OT- Jeep Wrangler JL... suspension improvement suggestions ? - Page 2
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    51,238
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2771
    Likes (Received)
    5566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SVE Performance View Post
    Don, which model ? Sport,Sahara,Rubicon ?
    Sahara.......

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    East Peoria, IL, USA
    Posts
    5,362
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    329
    Likes (Received)
    779

    Default

    heavy bumpers with a winch built in etc... Adds weight but doesn't take up any room. Does a fantastic job of protecting jeep from fender benders or trail carnage.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,699
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4091
    Likes (Received)
    3911

    Default

    I had a little more time to search this morning and found this:

    New JL coil springs | 2018+ Jeep Wrangler Forums (JL / JLU) - Rubicon, Sahara, Sport, Unlimited - JLwranglerforums.com

    Unfortunately there seems to be nothing that functions this way without increasing ride height.

  4. Likes Milacron liked this post
  5. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Modesto, CA USA
    Posts
    6,596
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1074

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thermite View Post
    The Cayenne is THAT shabby as to value-for-money?

    Whole lot of better choices in the world than either of those alternatives.

    Some of them you don't even have to leave Ford's tent to pick, but "usually".
    Last I looked the Porsche started around $65,000. Double that for all the upgrades!
    Bill D.

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,717
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill D View Post
    Last I looked the Porsche started around $65,000. Double that for all the upgrades!
    Bill D.
    My "base model" XJ8-L, without the optional sound system, sat navigation, and such was $67,000, February of 2005. Silly money - then OR now - just to move yer arse about.

    At $10,600 used, OTOH, it has proven a far sounder investment, given they can't rust!



    Land Rover, BTW uses very similar air-suspension to their Jaguar cousins, about as comfortable as can be, on road or off. Those can be deceptively HEAVY buggers for their size and useful space compared to the Jeep lineup. That can be nice for towing, but none too kind to Joe Average's pocketbook as to maintenance and operating costs.

    Dodge or GM in "suburban" and comparable sizes, AWD or no, are generally the better deal.
    Expedition, yah. Even Flex.. maybe.

    But Explorer? F*****g kidding, yah?

  7. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    peekskill, NY
    Posts
    24,141
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4376

    Default

    But Explorer? F*****g kidding, yah?[/QUOTE]

    AKA 'ford exploder.'

    The vehicle voted most likely to be upside down in the median on the
    Taconic parkway, during the seasons first snow dusting each winter.

    Something about either a) the suspensions or b) the pilots of those things.

  8. Likes Bobw liked this post
  9. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,717
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jim rozen View Post
    AKA 'ford exploder.'

    The vehicle voted most likely to be upside down in the median on the
    Taconic parkway, during the seasons first snow dusting each winter.

    Something about either a) the suspensions or b) the pilots of those things.
    To be fair.. I very nearly bought one, meself to replace the '91 GMC S15 short-bed.

    They LOOK nice, are fair comfortable, front and rear, seem to fit the typical suburban-life needs, are cheap enuf used to take a gamble.. but then .... yah go online and research 'em?

    We don't have the time...


  10. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Modesto, CA USA
    Posts
    6,596
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1074

    Default

    [QUOTE=thermite;3385800]To be fair.. I very nearly bought one, meself to replace the '91 GMC S15 short-bed.

    They LOOK nice, are fair comfortable, front and rear, seem to fit the typical suburban-life needs, are cheap enuf used to take a gamble.. but then .... yah go online and research 'em?

    We don't have the time...



    I thought the front drive Volvo based explorers where not so unstable as the old rear drive truck based ones?

  11. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,717
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill D View Post
    I thought the front drive Volvo based explorers where not so unstable as the old rear drive truck based ones?
    Uhhhh.. I suspect we'd have even LESS time for that....



    back to trying to make a jeep Sahara ride softer.

    Waste of time. It is still going to have a shorter wheelbase than average.

    Jaguar/Land Rover and other high-priced-spreads throw cubic money at that. Not just air suspension. Computers, position sensors, accelerometers to dynamically alter it as it rolls.

    Jeep is just a fair-decent compromise one is expected to adapt TO.

    Cheaper that way, and subject to fewer points of failure.

  12. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Arizona
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4

    Default

    I do/have owned several grand cherokees - similar vehicle, same suspension setup, and similar wheelbase. As someone else said, bumpers will help add some weight without sacrificing space which will help smooth the ride a little. Better or additionally would be GOOD shocks. I dont mean the $30/each monroes from the local auto parts store. Minimum I would go with would be Bilstein 5100 series. Preferable would be Fox 2.0 performance series. I've had and liked both. The bilsteins are slightly plusher on road, the fox a little firmer without being harsh while soaking up big bumps without bottoming easily. Also, the fox are aluminum, so less corrosion issues depending on where you live. Progressive rate springs would also be a good addition. I'm not sure if anyone is making them for JL's yet but I would check Old Man Emu first, then maybe Eibach.

    Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  13. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    5,480
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    470
    Likes (Received)
    2332

    Default

    1) I don't believe shocks will help much....they address suspension movement but not the spring rate/vehicle weight which is the enemy here.

