 | Home > Maintenance & Modifications > 2" Lift Advice for My 110 Puma |
 
|
|
|
| tatra805 Member Since: 16 Aug 2011 Location: Dolany Posts: 436   
|
Another vote against.
Not based on not doable or technical reasons. It is achievable, but at what cost and for what reason? 2 inch is not all that much, yes it can give you the edge over stock but you’ll spend ¾ of a full conversion where you are right into the territory of competition vehicles. That might still be ok for you and I don’t see a problem with it. But driving on road will be compromised, COG, insurance, MOT, warrantee etc for sitting 2 inch higher and a couple of thousands lighter if done right. I see a lot of terms used which are explained correctly, lift will not give you load capacity, HD springs don’t give lift but are harder when empty, progressive springs are available to counter this and give you the right spring for your needs. (wont solve the other component issues though) My fear would be to find a real expert on the subject which I can trust and who is willing to work out the setup according my wishes. (too many “””experts””” in the field to my liking) Half solutions don’t work and there are a bunch of them out there. I know that a 2 inch lift is seen as almost normal and for a novice can be seen as a first “must have”. You know, to avoid damage and be able to have good tires fit. Etc etc Who wants to drive stock??? I entered the 4x4 scene when mud tires were about it. Lift kits and lockers came later, and the terrain driven worse. Now 15 years later you need to have a 500BHP buggy with 3 winches if you want to be somewhat competitive. I am not against or judging. But I remember a Transylvania Trophy where 2 boyscout dressed up nuts in a stock Willy’s with capstan winch finished 3rd. They had the time of their lives and took the p**s out of 98% of the serious competitors. It’s not all about equipment. It’s an individual choice to find the fun in ownership of a 4x4. No judging from my side. To me, I rather spend the money on miles and experiences than group induced bling.  |
||
28th Aug 2012 12:17pm |
|
| Glynparry25 Member Since: 16 Feb 2009 Location: Miserable Midlands Posts: 3015  
|
Well said ^^^^
You could add Camel Trophy to the list of non lifted capable vehicles 
Glyn   |
||
|
28th Aug 2012 12:20pm |
|
| quentin Member Since: 23 Jul 2012 Location: on tour Posts: 119  
|
Ahh the good old days, And didn't I love my Bar Treads remember when the only way to 'Bling' up your Landy was to tie a canvas water bottle on the radiator grille, and a length of sisal rope around your bumper (even if you didnt have a capstain winch) and what about those Aeon Springs - the bees knees . 
(jeesh - I must be getting old ) |
||
|
28th Aug 2012 12:49pm |
|
| Tim_NZ Member Since: 05 May 2008 Location: Australia Posts: 177
|
Hi Glyn, I was advised the internal bump stops are not up to the abuse encountered with a 4WD. As I said in the thread I used a 32mm spacer between the top mount plates, (44mm total), I will be reconfiguring my ones with a shorter spacer, probably 20-25mm, (32-37mm total). I'm changing them for 3 reasons: Firstly because I have found the bags have "settled in" and only require about 35psi to lift the car back to the standard ride hight, (125mm bump stop clearance), and the ride is now a bit too soft. Secondly, I erred on the side of caution when I made the mounts since the bags will wear away if they are allowed to rub on the spring mount, and there is still plenty of clearance between the sides of the air bags and the spring mount to allow shorter spacers. Thirdly, the bump stop spacers can be shorter. Because the bump stops have to be extended some upwards articulation will be lost, however there is much more down travel in the air bags than with coil springs, (without the use of relocation cones), so longer shocks can be used. This may not suit "Extreeme 4WDers", but for a touring/every day vehicle they suit my purposes very well. Cheers, Tim |
||
|
28th Aug 2012 1:27pm |
|
| Glynparry25 Member Since: 16 Feb 2009 Location: Miserable Midlands Posts: 3015
|
Cheers for all the info Tim...... was thinking of reducing the spacing to 1"......... looks like that really was the best plan!!
Glyn |
||
|
28th Aug 2012 1:52pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2025 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
