Defender 130 suspension

[brendanm]

After a while of collecting components, last Sunday with the help of Lowranger (massive thankyou) we had a crack at swapping the suspension on the Defender.
Some of the components were the Gwyn Lewis fittings. The complete kit comes from the UK and includes Old Man Emu springs and coils. Being manufactured in Australia it made sense to purchase these items here, which I did using the codes Gwyn supplied. The shocks seam to have the travel, (see picture of rear) further dynamic testing will give a better indication.
The coils is where I start to be underwhelmed. The recommended rates of 2751 front (225lb) and 2755 rear(300lb). On a 130 with a winch and bar this equated to a lift of 5mm on the front and 0mm on the rear. The car sits at 235mm front and 350 rear .Brake lines are braded with a 100mm extension. Front arms are caster corrected for a 2inch lift. I was aiming at a 2inch lift.
I lined up another set of springs which are 2767 front (285lb) and 2754 rear (420lb)which are the next step up in the OME range. After reading forum posts not many are specific to the 130. The lift will now come from increased rate as opposed to a longer spring of the same rate. This would be compounded by the lack of coil turns which is making me think the ride will be too harsh even before they are fitted.
Some photos below of progress to date. As you can see the steel tray may account for some of the weight needed to be carried. The car is being set up with an off road bias and not daily carrying heavy loads.

[Benz]

just to set it straight on your lift values you have achieved. Your suspension was completely standard before fitting this kit?

It looks taller than a standard 130 but that could be the angle the photo was taken + larger tyres?

[n plus one]

just to set it straight on your lift values you have achieved. Your suspension was completely standard before fitting this kit?

It looks taller than a standard 130 but that could be the angle the photo was taken + larger tyres?

Or the portals :angel:

[Steve Td5 130]

Hi bud

You would have at least 3 - 4 inches extra ground clearance with the portal axles fitted.

Where did you get the portal axles from if you don't mind me asking.

Cheers

Steve

[Disco Muppet]

They're Maxi-Drive portals if I'm not mistaken.
Pure porn mate :cool:

[uninformed]

Not counting link geometry and COG, and just looking at the spring rates vs sprung weight and from a off road point of view, IMO your first rates are closer to what is probably good, the second too high.

I know of a 2 in lifted tdi 130 with bull bar and carrying some load, daily driven with a bit of right foot. Fronts are 220, rears are stock with the inner removed (320~330)

Im sure Wayne has his ideas on your rates.

Edit: There is some excellent info from Bush65 in this thread that should help you get a starting point:

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/technical-chatter/189656-understanding-spring-rates.html

[isuzutoo-eh]

Sadly most spring lifts are made through increasing rate rather than length. It seems like spring manufacturers/resellers are scared of coil bind.

Searching around to find a coil the right length and rate is one way, a quick and dirty method could be to use coil spacers (fronts are same as D2 isolators, rear not so sure but you could machine some up I suspect).
There also may be some progressive rate springs that'd keep the ride soft but give a higher ride height.

[LowRanger]

Not counting link geometry and COG, and just looking at the spring rates vs sprung weight and from a off road point of view, IMO your first rates are closer to what is probably good, the second too high.

I know of a 2 in lifted tdi 130 with bull bar and carrying some load, daily driven with a bit of right foot. Fronts are 220, rears are stock with the inner removed (320~330)

Im sure Wayne has his ideas on your rates.

Edit: There is some excellent info from Bush65 in this thread that should help you get a starting point:

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/technical-chatter/189656-understanding-spring-rates.html

Yes you are correct Serg.
Brendan and I have discussed spring rates and many other suspension thoughts along the way to where the suspension currently is on Brendans' vehicle.And my thoughts never at any time considered the springs from the manufacturer that are currently fitted.Taking into account that I know the vehicle and driver well,and how the vehicle primarily gets used by said driver,and also taking into account that I also am aware of how to calculate spring rate/height you can rest assured that I have offered my thoughts on the matter:angel:

[LowRanger]

Sadly most spring lifts are made through increasing rate rather than length. It seems like spring manufacturers/resellers are scared of coil bind.