    2) Drive around with bags of sand? Super - except you pay for that in MPG and loss of cargo room and cornering behaviour.

    3) Go to softer springs? Probably the best idea but I'd be surprised if you can find any for sale. The aftermarket goes for heavier, bad-asser stuff. Not softer.


    Most modern vehicles have too-stiff springs, too-low sidewalls and too-heavy steering. A Jeep, of all things, is known for a buckboard ride.

    But yes, I'd look into softer springs and air bags.

  14. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Coastal Dogpatch, SC, USA
    Posts
    51,238
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2771
    Likes (Received)
    5566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GregSY View Post
    A Jeep, of all things, is known for a buckboard ride.
    Actually modern Wranglers ride way better than they used to...otherwise I wouldn't have bought the thing in the first place. Bottom line is the ride is pretty decent as it is, but with the added weight it was amazing how smooth the ride was.

    As to Ford Explorers, check out the all new design 2020 Explorer ST (400 hp and RWD). Catch is they are almost as expensive now as a Land Rover Discovery.

  15. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Central Ohio USA
    Posts
    3,773
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    68
    Likes (Received)
    1697

    Default

    Slightly OT, but I've had the opportunity to drive various modern 'Rover' offerings at a regional race track, in a custom-constructed obstacle course of mud, ruts, hills and valleys. Slow speed, coached by drivers with serious off-road credentials. Those buggies can do some pretty amazing things.

    The interesting thing is, when I started on the course, I chose the 'nicest' path thru the first section. The coach said, "Nope, don't go the easy way. Pick the worst possible way to approach each challenge, and do that." The Land Rover did not disappoint.

    Fun time, plus a free hat and only two emails a year. Reasonable exchange. Plus I don't have to pay for their maintenance...
    Last edited by Chip Chester; 07-18-2019 at 03:41 PM. Reason: had to hat

  16. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    25,717
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7561
    Likes (Received)
    8104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milacron View Post
    Actually modern Wranglers ride way better than they used to...otherwise I wouldn't have bought the thing in the first place. Bottom line is the ride is pretty decent as it is, but with the added weight it was amazing how smooth the ride was.
    Hard to believe how smooth our '79 Grand Wagoneer "Quadra trak" was, too, given it had a short-ish wheelbase, narrower track than average, and LEAF springs at all four corners.

    "In general" changing spring rates on Jeeps is as simple as getting aholt of someone who can de-code their parts-bin SKU's. Factory themselves seems to have used everything that will fit the space at least once as they adapted to different engines, trim weight, towing or not, on/off road, amount of travel, wheel and tire selection.

    And there's another trick - one rapidly changed, and not terribly costly for the gain.

    Two full sets of wheels with mounted tires, Very different sidewall height / aspect ratio.

    Or .. as I use on the Town & Country - one set, but upgraded and oversized 70-Series Continentals to extend the load range and deal with Pittsburgh area pothole matrices camouflaged as "pavement". Higher inflation pressure if hauling a load. MUCH lower for light passenger use. They are large enough they don't go marshmellowy. Better stability, control, and braking than OEM, even at the lower pressures.

    Never been a fanboy of "pretty wheels", but Oye! Running the best tires I can find - a good Drager or Miller gage kept in each vehicle to insure ACCURATE inflation - has paid back very, very nicely.

  17. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    SE PA, Philly
    Posts
    5,278
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    981
    Likes (Received)
    1746

    Default

    For a given vehicle, as has been pointed out, the increased mass increases inertia which will make the vehicle jump around less. Downsides? This limits the vehicle's ability to withstand bumps and shocks. You will bottom out more. And you'll use more gas.

    If you want a smoother ride without 500 lbs in back you can use a spring with a lower spring rate, the car will sit lower and have less travel available unless you use a longer spring which might not fit (there's a limit to how small a spring can get due to the spring wire width). And so you would bottom more out due to less travel. There's a balance between the spring rate and the stiffness of the shocks. I don't think I'd change the spring rate without ensuring that the shocks are ok to handle more, well, shock with the weaker springs.

    If you want to get a smoother ride I'm guessing it can be done with different springs and shocks, but the original car design was for a certain duty cycle. As I imply above, if you go with a modified setup (springs, shocks, wheels, and tires) you may be precluding some of duty capabilities of the vehicle. Off-road much?

    There's been a trend for several years regarding cars going to a larger wheel. For cars that are offered with standard wheels, this means that the sidewalls of the large wheel setups are smaller. This is mostly for cosmetic purposes, but it does make the ride stiffer and bumpier. Small advantage in dry handling, and big degradation in wet road handling. Point is, changing your wheelsize to sidewall ratio also allows you to tailor your ride. A bit.

    Summary
    1) I think you can change the ride to your liking, but it will change your vehicles capabilities in other areas. As long as you expect this, you'll be cool.
    2) Besides springs, air springs, shocks, and (for the true "optimizer" in the crowd) suspension linkage, another area to look at in optimizing ride is wheels and tires.

    My 2014 Highlander has a pretty stiff ride, even with standard wheels. My plan is to live with it. Not worth changing things. To me, at least.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •