Why are my rear springs completely collapsed? (pics attatched - ford 8.8 swap)

Although the question wasn't posed to me, I don't like body lifts because I don't like the way they look. And they are always obvious to me, even if it's just 1". My Jeep had a 4" all suspension lift when I got it, and I run 33's so I don't need more lift, but if I did for 35's or something, I probably still wouldn't add a body lift.

They aren't wrong, I just personally don't like them.
 
89grand said:
Although the question wasn't posed to me, I don't like body lifts because I don't like the way they look. And they are always obvious to me, even if it's just 1". My Jeep had a 4" all suspension lift when I got it, and I run 33's so I don't need more lift, but if I did for 35's or something, I probably still wouldn't add a body lift.

They aren't wrong, I just personally don't like them.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, no one says you have to like them. Only reason I posed the question was because of the poor advice being strewn along the thread, and wanted something to back it up. When ever someone on here says “stay away, I don’t advise, I don’t recommend” we tend to ask for some detail. It’s the only way to back up statements. There’s nothing wrong with not liking the look of a body lift, however for those who are looking to optimize their jeeps potential for tougher terrain (flat belly, higher clearance gas tank) it’s not possible without a 1.25” body lift or serious frame modifications.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: skrelnik and jjvw
A small body lift has a very real functional purpose. And this build would benefit from one even without raising the skid.
 
glwood said:
@npalmi88, don't listen to this advice. I got a set of springs from a JKUR with a hard top, and towing package, which were the heaviest duty springs on a JK. This is how the front springs compared to my TJ springs. The spring on the left is the JKUR front spring, the middle is an oem TJ front spring, and the spring on the right is an OME JK front spring :

View attachment 101408

There's no way on earth you will get 2.5" of lift from that JKUR front spring on a TJ. And, those were TJ springs from an '03 X with 156k on it.
Click to expand...
Did you look at his current front springs, they are compressed at least 2 inches most likely due to age. So yeah, fresh springs won't help that! Richard!

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
fxrsliberty said:
Did you look at his current front springs, they are compressed at least 2 inches most likely due to age. So yeah, fresh springs won't help that! Richard!

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Stock JK springs are not the solution for a 35" tire. Stop making this thread hard to follow.
 
BuildBreakRepeat said:
In your personal opinion, why do you avoid these? What downsides do they have that outweigh benefits? What experiences do you have that show these disadvantages?
Click to expand...
I avoid them because they create other issues. After you get the 3+ inch lift kit in. The pinion angle is difficult to correct. Cheap and incorrect solution, IMHO, t-case drop, mml and body lift. For 3-4.5 inches of lift, with 35s and smaller tires. All that is needed is the sye and dc driveshaft. Which is what Jeep did after 2002. If your really Wheeling, highline fenders. Those other parts open up other issues, exhaust alignment, fan shroud alignment, transmission linkage, t-case linkage, stick shift console & boot issues, brake line length and position adjustments, etc.
You can argue many directions, but why push a weekend warrior/ daily driver into a maintenance nightmare scenario. IMHO, the stock TJ Rubicon is an incredibly capable machine, replicate the mods Jeep did. Then move forward.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
fxrsliberty said:
I avoid them because they create other issues. After you get the 3+ inch lift kit in. The pinion angle is difficult to correct. Cheap and incorrect solution, IMHO, t-case drop, mml and body lift. For 3-4.5 inches of lift, with 35s and smaller tires. All that is needed is the sye and dc driveshaft. Which is what Jeep did after 2002. If your really Wheeling, highline fenders. Those other parts open up other issues, exhaust alignment, fan shroud alignment, transmission linkage, t-case linkage, stick shift console & boot issues, brake line length and position adjustments, etc.
You can argue many directions, but why push a weekend warrior/ daily driver into a maintenance nightmare scenario. IMHO, the stock TJ Rubicon is an incredibly capable machine, replicate the mods Jeep did. Then move forward.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


I have pretty much everything you listed corrected on my daily driver and just drove it 3000 miles across the country. When I was first getting into Jeeps and the modifications that went into them, I was against body lifts and MML's simply because I didn't understand 1) their true purpose and 2) how to correct the issues they create. It takes a bit of research, but everything can be solved fairly easily.


fxrsliberty said:
Like I said "after 02" your just trolling.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What? Only rubicons came with a "standard SYE" (misnomer). Jeep never switched to "DC-ish" rear driveshafts on non-rubi models.




Back to the OP's question... I'm still a little confused on how the brand new rear strings measured 6" when there doesn't seem to be a ton of weight on the back. It seems bigger springs would fix this, but to me it appears like there may be more going on...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BuildBreakRepeat
So, sorry I never got back to you guys, I've just been havin fun with the old TJ, here's a pic after I solved the problem with new springs.

20190720_220741.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Hase89
Top Bottom
Back