Searching around to find a coil the right length and rate is one way, a quick and dirty method could be to use coil spacers (fronts are same as D2 isolators, rear not so sure but you could machine some up I suspect).
There also may be some progressive rate springs that'd keep the ride soft but give a higher ride height.

Unfortunately spring spacers are not an option on this truck,as they are a compromise at best,and this definitely isn't a compromise vehicle.:twisted:

[rick130]

As Serg and mark said, those second set of rates in particular are too high, ride quality and flex will suffer at the expense of load carrying.
If you are after a decent ride with reasonable flex, you need a longer coil, not a heavier rate.

If you want off the shelf coils, LRA in Melbourne probably have rates suitable, IIRC their 'purple' spring is a 17" free length, 220lb/in spring (the ones mentioned in Serg's post above I'm guessing) or you could just do some simple number crunching from the info you already have and get some coils wound, any spring maker will wind to your specs.

[Benz]

Or the portals :angel:
oh... I missed those.

nice!

[chook73]

Looking good mate....:thumbsup:

[brendanm]

Thanks to those who have offered information. That link made for good reading and confirmed what I am coming round to thinking. The alignment between Gwyn's fittings and the availability of OME components seemed too good. While I think the components would transfer to weight bearing tourers well. My situation is not carrying much and taking on less travelled tracks. I am also no speed demon on the road and am happy to trade off road manners for offroad bias when decisions are to be made. At this stage I have booked the car in to weigh each corner and have an idea of required height and spring rate to start the discussion.

[uninformed]

dont forget to update this thread with your findings :cool:

[brendanm]

Changed back to the original springs today. It gave me a good opportunity to better scrutinise the two side by side. The aftermarket springs were 10mm taller, 1mm thinner diameter and one less wind over the length.
Someone out there with more knowledge than me may be able to tell me my current spring rate
front drivers side- blue/ red
front passenger side white/ yellow
rear both sides brown/purple
The other omission was that the front were linear and the rear progressive.

[brendanm]

To answer my own question, I just found a link. blue/red 225lb 388mm free length. white/ yellow 225lb 376mm free length. Could not find the Defender 130 rear brown/ purple.
My thoughts were lineal 225lb front and progressive 300-320lb rear The purple that Swaggie mentioned may be very close for the front with a free height of 17 inch's 420mm. I will just bide my time until weigh in and a talk with Ken to see what he has to suit

[LowRanger]

To answer my own question, I just found a link. blue/red 225lb 388mm free length. white/ yellow 225lb 376mm free length. Could not find the Defender 130 rear brown/ purple.
My thoughts were lineal 225lb front and progressive 300-320lb rear The purple that Swaggie mentioned may be very close for the front with a free height of 17 inch's 420mm. I will just bide my time until weigh in and a talk with Ken to see what he has to suit

Brendan,a quick search came up with this RKB101111 (http://red90.ca/rovers/RKB101111.html)

[brendanm]

Thanks Wayne that is exactly what I have got.

[brendanm]

While I was waiting for the weigh in for the suspension I decided to jack up the car to simulate the expected lift. This way I could measure the difference in tail shaft length
As it currently sits with sagged old original springs carrying a winch and bar the tail shaft length was close enough to 700mm. When lifted 2.5 inches the tail shaft length grew to 705mm. Not a lot given a new shaft would hopefully have a longer slip joint.
Reading through old posts I became aware that Les Richmond Automotive was an agent for Tom Woods Shafts. As luck would have it they had a low km second hand item to fit the Puma. That saved measuring and quoting information to America that I would imagine are more conversant in imperial and Jeeps.
I did have a low km Discovery 2 Cardan shaft complete with heavy duty uni's which was the spare from my last vehicle. I was tempted to lengthen this to suit as I had already picked up a D2 TC flange.
The Tom Woods shaft arrived today and makes an interesting comparison. The pictures show increased articulation in the joint, increased angle in the flanges, larger uni's and larger diameter shafts with increased slip, the internal of the Cardan joint is also greasable.
Thankyou to Paul at Les Richmond who also supplied a flange to suit the TC knowing it would be needed in the installation. It is a nice surprise to deal with people who not only know the product but can also think ahead to solve problems that are likely to arise. He also recommended locktite on the nut as Puma's with more than 30mm of lift have worked loose in the past.

