PROCOMP shocks

[Slunnie]

Originally Posted by p76rangie

This is just playing on words. Saying it is not there to restrict wheel movement, but then saying that if you don't restrict the wheel movement you will bugger the shocks..

Hmmm, ok then. The bumpstops are there to suit the closed shock lengths only, not to prevent the tyres from contacting anything. Thats a bit clearer. The difference is in the insinuated relationship between the bumpstop length and the shock length.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

The 35's cannot be engineered approved anymore and your car is most likely now unroadworthy, even with the engineers certificate to the the size of the wheels. I am not sure whether you got the spring lift approved under the new or old laws. They are now national laws. Also Rovernit had not mentioned getting an Engineers certificate for the mods he was doing. The comment I previously made related to mods without an engineers certificate.

As I've already said, Victorian regulations are just that. 35's can be engineer approved in NSW and NSW has not adopted DOTARS. When engineered they are 100% legal in NSW.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

This is the point that I have been making. You have only picked up 2 inches in extra shock length. But this extra travel at the bottom has been negated by the drop in bump stops. Therefore you not gained any extra suspension travel.

You've probably already compared some long shocks in comparison to some short shocks. Long shocks have long travel, short shocks have short travel. That really is about all there is to it, but long shocks generally don't come with short travel which you might think. The bumpstop extension is purely to prevent the shock bottoming, as it already does on a standard suspension setup. The shocks are about 3" longer than standard.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

This is very much dependent on the rims you are running and what you class as rubbing. The 34's will rub slightly on full articulation.

Rubbing is rubbing. Most people run OE offset rims and if you offset the rims I would bet that you're even more likely to rub on the bodywork. The 33x10.5 Simex is already 260mm wider on a 7" rim and thats already at about the tuck limits of a D2 on standard offset. 8" OE offset rims will probably work too but thats about it. Those that don't rub probably have swaybars and little articulation.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

Have to disagree strongly on that one. Physically and technically impossible. You have proved it yourself in your statements above.

The pictures say it all really.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

Sorry must strongly disagree with this one also. Even though it is not a disco, I have basically increased the height of my Rangie in 1 inch intervals. The difference in stability was very noticeable with each increase. Countered some of this by increasing the track.

Did you alter the spring rates to suit as you continued lifting? How high is it now? What are the spring rates?

[Slunnie]

Originally Posted by ROVERNIT

Whats that suppose to mean about AULROC, oh youve been kicked out havent you

I admit there are few out there that dont venture out there drive way and talk like there they know it all

come on spill the beans

Its about the topic, not the man. Ian's had a lot of experience running comps etc.

[disco12]

Alright I have to say this

looking at the pictures from what I've seen I love how Aussies build their Discoveries.

quite a different take from us American Rovers

cool

[ROVERNIT]

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Its about the topic, not the man. Ian's had a lot of experience running comps etc.

Out of line agreed but im still currious to why his a landy man but not on AULROC member and after the bites I get from member there (which I fuel) I have come here for tranquility) and curious to what his story was with AULROC

Im not slide tackling Ian at all but he is stubbern

[ROVERNIT]

Originally Posted by disco12

Alright I have to say this

looking at the pictures from what I've seen I love how Aussies build their Discoveries.

quite a different take from us American Rovers

cool

No not really Dude there are only a few extremists from what I gather Slunnie is the forefather when it comes to D2

[p76rangie]

The discussion I raised in this thread is not whether the mods mentioned can be done, but why would you do it if you were only fitting 33 or 34 inch tyres.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Hmmm, ok then. The bumpstops are there to suit the closed shock lengths only, not to prevent the tyres from contacting anything. Thats a bit clearer. The difference is in the insinuated relationship between the bumpstop length and the shock length.

So what you are saying is that your 35 inch simexs will clear the inner guards with standard bump stops and suspension. Therefore there are no suspension mods required to fit 35's. Of course you would have to cut the outer guard, but you are indicating that it would clear everything else.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

As I've already said, Victorian regulations are just that. 35's can be engineer approved in NSW and NSW has not adopted DOTARS. When engineered they are 100% legal in NSW.

Here is a link to DOTARS http://www.dotars.gov.au/roads/safet.../vsb_ncop.aspx
If you read the intro, it states that they have been adopted by all states. What you are suggesting is that cars in NSW do not have to comply with ADRs. An engineer's certificate does not make a car roadworthy. The certificate only states that the mods are safe. I would be surprised if you rang your engineer today that he would approve 35's. Even vehicles in various states have been told that even though their vehicles have been previously engineered with 35's, they can no longer legally run them.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

You've probably already compared some long shocks in comparison to some short shocks. Long shocks have long travel, short shocks have short travel. That really is about all there is to it, but long shocks generally don't come with short travel which you might think. The bumpstop extension is purely to prevent the shock bottoming, as it already does on a standard suspension setup. The shocks are about 3" longer than standard.

