect this upgrade path to do for you?


-JS

 

What you're looking for, you'll find with a good "mid-travel" setup. I would just get the MCM rear package with U478s and ads 2.5 triple bypass. It will be enough. More than enough.

If you'll be going down to NM to bomb the southern dunes or montessa, then you'll probably grow into a LT setup.

 

I'm not as concerned with the towing capability anymore. I think we're going to get my wife an expedition or other large SUV that will probably become our primary tow vehicle, at least for the family trips. I understand what you mean by the Goldilocks setup, hard to have a stiff towing suspension provide good off road manners and make use of max articulation. I MAY still put bags on and run daystar cradles but I think either way I'm going deaver U748's with a triple bypass shock. Even if I dont run the bags, it's not like I lose the ability to tow. It just wont be as nice.

I'm not sure I agree that going fast/big hits and "crawling" are mutually exclusive scenarios requiring completely different suspension setups. One could certainly build a setup that was preferential to one scenario or the other, but a truck built to go fast over rough terrain will certainly "crawl" pretty well. Plenty of evidence of that here and even in your own build thread (nice truck, btw!). I suppose the opposite may not be as true. A suspension designed to crawl probably wouldn't lend itself as well to higher speed travel. At any rate, I need a bit of both from this setup. CO mountain roads/trails contain both types of terrain so a specifically built setup (in either use case) would be silly IMO.

Not sure what NVH is?

I suppose anyone who's going to wheel and modify their truck ought to be prepared for some increased maintenance. I am. The truck has about 77k miles right now and is almost paid off. It's likely that the more mods I get, the more it becomes a mountain toy and moves away from daily driving duty.

I think I have a realistic budget. I estimate spending between $4k-$6k for this rear setup. I am referring to a decent "mid travel" kit with things like deavers, bypass shocks, and perhaps some bump stops. I understand full long travel would be more than that. I'll prob do the install work myself as a project with my boys.

Good question about shock tuning. I don't really want to be pulling the shocks apart and messing with internals, but I am prepared to spend some time tuning external bypass valves to find what works best for different scenarios.

As I stated in my previous post, I'd like the truck to be able to comfortably navigate rough fire roads and rutted trails in the 30 mph range. I dont want to have my teeth rattled out or stress the truck too much while doing this. It would be nice to be able to do a little go fast on more open sections if I encounter them, but I don't expect long travel, trophy truck performance from this rig. As I said before, basically my entire impression of good suspension systems comes from driving a 3rd gen raptor on some typical CO mountain trails/roads. I was pretty impressed with that truck and if I could mimic something like that I'd call this a win. I've not had the opportunity to ride in or drive a tundra thats got a nice suspension to compare it to the raptor, though.

Thanks for your input. I reviewed your build thread on your truck and it looks like you've got the Camburg rear shock location kit. Do you think that relocation kit gives you an appreciable amount of capability over something like the mcm/deaver/ads mid travel setup that uses the stock shock mounting points?

Thanks for the input. I want to believe that the MCM setup will do everything I want. It's just hard for me to make a good judgment because I lack the breadth of experience with a bunch of different suspension setups. Having romped on that 3rd gen raptor I know what that feels like, but I dont have another frame of reference.

 

I'm not sure I agree that going fast/big hits and "crawling" are mutually exclusive scenarios requiring completely different suspension setups. One could certainly build a setup that was preferential to one scenario or the other, but a truck built to go fast over rough terrain will certainly "crawl" pretty well. Plenty of evidence of that here and even in your own build thread (nice truck, btw!). I suppose the opposite may not be as true. A suspension designed to crawl probably wouldn't lend itself as well to higher speed travel. At any rate, I need a bit of both from this setup. CO mountain roads/trails contain both types of terrain so a specifically built setup (in either use case) would be silly IMO.

Truly depends on many factors: but a vehicle with high up travel bias may not have enough droop possible to reach terrain (with enough force...if at all) to provide the necessary amount of traffic to allow vehicle to defeat an obstacle. Limitations are more evident in most OE IFS suspension designs, especially once you limit droop to driveline/suspension safe tolerances.

N.V.H.

noise, vibration, harshness.

I suppose anyone who's going to wheel and modify their truck ought to be prepared for some increased maintenance. I am. The truck has about 77k miles right now and is almost paid off. It's likely that the more mods I get, the more it becomes a mountain toy and moves away from daily driving duty.

Rebuildable shocks when used off-road require maintenance. if it isn't a daily driver and you can afford to have it up for rebuilding you're g2g, especially given the harsh environmental you may experience being in CO.

Good question about shock tuning. I don't really want to be pulling the shocks apart and messing with internals, but I am prepared to spend some time tuning external bypass valves to find what works best for different scenarios.

Piston valving and bypass valving aren't mutually exclusive. They are indeed working together to provide the necessary damping for your suspension system throughout the range of travel.

As I stated in my previous post, I'd like the truck to be able to comfortably navigate rough fire roads and rutted trails in the 30 mph range. I dont want to have my teeth rattled out or stress the truck too much while doing this. It would be nice to be able to do a little go fast on more open sections if I encounter them, but I don't expect long travel, trophy truck performance from this rig. As I said before, basically my entire impression of good suspension systems comes from driving a 3rd gen raptor on some typical CO mountain trails/roads. I was pretty impressed with that truck and if I could mimic something like that I'd call this a win. I've not had the opportunity to ride in or drive a tundra thats got a nice suspension to compare it to the raptor, though.

Rutted being washboard? - Small bump compliance can be 'toned' down with appropriately spec'd spring rates and ratios, but the biggest part of small bump compliance comes from tire compliance. Don't underestimate the role your tires play in your vehicles dynamics.
Axle wrap control is also majorly underestimated on the impact to ride quality, when your rear suspension becomes loaded/unloaded over terrain especially under accel or braking, that the pinion angle changes, this angular change is transmitted into your leaf springs, this torsional loading and un-loading is felt as wheel hop. The greater the delta between traction and no traction...the greater the effect.

Thanks for your input. I reviewed your build thread on your truck and it looks like you've got the Camburg rear shock location kit. Do you think that relocation kit gives you an appreciable amount of capability over something like the mcm/deaver/ads mid travel setup that uses the stock shock mounting points?

I am indeed running the Camburg rear for a number of reasons:

1.) Longer stroke shocks without needing to blow holes through the bed. Allowing more DROOP.
2.) Both shocks on the same axis (both shocks forward vs Dr Fwd/Ps Bwd). More consistency in valving around controlling axle wrap/centering. one in compression/one in rebound is funky for me.
3.) Additional rear lift provided by leafpack design. Allowing slightly more UPTRAVEL. Without bed frame/bedside/bedbox clearancing, axle path upwards is severely limited, which is why you see a lot of OE adapted LT vehicles go full tube back half.
4.) No ground clearance lost by extended length lower eyelet on the rear shock. This can be a con as new lower shock mounts need to welded to the axle tube.


-JS

 

I may have used this on you recently, but I’m doing it again even if I did, because, well, science.

 

Good point about tires and pressures. I think the single biggest increase in off road performance I've ever experience was when I aired down my 295/70r18's (on this truck) for the first time. I usually run at about 15 psi off-road and it really smooths out those little bumps you are referencing. When I say rutted I mean more like ruts caused by rain and runoff. Waterbars. Bigger stuff. Aired down tires only get you so far. As previously stated, if I can comfortably navigate these sorts of terrain features around 30 mph that would be super.

With regard to the relocation of rear shock mounts...Your reasons for running that setup make a lot of sense. I hadn't thought about the easier tuning by bringing both shocks into the same axis/orientation.

I know it's been discussed in other threads to some extent, but could you elaborate on the additional travel (both up travel and droop) gained by the relocate vs other options. For the sake of this discussion, let's compare rear travel in the following scenarios:

• Stock (mine's an SR5 trim but I think anything other than PRO models will all be about the same here, right?)
• A good bolt on, no cutting required "mid travel" setup. Something like the MCM triple bypass rear shocks paired with shackles and Deaver U748
• A good relocation kit (like the Camburg you are running)
• A full on LT setup with bed cage and spring under

I understand there are particulars to every scenario that impact true travel numbers, but I don't recall seeing any threads that directly compare the amount of travel one might expect from these different setups.

Science me, bitch.