[LowRanger]

While I was waiting for the weigh in for the suspension I decided to jack up the car to simulate the expected lift. This way I could measure the difference in tail shaft length
As it currently sits with sagged old original springs carrying a winch and bar the tail shaft length was close enough to 700mm. When lifted 2.5 inches the tail shaft length grew to 705mm. Not a lot given a new shaft would hopefully have a longer slip joint.
Reading through old posts I became aware that Les Richmond Automotive was an agent for Tom Woods Shafts. As luck would have it they had a low km second hand item to fit the Puma. That saved measuring and quoting information to America that I would imagine are more conversant in imperial and Jeeps.
I did have a low km Discovery 2 Cardan shaft complete with heavy duty uni's which was the spare from my last vehicle. I was tempted to lengthen this to suit as I had already picked up a D2 TC flange.
The Tom Woods shaft arrived today and makes an interesting comparison. The pictures show increased articulation in the joint, increased angle in the flanges, larger uni's and larger diameter shafts with increased slip, the internal of the Cardan joint is also greasable.
Thankyou to Paul at Les Richmond who also supplied a flange to suit the TC knowing it would be needed in the installation. It is a nice surprise to deal with people who not only know the product but can also think ahead to solve problems that are likely to arise. He also recommended locktite on the nut as Puma's with more than 30mm of lift have worked loose in the past.

Now you know what I have been saying all along ;)

[Tombie]

Great looking vehicle... Enjoy what you're doing...

Just to add some context - it is a compromised vehicle :) it's not road legal unfortunately...

Other than that - love it!

[LowRanger]

Great looking vehicle... Enjoy what you're doing...

Just to add some context - it is a compromised vehicle :) it's not road legal unfortunately...

Other than that - love it!

Funny you should say that,as it is fully engineered on Portals and 35's and as more things are done the extras are being engineered as well.
And you should see it in its element ie OFF ROAD it is a fabulous vehicle!

[brendanm]

Until recently it was my daily driver. Fully engineered and road legal. Done over 100000kms on the portals from the Cape to the High Country. Currently planning for Tasmania.

[uninformed]

Great looking vehicle... Enjoy what you're doing...

Just to add some context - it is a compromised vehicle :) it's not road legal unfortunately...

Other than that - love it!

FAIL!!!

[Tombie]

FAIL!!!


Really...

Heim joints are illegal for street use in Australia.

The rest of the mods I have no doubt could be engineered, but heim joints have always been a no go for street use.

But thanks for the highly amusing response!

[Tombie]

Funny you should say that,as it is fully engineered on Portals and 35's and as more things are done the extras are being engineered as well.
And you should see it in its element ie OFF ROAD it is a fabulous vehicle!


I have no doubt it's awesome offroad, I did comment I really like it..

I was providing just a small play on your comment that it's a "no compromise vehicle". :)

TSA, TAC, RTA and VicRoads all state heim joints must not be used on steering or suspension components.

For off road use the heim joints will be excellent.

As I said before - impressive truck!

[uninformed]

Really...

Heim joints are illegal for street use in Australia.

The rest of the mods I have no doubt could be engineered, but heim joints have always been a no go for street use.

But thanks for the highly amusing response!

Not sure why you had to go out of your way to point that out. Brendanm was not on here asking what he could or could not do leagally, he was not asking for advice in that area and it really had nothing to do with the context of the thread.

Seems like there is always a few that have to come out waving the "you cant do that, that will be illegal"card (then using the oh we have to because its a forum)

why dont you let him worry about that and just enjoy his 130 for what it is and the fact that he has shared info and his findigs with us.

Its no wonder more than one person has said to me they wont post pictures and builds here on AULRO...

[Tombie]

Hmmm let me see...

Because I could suggest Johnny Joints which give similar flex and are completely ok for road use and then he would have a vehicle completely road legal - with no repercussions from the traffic authorities.

As I keep saying, but it's falling on your deaf ears...

IT'S A BRILLIANT BUILD...

I really like it..

