JCR highline fenders

What is your opinion

  • Great function ?

    Votes: 8 53.3%

  • Great Look ?

    Votes: 14 93.3%
  • Total voters
    15
Eddie Greenlee said:
How in the world would you extend up the front shock mount of a 97 tj ??
Click to expand...

1606429554928.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1p and Eddie Greenlee
pc1p said:
Well now you have me intrigued so I'll play along with the Guessing Game to see if my understanding of the TJ suspension/limitations is moving in the right direction...

So let's see, you've moved the upper mount up an inch, but are using an ~11" shock. This seems like a lot of work to keep the same amount of overall travel but shift the bias some (even though IIRC most builders, including Blaine, say it's not worth it). From my buddy's experience and some basic research, it seems that most rubbing issues I've seen occur on 35"s happens at the back of the fender, not the top. This correct? My guess is that a high-fender would allow a longer shock to take advantage of some droop left in your control arms, plus likely give you more space at the rear of the fender. Am I close??



In these pics I’m on the bump stop on the driver side (I have about 1/2” of shock shaft remaining so I can trim some more) and on the passenger side the spring (a 3.5” RK triple rate) is loose in the bucket (it had dropped completely from the bucket at points on this trail).

View attachment 206045
View attachment 206046
These are 10.92” Rancho’s with 4.75-4.85” of up travel.
Click to expand...

Moving the factory mount up a bit is pretty quick work. If we can agree that 11" fronts split 50/50 is the reasonable limit, I've already shown that highlines aren't going to result in a better suspension. The exception is if the rear wall becomes an interference at full flex, full lock. And that is something that should be fairly evident if it is a problem to be addressed.

If something like a Fox is being installed, both the upper and lower mounts are being cut off and trimmed removed and the new ones go where the need to go in order to fit the new shock.
 
Last edited:
The (LJ) Dude said:
How is the clearance on these vs MetalCloak arched I wonder... 🤔
Click to expand...
The Metalcloak fenders don't require you to cut the hood at all for the install, so they do not give quite as much room for "up travel" ( not sure if that is the right term but thats the best way I can think to phrase it) they do provide some more clearance compared to stock due to them being arched and likely narrower than stock fenders. As JJVW said, both the JCR hilines and the Metalcloak fenders will give more clearance behind the wheel compared to stock fenders and just upgrading the flares which is important too.
 
jjvw said:
Moving the factory mount up a bit is pretty quick work. If we can agree that 11" fronts split 50/50 is the reasonable limit, I've already shown that highlines aren't going to result in a better suspension. The exception is if the rear wall becomes an interference at full flex, full lock. And that is something that should be fairly evident if it is a problem to be addressed.
Click to expand...
So to answer your own question from before, what good would high-fenders give you?

I don’t know exactly what you mean by “agree that 11” split 50/50 is a reasonable limit”. While not a terribly difficult, it’s certainly a good amount of work to do properly; what benefit did retaining an 11” shock but changing your travel bias provide you (and is it a worthwhile expenditure of time and energy if you had to do it again)?

Curious about what your setup is (springs, bumpstops, actual tire height, etc). I am shocked you don’t rub at the back of your fenders by the battery box. I’ve seen a handful of folks trim their flares only to then rub back there (on true 35”s).

I feel like I should clarify too - I went highlines to more easily accommodate a front stretch (my ultimate setup is a TJ-6 on 37-38”s). The challenging trails here in AZ favor a 102-104” WB with good success at the 108-110” WB.
 
jjvw said:
Ignore the fenders and understand that they aren't changing anything about where the tire can or can't go compared to stock.
View attachment 205936

Mine is a fairly typical 35s build with a 10.75" travel front shock with just under 6" of up travel. One important difference is that the front upper shock mounts are raised a little over an inch, meaning my tire can stuff a little higher than a stock shock mount.

What good would highlines get me? There is a real answer to that question. But it isn't what most would think it is because it has little to do with the top of the tire.
Click to expand...
Don’t mean to hi jack the thread, but who made those front fenders? I like the look.
 
pc1p said:
So to answer your own question from before, what good would high-fenders give you?

I don’t know exactly what you mean by “agree that 11” split 50/50 is a reasonable limit”. While not a terribly difficult, it’s certainly a good amount of work to do properly; what benefit did retaining an 11” shock but changing your travel bias provide you (and is it a worthwhile expenditure of time and energy if you had to do it again)?

Curious about what your setup is (springs, bumpstops, actual tire height, etc). I am shocked you don’t rub at the back of your fenders by the battery box. I’ve seen a handful of folks trim their flares only to then rub back there (on true 35”s).

I feel like I should clarify too - I went highlines to more easily accommodate a front stretch (my ultimate setup is a TJ-6 on 37-38”s). The challenging trails here in AZ favor a 102-104” WB with good success at the 108-110” WB.
Click to expand...

Currie 4" with Currie bumps without any extension. At just under 6" of up, the tires do rub the rear wall at full flex full steering lock, slightly more than I would like. The answer is to reduce the up to something closer to 5.5".

An 11" Fox is the reasonable limit for the front due to packaging restrictions. Things get more difficult with 12s which are actually 3" longer.

The front shocks are being changed to a RR Fox this winter. I'll spend a whole lot more time fitting those than I did with the Ranchos, which were always a temporary setup.
 
Last edited:
pc1p said:
For my eyes - it's about tire-to-lift ratio. My 35"s seem a tad undersized (depends on the angle) with my GR Hi-Fenders (and unlike BFGs and some others, these Grabbers are actually fairly close to 35") and 3.5" springs.

View attachment 205937

Ideally I would run a 2" spring on 35"s or the 3-3.5" springs on 37"s for a very "balanced look". I have some future mods planned that will allow proper utilization of the extra space, but with a family move planned in spring/early-summer of 2021, I will have my hands full getting the paint job and Hemi/auto-conversion done with enough time to get our stuff packed up!
Click to expand...
So you think my 4” lift will look unbalanced on 35s ??
 
Eddie Greenlee said:
So you think my 4” lift will look unbalanced on 35s ??
Click to expand...
With high-fenders? Yes... but obviously “looks” are all personal preference.

Mine on 3.5” springs with true 35”s can look like it skipped leg-day a few too many times. I went with the Hi-Fenders because I had the opportunity to get them cheap and because they will accommodate my future plans nicely - I will deal with the looks for now. If I were keeping it as is, I would be looking at dropping it down on a 2” set of springs (or likely lower) while correcting shock mount location to get a suitable shock bias.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eddie Greenlee
pc1p said:
With high-fenders? Yes... but obviously “looks” are all personal preference.

Mine on 3.5” springs with true 35”s can look like it skipped leg-day a few too many times. I went with the Hi-Fenders because I had the opportunity to get them cheap and because they will accommodate my future plans nicely - I will deal with the looks for now. If I were keeping it as is, I would be looking at dropping it down on a 2” set of springs (or likely lower) while correcting shock mount location to get a suitable shock bias.
Click to expand...
I was planning on dropping my 4” lift and that would give me a lower center of gravity. Not planning on changing my control atms. So hopefully a 3” lift would not necessitate a change in control arms
 
Looking at these pics and mocking up my picture.they are looking pretty good for me and when I outboard my shocks and lower my lift would be an advantage to me. But that’s why I asked everyone’s honest opinion.

298F9B8F-8F23-4584-ABBE-7C96B3694EE7.png


EC67983C-BC20-4294-A063-07064B46E3EB.png


4955E9E4-454E-4412-BFF6-4F873B80FD53.png
 
Eddie Greenlee said:
Chris, do your front fenders give you any more room between the tire and fender than standard stock fenders. ??
Click to expand...

I can't say for sure since mine didn't come with the factory fenders. However, if I had to guess based on some of the measurements @toximus took with different fenders, I may have gained 1/2" of clearance at most.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pc1p and Eddie Greenlee
There's no gains from Genright's "normal line" fenders because they place that tube under the flare.
 
Top Bottom
Back