If you are talking about pro-comp plus 4's, which have a travel of 9.9 inches, they have an extra 2 inches travel in the rear and 1.3 inches in the front over standard. But most people do not replace their shocks with OEM shocks. If they have replaced then with OME shocks sold for standard suspension, the Procomps are only 1.4 inches longer in rear and 0.7 inches longer in the front, they are 1.8 inches and 1.3 inches longer than Bilsteins, and 1.4 and 1.3 inches longer than Koni.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Rubbing is rubbing. Most people run OE offset rims and if you offset the rims I would bet that you're even more likely to rub on the bodywork. The 33x10.5 Simex is already 260mm wider on a 7" rim and thats already at about the tuck limits of a D2 on standard offset. 8" OE offset rims will probably work too but thats about it. Those that don't rub probably have swaybars and little articulation.

As you are aware with being on the D2 forum, most of the guys run their Simexs on standard rims. Most have ACE and therefore the sway bars make little difference.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Did you alter the spring rates to suit as you continued lifting? How high is it now? What are the spring rates

It is about the same total lift as your own, except 2 inches of it is in a body lift, which does not raise the centre of gravity as much. But you can't do a body lift with the D2's. So about 2 inches in springs, 2 inches in the body and a bit over 2 inches in the wheels. The track has been increased by around 150mm.
Yes I run heavier springs due to the extra weight of LPG tanks, front and rear bars, winch, etc. I run 220's in the back (std is 150's) and 170's in the front (std 133's). So about half the height increase is through the stiffness of the spring, but the springs are also 1 inch longer than standard. I go for length first and then make up what I have to in stiffness. I have stuck to off the shelf springs.

[p76rangie]

Originally Posted by ROVERNIT

curious to what his story was with AULROC

Without naming names. A person I know who I turned to the dark side (got an old Rangie for offroad rather than using the D2) had organised a trip with some AULRO members. These members had previously come on a trip I organised. I was not impressed with their driving ability, tended to be too much right foot and not enough thought.

He invited me on this trip along a track I had done many times. I had taken relatively standard vehicles (mud tyres though) up this track in the past without any great difficulty. Even did it as a night run, both up and down. The pictures I posted above are from this track. But it is the type of track that you can come unstuck if you don't use your head (or listen to others). I knew that these guys would end up breaking something, even though they were relative well set up rangies with Simexs, diff locks, maxi-drive axles, etc. I am not breaking my Rangie recovering idiots, so I said I would come along as a passenger and left the Rangie at the organiser's house. We were less than half way along the track when my predictions started to come true. The first one blew something in the front, from memory it was a diff. So the remaining 3 vehicles had to connect up to start towing him up the track. Not much further on, a second one with too much right foot blew his front CV. But did he stop, no, not until he blew the second CV. So 2 cars with only 2 wheel drive and 2 cars left to pull them. Tried getting one to the top at a time. Nearly got to the top and the 3rd rangie noticed his gearbox lever disappearing through the floor. He had managed to rip out 3 out of the 4 engine/transmission mounts and the motor and gear box was about to fall out. He managed to get to the top with some winching, but could not help with the other 2 damaged Rangies. So the only car left was the only one that knew how to drive (the guy I was passenger with). By this stage it was dark and we had no torches, etc. Walking around a wet slippery track, when you could not even see your feet, became very interesting and ended up on my arse a number of times. Finding winch trees was near impossible in the bush. The last remaining Rangie gave it a good shot, and nearly got the other two to the top, but winch and battery died and the clutch slave cyclinder gave way.

So we strapped the motor and gear box into the Rangie at the top and drove out to get my Rangie. I came back with lights and a winch and finished the recovery (they only had a couple of hundred metres to go).

So I was proved right, we got to the top after midnight, and I still refuse to go out with idiots that can't drive.

[ROVERNIT]

Originally Posted by p76rangie

Without naming names. A person I know who I turned to the dark side (got an old Rangie for offroad rather than using the D2) had organised a trip with some AULRO members. These members had previously come on a trip I organised. I was not impressed with their driving ability, tended to be too much right foot and not enough thought.

He invited me on this trip along a track I had done many times. I had taken relatively standard vehicles (mud tyres though) up this track in the past without any great difficulty. Even did it as a night run, both up and down. The pictures I posted above are from this track. But it is the type of track that you can come unstuck if you don't use your head (or listen to others). I knew that these guys would end up breaking something, even though they were relative well set up rangies with Simexs, diff locks, maxi-drive axles, etc. I am not breaking my Rangie recovering idiots, so I said I would come along as a passenger and left the Rangie at the organiser's house. We were less than half way along the track when my predictions started to come true. The first one blew something in the front, from memory it was a diff. So the remaining 3 vehicles had to connect up to start towing him up the track. Not much further on, a second one with too much right foot blew his front CV. But did he stop, no, not until he blew the second CV. So 2 cars with only 2 wheel drive and 2 cars left to pull them. Tried getting one to the top at a time. Nearly got to the top and the 3rd rangie noticed his gearbox lever disappearing through the floor. He had managed to rip out 3 out of the 4 engine/transmission mounts and the motor and gear box was about to fall out. He managed to get to the top with some winching, but could not help with the other 2 damaged Rangies. So the only car left was the only one that knew how to drive (the guy I was passenger with). By this stage it was dark and we had no torches, etc. Walking around a wet slippery track, when you could not even see your feet, became very interesting and ended up on my arse a number of times. Finding winch trees was near impossible in the bush. The last remaining Rangie gave it a good shot, and nearly got the other two to the top, but winch and battery died and the clutch slave cyclinder gave way.

So we strapped the motor and gear box into the Rangie at the top and drove out to get my Rangie. I came back with lights and a winch and finished the recovery (they only had a couple of hundred metres to go).

So I was proved right, we got to the top after midnight, and I still refuse to go out with idiots that can't drive.

thats fair enough I feel there isnt much driving on the site more ranting and raving then anything else

Ill let your self and Slunnie slug this one out hehehehe Ill read and take note hehehehe

[Slunnie]

Originally Posted by disco12

Alright I have to say this

looking at the pictures from what I've seen I love how Aussies build their Discoveries.

quite a different take from us American Rovers

cool

Aww I reckon the American trucks are pretty cool also. The first time I saw that SG Kalahari my jaw dropped. Not to mention the excellent mods that are coming out with the fitting of Toy axles and portals! Now thats gold.

[Slunnie]

Originally Posted by p76rangie

The discussion I raised in this thread is not whether the mods mentioned can be done, but why would you do it if you were only fitting 33 or 34 inch tyres.

The only 33 you'll fit is the Simex 33x10.5. The radials wont go.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

So what you are saying is that your 35 inch simexs will clear the inner guards with standard bump stops and suspension. Therefore there are no suspension mods required to fit 35's. Of course you would have to cut the outer guard, but you are indicating that it would clear everything else.

No, that'd be awsome if it did though. I've actually still got the standard bumpstops in the front and the suspension stops when shock runs out of compression travel but the 35's don't rub. If I stuck standard springs and shocks back in it'd rub all over the place. I 've tried both 255/85 and 285/75 on a 2" lift and both of those rubbed, and are both right on the very very limits of the guard openings, but when turned they'll contact the inner body work also.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

Here is a link to DOTARS http://www.dotars.gov.au/roads/safet.../vsb_ncop.aspx
If you read the intro, it states that they have been adopted by all states. What you are suggesting is that cars in NSW do not have to comply with ADRs. An engineer's certificate does not make a car roadworthy. The certificate only states that the mods are safe. I would be surprised if you rang your engineer today that he would approve 35's. Even vehicles in various states have been told that even though their vehicles have been previously engineered with 35's, they can no longer legally run them.

I've just had a look through the DOTARs reports and also the NSW RTA site. I must fess up and apologise. Up until tonight my understanding was that NSW were not yet changing to DOTARS but it seems we have. The good news is that with engineering approval everything is still legal. The lift is taken from the uppermost suspension tolerance, and then 70mm has been added which is the value of the 1/3 travel which is the standard limitation. That brings it to 4" over delivery, but 70mm over max ride height. The 35" tyres will also bring the 4WD to another 75mm up on the ride height. Total lift is then 145mm lift over standard max spec and so still legal by 5mm. Cool.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

If you are talking about pro-comp plus 4's, which have a travel of 9.9 inches, they have an extra 2 inches travel in the rear and 1.3 inches in the front over standard. But most people do not replace their shocks with OEM shocks. If they have replaced then with OME shocks sold for standard suspension, the Procomps are only 1.4 inches longer in rear and 0.7 inches longer in the front, they are 1.8 inches and 1.3 inches longer than Bilsteins, and 1.4 and 1.3 inches longer than Koni.

No not talking about the Procomps. These particular spec Bilsteins are longer than those spec procomps and they are not D2 shocks, they're buggy type shocks or Nissan Patrol rears. Actually the D2 also runs different config shocks to the RRC/D1/Def etc having eye mounts universally.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

As you are aware with being on the D2 forum, most of the guys run their Simexs on standard rims. Most have ACE and therefore the sway bars make little difference.

