|
|
Post by stigand on Apr 9, 2009 21:52:35 GMT 11
Guys need a new set to improve road handling on 96 3.1 MU, old set shot; little off road use but still want adjustables........leaning towards rancho 9000, I'll fit myself. Any recommendations for suppliers and suitable models?
|
|
|
|
Post by mulover on Apr 14, 2009 13:59:01 GMT 11
The rancho rs9000's are in my opinon the way to go, mine used to handle like a pig till i put rancho's on it and settled it down alot. they are a bit pricy but they last ofr ages. If you have BNT in aucland then they should sell them, or try googleing supplyers.
Be sure to get the standard length for the front, as it doesn't matter what mods you do to the ifs you don't need longer shocks, and measure your back ones as you may be able to fit slightly longer ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by turnturn on Apr 14, 2009 14:50:16 GMT 11
I agree with Mulover. I put Rancho 9000's on my Mu at least 6 years (140,000ks +) ago and they are still fitted.
Fronts were RS9214
Rears were RS9118
From memory (you should probably check) the RS9118 had more travel than the stock shocks.
Got them from BNT here in Dunners.
|
|
|
|
Post by dasnoboarder on Apr 14, 2009 17:28:48 GMT 11
Fronts were RS9214 Rears were RS9118 Is this stock suspension height? Or with a lift? Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 14, 2009 18:38:00 GMT 11
An interesting question for all tose that have had adjustables more than a year. How often do you adjust them now?
|
|
|
|
Post by nelson on Apr 14, 2009 19:19:22 GMT 11
are this shocks suitable for a 2" suspension lift?
|
|
InVinceble
Isuzu Junior
....still says ISUZU on the motor!
Posts: 77
|
Post by InVinceble on Apr 14, 2009 20:23:39 GMT 11
To answer Geeves question above...
I fitted 9000's a couple of years ago to my "bighorn". I was as keen as mustard to make use of the adjustment. Set them to the hard end of the range (9) and whizzed around town... nice, definate improvement on the stock shock after 100K, no suprises there. On a forest track with the shocks at the opposite end of the range (1) I nearly died... from laughter! The truck went over a "small' rut and didn't stop bouncing for ages. I got out and hardened them up, now run at the mid point setting (5). Accepting the body roll when on road at this setting and driving accordingly, they ain't bad either. So here's your answer Geeves, at "5" they work fine for me off and on road so I no longer bother changing the settings. Glad I didn't buy the in-cab adjuster kit!
|
|
|
|
Post by stigand on Apr 15, 2009 2:45:51 GMT 11
Thanks for feedback, mate has in-cab on Patrol and we genuinely use it a fair bit. We tow several big boats and trailers and travel at speed to diving spots up North the difference in handling is quite stunning. Also I sort of figured with the weight of bar and winch on front I would use adjustment to "fine tune" handling especially as they wore in..........HOWEVER is it worth the extra $$$.......I suspect as Geeves suggested once the novelty wore off I wont be crawling under her too often. I'll post on improvement [or lack of] in handling once they are fitted.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulover on Apr 15, 2009 13:52:36 GMT 11
It is still worth getting the adjustables, i had rancho 5000's on the front before and they just where not stiff enough. You may not adjust them very often but at least you can set it to what you want.
Generally i have mine set on 7 on the road and drop them down to 4-5 if its a rather full on run. And 1-2 for in the snow to let it "walk" better.
|
|
|
|
Post by turnturn on Apr 20, 2009 10:03:56 GMT 11
Those part numbers were for stock suspension.
Back then (6ish years ago) there were only 5 positions of adjustment.
Mine are nearly always on "5" but occasionally get lowered to "3 or 4" off road.
|
|
|
|
Post by stigand on Apr 27, 2009 6:37:39 GMT 11
Bugger..........that made no difference apart from a bit of extra stiffness, when she lands after a bump she still wanders, and cornering is still vague; I'll have a play with torsion: Possibly the 265's previous owner fitted is not helping but they are wearing very even, any suggestions welcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 27, 2009 12:02:46 GMT 11
Disconec the sway bar and then measure the front hight at both wheels. I bet it is different with the sway bar off but was the same with it on. Adjust them to the same and it could help. Also check all your bushes etc although these get checked every wof. If all the above fails remember its not a race car
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Apr 27, 2009 12:03:04 GMT 11
What tyre pressures are you running?
|
|
|
|
Post by stigand on May 3, 2009 15:10:45 GMT 11
Geeves, running 30 front and rear with these 265's. That was a good tip about removing sway arm prior to playing with torsion......gap between hub and mudguard was actually within 10mm the same I tightened torsion 2x full turns. Noticable difference in handling [stiffness] but to be honest this my second manual MU seems to just be a pig. I have had a few swb 4wd and on road this is the worst: I got all motivated after driving a 4wd Mitsi UTE!! a month ago and the ride was far superior, anyway I will give up for now and see if new tyres in a few months will make a difference. But I guess bottom line is its a 13 year old swb truck.................
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on May 3, 2009 16:11:30 GMT 11
Is it standard or lifted? How much? Bump steer can be an issue on lifted trucks. Do you have heavy aftermarket fittings on the front ie arb bar winch etc . When was a wheel alignment last done
|
|
|
|
Post by mudgrip4 on May 3, 2009 18:01:06 GMT 11
Stigand - something not right there - the mu is usually pretty good on road. Try running at 38-40 lbs on road. This will give harder ride but better road holding.
|
|
|
|
Post by stigand on May 3, 2009 18:39:50 GMT 11
Yes she has heavy steel on front, has never been aligned, but with nice wear and no nasty feel in steering why bother? No I dont believe she has been lifted. Riding a bit high with new shocks and torsion tighten. I'm leaning towards these big wheels causing it. Hesitant to over-inflate cause of centre wear but will have a go for fun prior to new tyres.
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on May 3, 2009 19:45:00 GMT 11
265x75x16 is fairly equal to a 31x10.5x15 which is pretty much a standard size 4wd tyre on everything not completely original. The issue of tyre pressures has been debated for ever with no one admiting the other side is right. Pumping up the tyres to 38 will eliminate the tyres as a cause but Im with you on 30 to 32 psi for normal use. Its interesting you want to blame the tyres. Have they worn evenly? What is the complete size and type and what rim are they on?
|
|
