Author Topic: 89-95 Rears up front??  (Read 1887 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Yeagley

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 155
  • Member since Jun '07
    • View Profile
89-95 Rears up front??
« on: Jan 17, 2008, 09:12:21 AM »
Alright, im collecting up all my parts for my SAS. Does anyone run the longer 89-95 rear springs up front? Does the extra 3 inches of spring give anymore flex. Ive run the older rears up front on my other rig and loved them. Has anyone run both? Which do you like better?
« Last Edit: Jan 17, 2008, 11:08:17 PM by TurboCrawler »

dirtchicken

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: -44
  • Posts: 350
  • Member since Nov '06
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rear springs
« Reply #1 on: Jan 17, 2008, 10:48:01 AM »
Tons of people run the 86+ rears in the front. It's a very flexible spring.

Yeagley [OP]

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 155
  • Member since Jun '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rear springs
« Reply #2 on: Jan 17, 2008, 07:43:33 PM »
I have run the 48" rears up front for a few years. I was talking about the 89-95 rears. They are 51" long.

Gittinit

  • throttle jockey!
  • Offline The 2K Group
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 28
  • Male Posts: 2,293
  • Member since Sep '06
  • out from under my rock, and ready to roll
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #3 on: Jan 18, 2008, 05:20:47 AM »
Arent the 51" springs 2" longer in front and about 1" in rear. Mabye the difference was all in front of the spring. Either way Its the decreased approach angle due to the longer spring, that keeps me thinking the 48" springs are best.
Hug your kids, pray for a soldier, and don't sweat the small stuff.

my favorite places:
http://www.flatnasty.net/
http://www.orvpark.com/

– fortysixandtwo – sorry, i prefer marlin because aside from gittinit, no one is a know it all a hole

Yeagley [OP]

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 155
  • Member since Jun '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #4 on: Jan 18, 2008, 08:37:00 AM »
Thats kind of what I was thinking.They are 2 inches longer in the front.  Maybe if I was running 40's it wouldnt be an issue.

RN37DD

  • Offline Crawler Guru
  • ****
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 742
  • Member since Apr '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #5 on: Jan 18, 2008, 08:58:59 AM »
with the 48 rears up front what dose that do for ride hight? reason I'm asking is i have 2 inch lift springs up front now and they are stiff!!! plus I've got a spare set of good rear springs standing by. don't want to go too high because I'm running 31 inch tires.

Yeagley [OP]

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 155
  • Member since Jun '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #6 on: Jan 18, 2008, 09:36:14 AM »
Here is my 83 with stock rears up front. I added most of the leaves out of a 4" pro comp wrangler pack. Tires are 35's. I think they only lift you a couple inches without anything added. You might need to add a few leaves out of another rear pack to handle the weight of the motor.

RN37DD

  • Offline Crawler Guru
  • ****
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 742
  • Member since Apr '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #7 on: Jan 18, 2008, 09:51:15 AM »
cool thanks..  i think that might be an option.. I'll have plenty of leafs to add if necessary from  other spring packs.  how dose it ride now? mine handles great on the road but about knocks all my teeth out on the logging roads.

Gittinit

  • throttle jockey!
  • Offline The 2K Group
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 28
  • Male Posts: 2,293
  • Member since Sep '06
  • out from under my rock, and ready to roll
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #8 on: Jan 18, 2008, 10:10:17 AM »
 Johns a f*g 051.jpg  Ha Nice picture title! Now thats some funny crap right there.

I added s-10 rear leafs for my rears up front pack, and my friend added 4" yj springs into his. I think it all depends on your overall goals, and the stance you wish to achive.
Hug your kids, pray for a soldier, and don't sweat the small stuff.

my favorite places:
http://www.flatnasty.net/
http://www.orvpark.com/

– fortysixandtwo – sorry, i prefer marlin because aside from gittinit, no one is a know it all a hole

Yeagley [OP]

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 155
  • Member since Jun '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #9 on: Jan 18, 2008, 10:24:57 AM »
LOL, I copied a bunch of pictures for my buddy John, That was the title of it. Mine ride and flex great. I stretched that truck to 109" wheelbase. It drove awsome on and off the trail. I daily drove that truck till the day I parted it out.

RN37DD

  • Offline Crawler Guru
  • ****
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 742
  • Member since Apr '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #10 on: Jan 18, 2008, 11:28:52 AM »
were you running 51's on the rear axle? that would kick it back a couple inch's if the front spring mounts were the same. and if so did you have to change the rear spring mount location?

Yeagley [OP]

  • Offline Rock Master
  • ***
  • Turtle Points: 0
  • Male Posts: 155
  • Member since Jun '07
    • View Profile
Re: 89-95 Rears up front??
« Reply #11 on: Jan 18, 2008, 04:33:57 PM »
I had 48" rears in front and Chevy 64s in the rear. I stretched the front as far as I could and moved the rear back about 5 inches. The rear shackles would hit if I went straight over a big rock.

 
 
 
 
 

Related Topics

12 Replies
4421 Views
Last post May 21, 2004, 01:40:39 AM
by GRM
1 Replies
1643 Views
Last post Nov 14, 2004, 03:42:34 AM
by WHITE_TRASH
5 Replies
2047 Views
Last post Jan 13, 2005, 08:28:54 PM
by kneedownnate
4 Replies
2390 Views
Last post Jul 02, 2009, 05:32:54 PM
by 86rustbucket
0 Replies
1473 Views
Last post Nov 28, 2005, 07:54:58 PM
by KYOTA