Thread: Springs or dislocation cones?

I can't help too much with the detail around dislocating However, I have the +50mm King Springs and air helper bags in the rear, combined with my tough dogs things don't dislocate.

To re fit the bags You will simply need (I'm guessing) a 25-30mm spacer ontop of the axle, inside the coil and below the bag. Frequent dislocating with the bags in place though will lead to premature bag failure.

Needing both does beg the question what do you do with the car to warrent needing the extra articulation from the dislocating springs. For traveling I'd be stopping the dislocating happening and focus on reliability.

Sent using Forum Runner

Mick

I have dislocation cones on rear for the same reason. Some also have limiting straps.

I can't see them affecting insurance at all.

Other people simply permanently locate the springs with hose clamps.

Your system already does what you want it to. Why spend more on changing it.
The old shocks must have kept the system within limits and now the plus 2" shocks let it extend. (Mind you it looks impressive when it happens.

I considered an extended 'A' frame ball joint as well but don't know much about it.

Spring spacers with the existing are also an option.

Everyone will have a different opinion according to what they have done but it seems that your previous set up was limited by the shockers and now the springs. You get little benefit with articulation when there is no weight on the wheel as you won't get traction.

There are extreme set ups where there are smaller/weaker long travel helper springs that load up the articulated wheel at max travel but don't do much when travelling level on the road. Sounds good in theory but....

I'd either get cones (Andrew Richmond?? Had some) with limiting straps if you wish or research/ look at anchoring the top of the coils.

Good luck with it.

I too looked into limiting straps and dislocation cones, Ended up securing the top of the spring and reinforcing the bolted strap with a larger item on the diff side.

RRC tho but along the same line's

Cheers

Retain the rear, it then forces the front to articulate
Otherwise you look like a poser with all rear artic, and no front compensation
Hose clamps, big cable ties, mimic the bottom clamp, they all work
Any one can bolt in rear top shock brackets and longer shocks, nothing wrong with that, it works and is pretty cheap
BUT you can end up with a floppy rear and unstable balance
Dc

I can't see them affecting insurance at all.

Just for peoples info so they know what guidelines they infringe, I'm sure the guidelines state that springs must be retained by the original method. For Landrovers, they should be captive.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Just for peoples info so they know what guidelines they infringe, I'm sure the guidelines state that springs must be retained by the original method. For Landrovers, they should be captive.

They are only captive on the bottom.

I had 3 inch flexi coils in my 130 and really liked them I also had +5 shocks and I too only had them held by the bottom.

I got mine from Suspension Stuff, mine were made by dobison but the new flexi coils are made by kings apparently.

I would go them again no dramas.

I've heard that the flexy coils are only suited to offroading and not that good when fully loaded and touring. I do camp a lot and my vehicle is around 400kg of just equipment.

How do the flexy coils go fully loaded and unloaded on the black top?
As mentioned that is an option but I'm unsure what they are like as an all rounder.

Had the same issue with my Bilstein shocks, fitted relocation cones, they work like a bomb!