Cool. Does Davids truck have ACE or disconnect? It isn't flexing very well in that pic.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

It is about the same total lift as your own, except 2 inches of it is in a body lift, which does not raise the centre of gravity as much. But you can't do a body lift with the D2's. So about 2 inches in springs, 2 inches in the body and a bit over 2 inches in the wheels. The track has been increased by around 150mm.
Yes I run heavier springs due to the extra weight of LPG tanks, front and rear bars, winch, etc. I run 220's in the back (std is 150's) and 170's in the front (std 133's). So about half the height increase is through the stiffness of the spring, but the springs are also 1 inch longer than standard. I go for length first and then make up what I have to in stiffness. I have stuck to off the shelf springs.

The extra width would be nice, the lift magnifies the sway without the rate increase. I used to drive with Damian (LC60 w/ 2" + 2" & 35's) and the body would sway heaps due to the spring rate but it was fine - just looked very uncomfy on the side angle. You truck should flex like there's no tomorrow though.

A 2" lift + 2" body is a different setup to a 4" lift though. The D2 is a lot more accepting of that type of thing than a RRC. Interestingly, a D2 will naturally keep increasing its roll resistance as it leans, which the RRC/D1/Def doesn't due the rear suspension design.

[p76rangie]

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I 've tried both 255/85 and 285/75 on a 2" lift and both of those rubbed, and are both right on the very very limits of the guard openings, but when turned they'll contact the inner body work also.

That is strange. I have 255/85/16 BFG MTs as my road tyres and they are a lot easier to fit into the guards. Must be a D2 thing.

What I find is that it is not the height of the tyre so much, but the width of the tread. With the lugs on the Simex, they are a lot harder to fit. The actual tread width on the older BFG (and most other tyres) is nowhere near 255mm. From memory, I think they were around 230mm. The 255 measurment is always taken at the widest part of the tyre, about half way up the sidewall where the tyre bulges the most.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

The 35" tyres will also bring the 4WD to another 75mm up on the ride height. Total lift is then 145mm lift over standard max spec and so still legal by 5mm. Cool.

It is not the overall height increase that stops 35's being engineered, there is a seperate rule governing the size of the tyre. Apparently they have set a maximum tyre size on any light 4WD at 33 inches. I have heard it from many sources, but cannot find it in the DOTARS. But here is a quote from LR Automotive's website.
"Normally to modify a Land Rover to run larger wheels we would use a body lift kit. Unfortunately it is ILEGAL to fit body lifts to and SRS vehicle in Australia. This limits what we have been unable to do with the D2's. Working with our engineer we have final;ly found the way through the legal loop and it is now looking very promising that we can create the D2's with 35" tyres, Offset rims and our XL flares. We are still doing some prelim work but all is looking good.

Was all looking good until the new rules in April 2006. This has outlawed the use of tyres larger than 33" for Australian roads. With the D2 it is possible to run a 32" tyre 265*75*16 with only a minor suspension upgrade without flaring etc. For this reason we have put the moulds for the D2 flares on the back burner. They do look good though!"

[Slunnie]

Originally Posted by p76rangie

That is strange. I have 255/85/16 BFG MTs as my road tyres and they are a lot easier to fit into the guards. Must be a D2 thing.

You must have a big guard D2! 255/85 dont fit with 2" without rubbing on my D2, nor Lawrances or Bryans.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

What I find is that it is not the height of the tyre so much, but the width of the tread. With the lugs on the Simex, they are a lot harder to fit. The actual tread width on the older BFG (and most other tyres) is nowhere near 255mm. From memory, I think they were around 230mm. The 255 measurment is always taken at the widest part of the tyre, about half way up the sidewall where the tyre bulges the most.

I agree that treadface is a massive part of the equation when fitting tyres and something mostly overlooked.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

It is not the overall height increase that stops 35's being engineered, there is a seperate rule governing the size of the tyre. Apparently they have set a maximum tyre size on any light 4WD at 33 inches. I have heard it from many sources, but cannot find it in the DOTARS. But here is a quote from LR Automotive's website.
"Normally to modify a Land Rover to run larger wheels we would use a body lift kit. Unfortunately it is ILEGAL to fit body lifts to and SRS vehicle in Australia. This limits what we have been unable to do with the D2's. Working with our engineer we have final;ly found the way through the legal loop and it is now looking very promising that we can create the D2's with 35" tyres, Offset rims and our XL flares. We are still doing some prelim work but all is looking good.

Was all looking good until the new rules in April 2006. This has outlawed the use of tyres larger than 33" for Australian roads. With the D2 it is possible to run a 32" tyre 265*75*16 with only a minor suspension upgrade without flaring etc. For this reason we have put the moulds for the D2 flares on the back burner. They do look good though!"

I'm still not sure where you're getting this from. It is not relevant to NSW. As I understand it, this is a VIC specific ruling, and I suspect QLD has something similar also. In NSW you can still run 35" tyres, actually you can run bigger if the engineers will sign off on it. If you cant run bigger than 33's it'll be in the state regs, ADRs, DOTARS. There has been a lot of talk about this on Outers already which also comments that this is a VIC thing.