He's gone to so much effort, if it remains completely legal he has pulled off the *ultimate* build...

It's those on here who willingly and knowingly flaunt the law that bring our hobby under scrutiny by those in power.

Perhaps Mr Uninformed, try a Snickers and relax.

As for those who won't post their builds - if they aren't prepared to build something that is open to scrutiny and comment - perhaps their designs need revising.
You don't build a house without complying with regulation, and a vehicle is more of a potential hazard than a house.

You have a great day!

And Brendan, keep up the great work.

[uninformed]

Or you could have just kept it to your first comment and that would have been great.

Did you even ask if they were heims or jonny joints??

As for people not wanting to be scrutinized, its only by the likes of yourself and others on this forum. And last time I checked none are certified engineers or in the relevant department of transport. So it just comes down to your 2 bit interpretation. I know of a few people that have been happy to be scrutinized by the appropriate authorities but cant be bothered here because of this attitude.

As for your build a house to code example I have lost count the number of times one engineers interpretation has been different to another for the same problem, enough so to warrant a different on site approach, yet all have been certified and deemed up to standard...

[Tombie]

That's a nice story. :D

However the only attitude I am detecting appears to be coming from you. I have not played the man, only the ball and you are trying to make it personal.

And what is more unusual is that you are not even the person building the vehicle.

I posted a comment, your interpretation was to take offence and to kick off with "FAIL".

Perhaps I may offer a suggestion?

Consider your own advice...

[Tombie]

Brendan, I would like to apologise for the high jacking of your thread.

[brendanm]

Without having too bigger detour into the legalities, not only do laws differ from state to state but also between engineers interpretations. Portals are not signed off in Qld though fine for NSW. What happens interstate does not effect my insurance. The rear arms which seem to be the point of contention have been signed of on a company promotional vehicle that is a distributor for this exact product in Sydney. They were at the Landrover expo and we discussed this exact point. I would not drive a vehicle that is dangerous or not legal voiding insurance. Thanks to uninformed for your understanding of the gist of the thread, I have been guided by others and learnt from their experience.


Any how, todays progress.
The vehicle weighed in fully loaded with all the gear for extended touring and full of fuel at 2559kg. Fairly evenly distributed with the front 1290kg, and rear 1269kg. Carrying a jerry can in the back would be near spot on. Interesting was a recent Defender 110 that they weighed with both a bar and winch was 100kg lighter at the front. I would not have thought that much difference between similar setups over varying wheel bases. This would explain why a 50mm lift for a 110 returned a 5mm lift in the 130.
The springs recommended will be available to collect tomorrow and should deliver both the height to correct castor and suppleness with articulation. The fronts are around 300lb with the rear spring rate higher than I thought at around 450lb. Maybe that's the weight of the dual cab and steel tray.

[chook73]

Without having too bigger detour into the legalities, not only do laws differ from state to state but also between engineers interpretations. Portals are not signed off in Qld though fine for NSW. What happens interstate does not effect my insurance. The rear arms which seem to be the point of contention have been signed of on a company promotional vehicle that is a distributor for this exact product in Sydney. They were at the Landrover expo and we discussed this exact point. I would not drive a vehicle that is dangerous or not legal voiding insurance. Thanks to uninformed for your understanding of the gist of the thread, I have been guided by others and learnt from their experience.


Any how, todays progress.
The vehicle weighed in fully loaded with all the gear for extended touring and full of fuel at 2559kg. Fairly evenly distributed with the front 1290kg, and rear 1269kg. Carrying a jerry can in the back would be near spot on. Interesting was a recent Defender 110 that they weighed with both a bar and winch was 100kg lighter at the front. I would not have thought that much difference between similar setups over varying wheel bases. This would explain why a 50mm lift for a 110 returned a 5mm lift in the 130.
The springs recommended will be available to collect tomorrow and should deliver both the height to correct castor and suppleness with articulation. The fronts are around 300lb with the rear spring rate higher than I thought at around 450lb. Maybe that's the weight of the dual cab and steel tray.

hmmm that was mine that weighed in at 1190kg on the front (614 ps and 576 ds) which can be attributed to an awning on the passengers side and about 25lt of water in the passengers side tank at the time plus all of my batteries are on the passengers side.

My rear end weighed in at a whopping 1534kg (only 4kg difference side to side) with fridge and drawers etc but I do have a lot more "stuff" in the rear. That weight however did not take into account things like tent, food and camping equipment which varies depending on the trip I do.

Your front difference will be in the portals and tyres, I know when I pick up my portals each one weighs at least 20kg.

[LowRanger]

Without having too bigger detour into the legalities, not only do laws differ from state to state but also between engineers interpretations. Portals are not signed off in Qld though fine for NSW. What happens interstate does not effect my insurance. The rear arms which seem to be the point of contention have been signed of on a company promotional vehicle that is a distributor for this exact product in Sydney. They were at the Landrover expo and we discussed this exact point. I would not drive a vehicle that is dangerous or not legal voiding insurance. Thanks to uninformed for your understanding of the gist of the thread, I have been guided by others and learnt from their experience.


Any how, todays progress.
The vehicle weighed in fully loaded with all the gear for extended touring and full of fuel at 2559kg. Fairly evenly distributed with the front 1290kg, and rear 1269kg. Carrying a jerry can in the back would be near spot on. Interesting was a recent Defender 110 that they weighed with both a bar and winch was 100kg lighter at the front. I would not have thought that much difference between similar setups over varying wheel bases. This would explain why a 50mm lift for a 110 returned a 5mm lift in the 130.
The springs recommended will be available to collect tomorrow and should deliver both the height to correct castor and suppleness with articulation. The fronts are around 300lb with the rear spring rate higher than I thought at around 450lb. Maybe that's the weight of the dual cab and steel tray.

I hope that they also took into account the drivers weight on the right hand side

[chook73]

I hope that they also took into account the drivers weight on the right hand side

that would have pushed it over the GVM.....:wasntme:

[LowRanger]

At least you will be an expert at changing over Defender springs now Brendan,and have them done in no time:D

[uninformed]

Any how, todays progress.
The vehicle weighed in fully loaded with all the gear for extended touring and full of fuel at 2559kg. Fairly evenly distributed with the front 1290kg, and rear 1269kg. Carrying a jerry can in the back would be near spot on. Interesting was a recent Defender 110 that they weighed with both a bar and winch was 100kg lighter at the front. I would not have thought that much difference between similar setups over varying wheel bases. This would explain why a 50mm lift for a 110 returned a 5mm lift in the 130.
The springs recommended will be available to collect tomorrow and should deliver both the height to correct castor and suppleness with articulation. The fronts are around 300lb with the rear spring rate higher than I thought at around 450lb. Maybe that's the weight of the dual cab and steel tray.

How did you find the feel of the vehicle when you went back to OEM LR springs? did you like the ride and handling?

To me 300lb or there a bouts is quite high in the front. Im betting not only will it be harsh on road, but won't allow the use of your new SE Superflex front arms.

While we both have some big differences in our defenders: Yours 127in, 5 inch portal lift, wider track, greater unsprung mass to deal with, higher COG in the body not just the portals. Mine 110in, 2 inch spring lift truck cab, light tray. The front sprung weight is close. Im at 1140kg but you would have at least 50kg more in unsprung mass than me. So at 100kg more which is 11.4% increase, my springs are 190lb/in, that would put yours at 212lb/in. Now I know it doesn't quite work like that, but if you can handle the feel, ride and handling of the 225 in lift, its going to get you more flex at low speed.

As far as springs and more unsprung mass, I know a 118in LR with maxi drive portals that has 187lb front springs (it is lower than yours though)

All just my opinion of coarse.

[brendanm]

I will find out a little more tomorrow as their email came through late this afternoon with recommended springs. Their concern was that a lighter duty spring will struggle with the weight and sag. I will find out if the rear is progressive as this may absorb initial bumps easier.
As for how it drives, I need an alignment pretty badly though until all the components are fitted there is no point. I need the springs to correct castor. The height will then tell me if I need an adjustable Panhard rod or can get away with what is there and a new dampener is also going in.
The rear arms are not great. Just a bit noisier and harsher than having rubber at both ends. Again until the springs go in, it is not a fair test. When so much was changed over in one hit it will take a bit of diagnosis. The rear wide angle joint on the A frame is designed for a 2 inch lift. The shocks are 5.5 inches over size so on lower than standard height springs(dropped 20mm with the inner helper coil removed) it is a bit ordinary.
One issue with the trailing arm will be the arm connects lower on the housing to counter the turning moment of force exerted by the different axle setup. A 2 inch lift really needs an arm for a 4 inch lift. I can foreshadow how quickly I will chew through chassis end rubbers by not doing something. Be interested to see what Superior come up with from their current testing of their long arm kit. X Engineering in the UK do a ball and socket type setup, though I would not imagine this would be much better than what is currently there.

[LowRanger]

I don't think that there has been much follow up on the long arm kit,Greg has been busy with other projects,and the replacement HD standard length arm,which may be a solution,due to the different type of mount at the chassis end.Unfortunately Greg is away for a few weeks,so I can't follow this up until he is back.The other solution is a custom set of arms and bracket like Iain had made,don't know how you would go getting Brad to get them made and weld on the brackets though!
And the good thing with Ken is,if the springs don't do what is expected,he will get you another set,until you and he are happy with how they work

[uninformed]

I would have thought that if the springs are properly designed and made from good material, then sagging at a minimum. My old 210lb/in springs sagged only 10mm max in over 7 years.

IMO the biggest concern for you with soft springs is High COG and body roll. Since you have a higher COG (even with wider track) this sort of acts as a lever getting more body roll for a given spring rate. There is nothing wrong with body roll to a point, if you have nice flat links (in our case radius arms and trailing arms), but we don't, and your TAs are steeper again. With body roll you get roll steer (oversteer in our case) and this can be a little funky on and off road.

I don't find mine bad at all but definitely would like to change the links.

You don't want the truck flopping about when crawling especially on side angles, and you don't want to have to keep correcting the steering wheel during cornering, but there is obviously a point that can be ok.

[LowRanger]

I will find out a little more tomorrow as their email came through late this afternoon with recommended springs. Their concern was that a lighter duty spring will struggle with the weight and sag. I will find out if the rear is progressive as this may absorb initial bumps easier.
As for how it drives, I need an alignment pretty badly though until all the components are fitted there is no point. I need the springs to correct castor. The height will then tell me if I need an adjustable Panhard rod or can get away with what is there and a new dampener is also going in.
The rear arms are not great. Just a bit noisier and harsher than having rubber at both ends. Again until the springs go in, it is not a fair test. When so much was changed over in one hit it will take a bit of diagnosis. The rear wide angle joint on the A frame is designed for a 2 inch lift. The shocks are 5.5 inches over size so on lower than standard height springs(dropped 20mm with the inner helper coil removed) it is a bit ordinary.
One issue with the trailing arm will be the arm connects lower on the housing to counter the turning moment of force exerted by the different axle setup. A 2 inch lift really needs an arm for a 4 inch lift. I can foreshadow how quickly I will chew through chassis end rubbers by not doing something. Be interested to see what Superior come up with from their current testing of their long arm kit. X Engineering in the UK do a ball and socket type setup, though I would not imagine this would be much better than what is currently there.

I must admit that I am a bit dubious about the springs,especially the front,I hope that they took out your standard fronts and tested them to work out the current rate,and didn't just weigh the vehicle and forgot that you carry possibly an extra 40-50kg from the portals and another 20 odd KG from the SF arms that is all unsprung weight,that shouldn't be taken into account when calculating the spring rates.I would have thought you would not need any more that 240-250 max in the front.

[rick130]

One thing we need to remember is that the wheel rate will be different in this rig with the wider track, ie. a higher rate spring will give the same wheel rate as a standard track Defender, it's all about the leverage on the spring in one wheel bump/articulation.

[LowRanger]

One thing we need to remember is that the wheel rate will be different in this rig with the wider track, ie. a higher rate spring will give the same wheel rate as a standard track Defender, it's all about the leverage on the spring in one wheel bump/articulation.

Brendans track is the same as mine;)
There are other factors involved as well,but I won't bring these up for discussion.

[brendanm]

Installed the new springs. Not sure what to think. The rate is higher than OEM though not sure of the exact rate as it is classified as the companies medium springs. They knew I was after articulation and suppleness offroad and I don't carry heavy loads
The lift is a bit short of the 2 inches on the front and I am not sure if this is why the steering feels heavy. Initial trials have the springs near completely compressed with still 20mm between the axle and the bump stop. The free height of the coil was near identical to the free height of the standard coil. The diameter of the coils thickness is significantly larger The result is 280mm in car spring height. It sits ok though the lift on the rear is only about 10mm over standard.
Photos show travel. Takes a bit to lift a tyre.
The rear A frame is just starting to rub on the exhaust over the axle and the rear of the tyre is just kissing the guard. Couple of mods to follow.

[LowRanger]

Installed the new springs. Not sure what to think. The rate is higher than OEM though not sure of the exact rate as it is classified as the companies medium springs. They knew I was after articulation and suppleness offroad and I don't carry heavy loads
The lift is a bit short of the 2 inches on the front and I am not sure if this is why the steering feels heavy. Initial trials have the springs near completely compressed with still 20mm between the axle and the bump stop. The free height of the coil was near identical to the free height of the standard coil. The diameter of the coils thickness is significantly larger The result is 280mm in car spring height. It sits ok though the lift on the rear is only about 10mm over standard.
Photos show travel. Takes a bit to lift a tyre.
The rear A frame is just starting to rub on the exhaust over the axle and the rear of the tyre is just kissing the guard. Couple of mods to follow.

All a little perplexing.I would expect that your steering should have felt heavier when you had the standard springs and SF arms,due to a larger variance in actual castor and what is built into the arms.
As far as bump stop clearance is concerned,don't be too worried about it,what you need to find out,is how close you are to the shock bottoming out,when you know your limit there then you can adjust your bumpstop accordingly.

[chook73]

Brendans track is the same as mine;)
There are other factors involved as well,but I won't bring these up for discussion.

Out of interest Wayne what measurement is your track?

[LowRanger]

Out of interest Wayne what measurement is your track?

The same as Brendan's :D :wasntme:


I don't remember off the top of my head Iain,but last time I was down at Brendan's we measured them and they were the same.

[chook73]

The same as Brendan's :D :wasntme:



Geeee..... I wonder what Brendan's track measurement is......:whistling:

[uninformed]

Geeee..... I wonder what Brendan's track measurement is......:whistling:

Looks like he has stock 6.5" wide LR steel wheels. If he is not running any spacers then you can pretty much add 85mm per side for increase of track by the portals. Tyre size doesnt matter as its the centre of tyre to centre of tyre and rim offset is going to dictate that.

So over a stock 130 he would have approx 170mm more track width.

I dont know the difference in offset and size between his rims and yours???

[LowRanger]

Looks like he has stock 6.5" wide LR steel wheels. If he is not running any spacers then you can pretty much add 85mm per side for increase of track by the portals. Tyre size doesnt matter as its the centre of tyre to centre of tyre and rim offset is going to dictate that.

So over a stock 130 he would have approx 170mm more track width.

I dont know the difference in offset and size between his rims and yours???

Serg.
Brendan is running custom offset 8" rims and 35 x12.5/16's

[LowRanger]

Geeee..... I wonder what Brendan's track measurement is......:whistling:

That's an easy one Iain...........the same as mine:eek:

[uninformed]

Serg.
Brendan is running custom offset 8" rims and 35 x12.5/16's

Thanks, they look like stock 130 rims in the pics. But that is from behind a computer screen :D

So if Brendan knows his offset/back space, it wont be hard to figure out his track width.

[brendanm]

The rims have the original 130 centres in a 8.5 inch wide outer rim to suit the 35 inch tyre. They were custom made by now retired wheel fabricator here in Sydney called Speedy Wheels. It was a bit of mucking around originally as I mocked them up to totally contain the portal inside and protect them from damage before welding them up. The biggest increase in capability comes from the internal beadlocks. I usually run them around 10psi and as low as 5psi in really hard going. The car climbs pretty well.


Fitted the dampener, Thankyou to Iain for his spare. Interested to find out more of Gwyn Lewis Hydraulic Assist unit in place of the dampener. It is supposed to take pressure off the steering box. Apparently they are legally engineered on plenty of Jeeps running around. Not sure if anyone on here is running this set up on a landrover.


Progress for today consisted of booking the car in for a wheel alignment and swinging by the Landrover dealership to measure up a standard Defender. Front spring height is around 250mm and rear 350mm. Most posts talk of hub centre to wheel arch. Neither of these are where they used to be on mine. Mine is currently at 285 front and 360 rear.

[LowRanger]

The rims have the original 130 centres in a 8.5 inch wide outer rim to suit the 35 inch tyre. They were custom made by now retired wheel fabricator here in Sydney called Speedy Wheels. It was a bit of mucking around originally as I mocked them up to totally contain the portal inside and protect them from damage before welding them up. The biggest increase in capability comes from the internal beadlocks. I usually run them around 10psi and as low as 5psi in really hard going. The car climbs pretty well.


Fitted the dampener, Thankyou to Iain for his spare. Interested to find out more of Gwyn Lewis Hydraulic Assist unit in place of the dampener. It is supposed to take pressure off the steering box. Apparently they are legally engineered on plenty of Jeeps running around. Not sure if anyone on here is running this set up on a landrover.


Progress for today consisted of booking the car in for a wheel alignment and swinging by the Landrover dealership to measure up a standard Defender. Front spring height is around 250mm and rear 350mm. Most posts talk of hub centre to wheel arch. Neither of these are where they used to be on mine. Mine is currently at 285 front and 360 rear.

Brendan
I usually measure from centre of the hub to the bottom of the wheel arch on the guard,not the flare.

[MLD]

Brendan the truck is looking good :thumbsup: Looking forward to a day out doing a super tuff truck trip. That said any chance I had to follow you has now evaporated.

MLD

[brendanm]

Hi Mark
I will organise a trip somewhere when I sort out the last couple of issues. Later on this week I will get a tweek on the exhaust as it is just rubbing on the rear A frame on full extension. Maybe there was something to ending your exhaust behind the muffler.

[brendanm]

Tested the car out yesterday at Yawal by doing 6 stage. Talk about the hill that just keeps on giving. Travel is good and a bit of extra clearance is welcome. I thought the springs may have been too rigid originally though on cross slopes and angles softer springs may have made the car more tippy. All the wheels are still on the ground and the car sits level. Not sure of the exact rate of the springs as they are listed as Ultimates medium rate.

[chook73]

Brendan the truck is looking good :thumbsup: Looking forward to a day out doing a super tuff truck trip. That said any chance I had to follow you has now evaporated.

MLD

Hows that feeling now Mark after 6 stage?

[MLD]

Iain I'll down grade the super tuff back to merely tuff. That said with some sliders and fitting the winch I would have been self sufficient and would have avoided the damage. The 130 did everything I asked of it. Given the company I was in the 130 held her own. It was driving in the dark that had me most of all.

It will be a while before I sign up for 6 stage again. I need the rest from the emotional roller coaster. :D

MLD

[chook73]

Iain I'll down grade the super tuff back to merely tuff. That said with some sliders and fitting the winch I would have been self sufficient and would have avoided the damage. The 130 did everything I asked of it. Given the company I was in the 130 held her own. It was driving in the dark that had me most of all.

It will be a while before I sign up for 6 stage again. I need the rest from the emotional roller coaster. :D

MLD

Well now you have the justification for the sliders and a few battle scars to brag about around the fire.....

[LowRanger]

Iain I'll down grade the super tuff back to merely tuff. That said with some sliders and fitting the winch I would have been self sufficient and would have avoided the damage. The 130 did everything I asked of it. Given the company I was in the 130 held her own. It was driving in the dark that had me most of all.

It will be a while before I sign up for 6 stage again. I need the rest from the emotional roller coaster. :D

MLD

Just fit the winch and sliders,you don't need any fancy new bullbar,and with the money you save,you can buy an LED light bar,and you won't have to be afraid of the dark again:p:wasntme: