Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | AF 350Z | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
| Latest | 0 Rplys |
|
Pathfinder | Terrano | QX4 | Xterra | Patrol | Safari | X-Trail Nissans greatest 4WDs and SUVs |
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread |
|
Thread Tools |
06-02-2002, 09:19 PM | #1 | |
AF Regular
|
"Heavy Duty" Replacement Leaf Springs
When I'm not hauling four people and a weekend's worth of gear, I'm usually towing my boat. During a few recent trips, I really started to notice my rear leaf springs were completely shot. The final straw was a few weeks ago when I started bottoming out on bumps with three people (including me) and maybe 30 lbs of gear.
Unfortunately, most replacement spring packs out there seem to taylor to the offroading market. For these parts, increasing articulation is more important than hauling heavy loads. Fortunately, Automotive Customizers had a set of springs that were rated 400 lbs heavier than the stock Nissan springs. Since I'm also not interested in lifting my X, the 1.5" lift they would provide seemed like a reasonable trade-off. They arrived ready to install, with all the parts. Interesting enough, they had a Rancho sticker on them. Doesn't Rancho offer a 1.5" lift for the X??!! The spring pack has 13 leafs, including two load leafts. Anyway, thanks to Rick and Chuck for helping a tool-tard like me install them. And Schlud and SuperJens for the moral support. We had the construction crew standard in full effect this weekend. Three people watching, two working! The ride is outstanding! I put on a new set of the longer bilsteins, so it is nice and stiff, but not bone-jarring. The only draw back is the spring pack is now lower than the dif. Since wheeling is not my primary concern for the X (actually a close second), that is acceptable for my purposes. Once I've driven on them and re-torqued the bolts, I'll cut off the ends of the U-bolts you see sticking down. Stats: Wheel well height before = 34" Wheel well height after = 36" Clearance from lowest part of trailer hitch before = 16" Clearance before with boat hooked up = 14.5" Clearance after, w/o boat = 19" Clearance after, w/ boat = 18.5"!!!!:ylsuper BTW - Hats off to Mike at A/C. I hit him with lots of questions and he replied within hrs. every time! |
|
06-03-2002, 04:39 PM | #2 | ||
XTerra Guy
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,503
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Re: "Heavy Duty" Replacement Leaf Springs
Quote:
|
||
06-03-2002, 05:14 PM | #3 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
I see you mounted your Bilsteins upside down. I did too, but I left the boot on and cut 3 big holes in the new "bottom" of it to let water/crap drain out.
Brent |
|
06-03-2002, 06:50 PM | #4 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 903
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
If for no other reason though, having them canister up makes the print right side up.
__________________
ChuckH |
||
06-03-2002, 06:52 PM | #5 | |
AF Regular
Thread starter
|
I had my old Bilsteins mounted the opposite (with the boot), but everyone recommended that I reverse them. We haven't had rain here in three or four days, so I was pretty surprised when tons of muddy water flowed out when we took them off. The new ones (THANKS SCHLUD!!!! You gave moral and suspension support) were from Schlud and he didn't have the boot, so I didn't have the option. I'm kinda worried about grime getting on the shaft, but others apparently haven't had any problem yet, so we'll just have to wait and see.
|
|
06-03-2002, 09:52 PM | #6 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 903
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
You're worried about grime on your shaft?
Uh, anyway, I wouldn't worry about it. Without the boots, all the grime should stay off and not attach. The only real issue is potentially hitting a rock or soemthing with the shaft and damaging it, but I suppose a strike that would damage the shaft would probably crack open the canister, so you'd be screwed either way and more so if the canister were cracked open. Looks like I'm going to be cracking open my leaf packs again. I ordered the SLR AAL's to replace the Ranchos. I think with all that weight I have in back they will work better and it would be more safe to add shackles if I need to. I almost ordered a whole new pack, but I don't want to spend that much. Sure are nice though!
__________________
ChuckH |
|
06-03-2002, 11:22 PM | #7 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 315
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
A. Looks cool. B. Saw someone else do it. C. Decrease unsprung weight. BTW, inverted you can now put the rear sway bar back on for the street and use disconnects.
__________________
Regards, Ian |
||
06-04-2002, 12:04 AM | #8 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hongcouver
Posts: 325
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
So what's the deal, is the can better up or down? Mine are down, but I have the plastic boot (solid, not the accordian type).
|
|
06-04-2002, 01:16 AM | #9 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 903
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
__________________
ChuckH |
||
06-04-2002, 08:44 AM | #10 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
Mine have the rigid boot, not the accordian style, and had no drain holes.
The reason I mounted them upside down is D: None of the above. I had the same reasoning ChuckH mentioned, to prevent crud from accumulating in the little dished area on "top" of the can and being worked into into the can. Not likely stuff would get there under street use, but I don't think Bilstein expects them to get many dunkings in funky water. Reducing unsprung weight is a plus I suppose, but not a consideration. I figure that even though I can't invert the front shocks, they're a bit less likely to see the nastier water since they're not going to see much of the crap the front end stirs up. Brent |
|
06-04-2002, 09:53 AM | #11 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 321
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
Maybe first I should ask: What Is "unsprung weight"? :smoker2: I assume that it is weight (such as axles and tires) that isn't supported by the springs. |
||
06-04-2002, 01:10 PM | #12 | |
AF Enthusiast
|
Exactly. With the can on top, it is fixed in place during suspension movement and the weight of the can/oil/etc. is more than the rod and piston inside it. The less the parts that have to move weigh, the faster they can react to the terrain (less inertia). That's why performance cars use alloy wheels, tubular suspension arms (instead of stamped), etc.
Brent |
|
06-04-2002, 03:30 PM | #13 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 315
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
It is very hard to notice a difference on a 4000 lb. truck, but it is noticable on motorcycles and race cars. My only concern with mounting them inverted is the shock canister hitting the frame under extreme articulation (especially near the swaybar mount on the passenger side). Keep an eye on that area if you do run them inverted.
__________________
Regards, Ian |
||
06-05-2002, 12:45 AM | #14 | |
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 410
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Looks like I get a chance to help you out finally Chuck. Lemme know if you need a hand with the AAL's.
Cheers Chad |
|
06-05-2002, 01:37 AM | #15 | ||
AF Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 903
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
__________________
ChuckH |
||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
Thread Tools | |
|
|