Once the weight is different everything suspension-wise is different and some perceptible and other imperceptible.
SwayLOC setting for an LJ
- Thread starter Irun
- Start date
Once the weight is different everything suspension-wise is different and some perceptible and other imperceptible.
Possibly but having a stock TJ and a stock TJ Unlimited both in the 04 year model and being able to drive them back to back says that even if the bean counters weren't reining in the engineers, they would have still used the same front and rear swaybars on the Sport and Rubicon models. If there is a difference in body roll between the two, it is negligible.
Last edited:
JK brakes all around.
HP front axle in Dana 44 with TJ outers.
Heavy Duty rear Dana 44 with larger axle tubes with thicker wall.
Additional body mount between the last one under the doors and beginning of the wheel arch.
Frame thickness bumped up to a solid .188 wall or maybe even thicker.
More reinforcements in the cargo floor to stiffen up the body.
Increase in all things to run a solid 32" tire from the factory. Includes shocks, bump stops, etc.
Slight bump up in steering component strength to handle the larger tires.
Beef up the inner C slightly.
Atlas 4200 motor with a solid NAG 1 6 speed auto behind it and the correct axle gearing to make that work.
Yay, let's all go buy a 48,000 dollar TJ Unlimited in 04 dollars.
That is a freaking awesome list. The motor/trans combo would have been really sweet. Only thing I would change in that list is 33s for tires (and really only for looks) and that would have been a very solid jeep straight from the factory for MOST people. But people would have likely complained it's too expensive.
Last edited:
I would think of the design inputs for the sway bar more as the COG height and roll center, which I don't think should change much between the TJ and LJ, so I can easily buy into the same sway bar being appropriate for both.
Since most of it was Ctrl+C/Ctrl+V'd from other models, one could ask whether the TJ had what it would have to begin with if they'd started from scratch.
But to stay in TJ and LJ context, I doubt the the TJ and LJ would have had identical suspension if both were started from scratch, but since the LJ is more similar in wheelbase to the vehicles the parts were originally designed for, it stands to reason the TJ links might have been even shorter.
None of this if unique to our stuff though. The entire industry is built around leveraging economies of scale so there's not likely a vehicle on the road that doesn't have dozens, if not hundreds of parts lifted from other models that may not be exactly what the engineers would have used in a vacuum.
I didn't buy my swayloc until the TJ was gone but I never noticed a significant difference between TJ and LJ with the OE bar, so I wouldn't expect one with a swayloc on the same hole.
Other than springs and shocks, are the suspensions otherwise equivalent as well? Not comparing a midarm to a short arm or something like that?
My LJ is heavy compared to most TJs. LJs are heavier to start with. Mine has full doors and a hard top. It's heavy. My SwayLoc has 4 holes. I believe I tried it in the 2nd from the rear position as directed by the installation instructions (2nd softest). I found that to be a little softer than I prefer, mainly offroad. I now run it in the 2nd stiffest position (2nd from the front) and like this setting for my use.
I expect lighter rigs might ride best with the softer settings and stiffer settings might be better for heavier rigs.
I expect lighter rigs might ride best with the softer settings and stiffer settings might be better for heavier rigs.
Finally got on and off-road after 2 months out of town w/o the LJR. Had a recovery Monday and did a couple hundred highway miles RT and 20 ish off-road.
Love this SL. But.. wanted to try the 2nd from back hole to see if on road might be even better - so I moved it and, since I was in there, adjusted the link lengths to increase the angle.
Ended up at 6.6* which is about double what I had.
S'aright?
Love this SL. But.. wanted to try the 2nd from back hole to see if on road might be even better - so I moved it and, since I was in there, adjusted the link lengths to increase the angle.
Ended up at 6.6* which is about double what I had.
S'aright?
I've never measured the angle. I just set it as high as it could go without hitting the back edge of my bumper at full stuff/bump. That minimizes tire contact and is much too high to invert at droop.
Similar threads
