LCoG and long arm lifts

LJAugie

LJAugie

New Member
Original poster
Joined
Nov 4, 2022
Messages
9
Location
07607
New guy here,

Not new to Jeeps, just out of touch with the current aftermarket offerings.

Long arm kits, what are the preferred vendors these days vs. 10 years ago?

My TJ was homebrewed on 3 inch Full Tracrion springs, Bilstein 5150 shocks, 1 inch body lift, currie MML, and a GoFerIt off road tummy tuck, Poison Spider Rocker Knockers, and Warn gas tank skid.

I'd like to do a similar low COG setup, long armed on my LJ.....with Higline type fenders.
I am open to suggestions as I am in the planning stages. Probably will go 35 or 37 inch tire (with an appropriate front axle build/replacement).

Thank you!
Augie
 
Welcome to the forum. I would definitely use the forum to do some searching as this topic seems to have wildly different opinions.

I feel alot of people here will steer you away from long arms for various reasons. You could literally read for hours on this topic and then make decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plumber1, John Cooper, ColoJeep and 5 others
You wont find a lot of love for long arms here. They will introduce more problems by ruining instant center and antisquat, which will ultimately give you horrible driving behaviors. What most here will recommend on a 35" tire build is a Currie/Savvy lift either with mid or short arms and johnny joints, UCF tummy tuck and tuned shocks (or ranchos/Black maxx), Genright aluminum highline fenders to save on weight (or the steel crawltecs which are designed really well).

Fanbois unit!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Longwhitejeep, The4bangertj, RINC and 1 other person
Thank you both!
I am used to vbulletin forums (if that shows my age) and the search feature here I guess uses Google and I can't sort by most recent (or can I?). And doing at it through the phone? Added torture. Lol.

So years ago, I liked the Terraflex LCG and the Clayton setups. Not as favorable or just not in the long arm varieties? I'll look into the ones you mentioned.

Thanks again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Necro, ColoJeep, JMT and 1 other person
LJAugie said:
Thank you both!
I am used to vbulletin forums (if that shows my age) and the search feature here I guess uses Google and I can't sort by most recent (or can I?). And doing at it through the phone? Added torture. Lol.

So years ago, I liked the Terraflex LCG and the Clayton setups. Not as favorable or just not in the long arm varieties? I'll look into the ones you mentioned.

Thanks again.
Click to expand...

I dont think it's the brand of long arm that trips people up its long arms in general.

I won't pretend to be a suspension expert but there are some here.

I cant help on the search issue maybe @Chris Could help?

At the end of the day it is your jeep and your money and although some come off as gruff they are trying to help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RINC, L J and Woodrow
You won't find any long arm setups that don't compromise the suspension geometry. That includes Clayton and Teraflex. Basically, where lifted short arms create high antisquat and result in hopping during steep climbs; long arms due to their control arm mounting locations result in too low of an antisquat. This causes the rear end to sink during a steep climb which shifts weight of the front and the front wheels to come off the ground. One problem is addressed while creating another.

Separate from that is the flawed LCoG build philosophy that pretends to solve a non existent problem of stability through performance compromising restrictions to the suspension.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Longwhitejeep, rasband, The4bangertj and 3 others
P man said:
....

At the end of the day it is your jeep and your money and although some come off as gruff they are trying to help.
Click to expand...

Here's a preemptive pet on the head, just in case anyone needs it.
headpat (1).png
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: inkedrose, Longwhitejeep, DEValken and 8 others
Chris said:
It’s bolt-on long arms we are trying to steer them away from.
Click to expand...

Close. Clayton and Genright aren't bolt on and they have a passing resemblance to the Savvy mid arm. A noteworthy difference is that the Savvy rear frame mounts have more separation between mounts, to the extent that it requires an 1.25" body lift to fit under the tub. That difference is part of where the concern over instant centers and antisquat comes into play.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Necro, L J, Jerry Bransford and 1 other person
LJAugie said:
I'd like to do a similar low COG setup
Click to expand...

You won’t find many proponents of LCoG setups here, I’ll tell you that much. More importantly you should tell us why it is you think you need a LCoG setup and what benefits you believe it offers over a traditional setup.

I think you’ll be surprised to find that LCoG setups are not optimal in any way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RINC
Trying to keep things simple with a probable reason some are so concerned with their COG.

Many years ago Jeeps had a reputation being somewhat easy to roll/tip. That however was with the old CJ and older models, which is why Jeep developed the Wrangler YJ. Jeep was being bled by numerous lawsuits relating to the tendency to roll so they had to fix it... hence the Wrangler YJ that came along in 1987.

The easy to roll complaints are still hard to quiet among those who know no better so the reputation still exists among some, though in fact it's no longer true.

Even this TJ, built by mrblaine with a suspension lift and bigger tires, had no problem with rolling as shown here. The camera for this photo was being held level so the amount this TJ is tipped to one side is not exaggerated. Nope, it did not roll.

Jon in Johnson Valley.JPG


The below is the above Jeep with a few minor changes.

CrawlMagazineJonsJeep.jpg


Low-COG builds for Wranglers are simply not needed. Though I guess It would be possible for a clueless type to build his Wrangler to easily tip if he fucked up and screwed up every possible thing that make it easier to roll but it would be a terrible build by a clueless dumbass indeed that might raise the odds of a roll/tip.
 
  • Like
  • USA Proud
Reactions: RINC, ColoJeep and P man
Jerry Bransford said:
Even this TJ, built by mrblaine with a suspension lift and bigger tires, had no problem with rolling as shown here. The camera for this photo was being held level so the amount this TJ is tipped to one side is not exaggerated. Nope, it did not roll.

View attachment 373422
Click to expand...

My favorite part is how much fun that guy is having. Look at that grin!
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: psrivats, RINC, P man and 1 other person
Jerry Bransford said:
Trying to keep things simple with one more possible reason some are so concerned with their COG.

Many years ago Jeeps had a reputation being somewhat easy to roll/tip. That however was with the old CJ and older models, which is why Jeep developed the Wrangler YJ. Jeep was being bled by numerous lawsuits relating to the tendency to roll so they had to fix it... hence the Wrangler YJ that came along in 1987.

The easy to roll complaints are still hard to quiet among those who know no better so the reputation still exists among some, though in fact it's no longer true.

Even this TJ, built by mrblaine with a suspension lift and bigger tires, had no problem with rolling as shown here. The camera for this photo was being held level so the amount this TJ is tipped to one side is not exaggerated. Nope, it did not roll.

View attachment 373422

The below is the above Jeep with a few minor changes.

View attachment 373421

Low-COG builds for Wranglers are simply not needed. Though I guess It would be possible for a clueless type to build his Wrangler to easily tip if he fucked up and screwed up every possible thing that make it easier to roll but it would be a terrible build by a clueless dumbass indeed that might raise the odds of a roll/tip.
Click to expand...

Looks like they ended up taking the windshield off to lower the CG. ;)
 
  • Haha
  • Wow
Reactions: RINC and Jerry Bransford
Top Bottom