convert from torsion bars to coil spring on feroza

[nebivedu]

Has someboby done something like that?

[lay80n]

Solid axle swap, or keeping the IFS


Layto....

[HotFourOk]

I think he means keeping the IFS layto... like what we were talking about today with the Vitara's.. lol

I have heard of a pommy using ford mondeo struts in his roza to convert the front to coils, using the IFS setup still.

[Mudsierra]

you mean coils instead of torsion bar?

[HotFourOk]

Found it...

http://www.daihatsu-drivers.co.uk/node/ ... mment-7871

ive just done a spring over axle conversion on mine it gave me 6"lift on rear had to have a prop spacer made though .and managed to get 4"on front by cuttin lower bump stops and torsion bars off then replaceing front shockers with mondeo v6 suspension legs

[nebivedu]

you mean coils instead of torsion bar?

Yes.

[Clint]

Haven't been on here in ages. First post in a long while.

Has anyone looked into keeping the front torsion bar setup etc and just installing some coilovershocks instead of normal shocks.
I figure that the coils would take some of the weight and you could then back off the torsion bars a bit to regain some wheel travel.

Just a thought, I haven't looked into it at all.

[lay80n]

Haven't been on here in ages. First post in a long while.

Has anyone looked into keeping the front torsion bar setup etc and just installing some coilovershocks instead of normal shocks.
I figure that the coils would take some of the weight and you could then back off the torsion bars a bit to regain some wheel travel.

Just a thought, I haven't looked into it at all.

If you had coilovers, you would just chuck the torision bars and shocks away mate. Coilovers are a integrated coil spring and shock in on unit. . Your torsion bars are not what limits the travel on the roza front end, your upper and lower bumpstops limit it. Look at your front end, there are physical limits to its arc of movment, unlike a solid axle front end which has much less limiting components to its arc of movement. Without going to major lengths you will not gain large amounts of travel from a feroza IFS. If you going to spend money on coilovers etc do the job properly and SAS it too..

Layto....

[*BESTY*]

[ If you going to spend money on coilovers etc do the job properly and SAS it too..

Layto....

Toyhatsu (Kent) has this very set-up on his Feroza (US = Rocky)

PM him for questions if ya wanna do it

[Clint]

I suspect that the size of coilovers that you could find to fit the feroza (if any exist) wouldn’t be large enough or substantial enough to take the entire weight of the front end, because the coil diameter would have to be small enough to fit through/inside the upper swing arm. So I think you would probably still need the torsion bars there to take some of weight off the coilovers. However if you found the coilovers would handle the suspension duties all by themselves then I would have the torsion bars out and in the bin before you could say “IFS SUCKS”.

I am aware that there are bumpstops that limit the travel of the front suspension. These are only used when the suspension gets to the full extension or compression. What I was trying to get across (I may not have explained myself properly) was that most of us here have ‘wound up’ our torsion bars to gain more ground clearance. In doing this you effectively stiffen up the front suspension, and this makes it harder for the suspension to compress (when wheel gets pushed up into guard) hence limiting wheel travel. I would be surprised if any feroza with the torsion bars wound up, ever comes close to using the lower bump stop. The point of the coilovers was to take a percentage of the load (if not all) so you could back off the torsion bars making the suspension softer again (coil springs have a more progressive spring rate) while still retaining the higher ride height.

As far as SAS vs potential coil overs go. I would like to try and get full use and suspension travel out of the setup that is already there before doing a SAS. I suspect you could get a pair of coil overs for around $1000. This verses probably $10000 for an SAS, I know what I would be trying first.

[*BESTY*]

Clint, you're never going to get a better time to SAS whilst you don't have a chassis.

Whilst it's off, it is the perfect time to put running gear (diffs, t-case, g-box and engine) from a donor vehicle.

All you need to do is to get an engineer and talk to him about the legalities of fabricating coil-over front and rear. If you use Toyota stuff, it makes it easier (cause Daihatsu used to be a branch of Toyota).

Yes I hear you.............it all comes down to money for the parts and labour, but while its off the road....................

[Clint]

Clint, you're never going to get a better time to SAS whilst you don't have a chassis.

Whilst it's off, it is the perfect time to put running gear (diffs, t-case, g-box and engine) from a donor vehicle.

All you need to do is to get an engineer and talk to him about the legalities of fabricating coil-over front and rear. If you use Toyota stuff, it makes it easier (cause Daihatsu used to be a branch of Toyota).

Yes I hear you.............it all comes down to money for the parts and labour, but while its off the road....................

Yeah i know, would have been the perfect time to do it.
I have the skill and knowledge but i don't have the money or the facilities at the moment.
It's been off the road for nearly 18months now and i need to head bush again soon, real bad. I nearly have it finished and have gone to far down the 'back to stock' road to change now.
From what i have heard, QLD has a lot of restrictions on modifying 4b's and i don't really want to have to deal with all the red tape.

[crazyfroza]

been thinking of doing same thing including triming bracket off chassis that bump stop sits on, but i would fabricate a bracket off the chassis to mount top of coilover, similar to escudo, i reckon a gain of 3- 4 inches from std & comfy ride. only problem i can see is cv angle & maybe having to extend top susp arm to get angles right. got a spare chassis so i might have a play & see how it goes. fortunately mines dedicated off road so no certificate worries

[lay80n]

If you want to make a IFS setup that works, look no further than the trophy trucks from the states. Having said that, there is a lot of work, and in the end a SAS conversion. You can easily get a coilover setup that will support the front of a roza, but getting one that is good offroad and short enough to accomodate the pathetic travel fom the roza IFS will suck, and the money will not really show any gains. As said, more travel is limited by the arms and bumpstops, as well as CV angle. Without major re-engineering you arent going to get your money and time's worth from it.

Layto....

[Tiny]

If you want to make a IFS setup that works, look no further than the trophy trucks from the states. Having said that, there is a lot of work, and in the end a SAS conversion. You can easily get a coilover setup that will support the front of a roza, but getting one that is good offroad and short enough to accomodate the pathetic travel fom the roza IFS will suck, and the money will not really show any gains. As said, more travel is limited by the arms and bumpstops, as well as CV angle. Without major re-engineering you arent going to get your money and time's worth from it.

Layto....

agree, easy to fab up a decent mount system and a coil over custome made to suit would be around $500 with coil ea

[Clint]

If you want to make a IFS setup that works, look no further than the trophy trucks from the states. Having said that, there is a lot of work, and in the end a SAS conversion. You can easily get a coilover setup that will support the front of a roza, but getting one that is good offroad and short enough to accomodate the pathetic travel fom the roza IFS will suck, and the money will not really show any gains. As said, more travel is limited by the arms and bumpstops, as well as CV angle. Without major re-engineering you arent going to get your money and time's worth from it.

Layto....

I agree that the IFS on those comp trucks work well, they have been specifically engineered and designed for a particular purpose, ie offroad racing. They have quite long arms and I think you will find coilovers as well.

The IFS was designed and introduced on 4b’s to improve onroad handling without a lot of thought given to offroad capability. I think IFS performs this designed function in 4b’s quite well. However it doesn’t help those of us who want offroad capability.
I think the thing that is probably most relevant to most feroza owners, on this site, is getting the most out of what we already have, I think I would be safe in saying that not one of us uses all available suspension travel in our current IFS setup. (For reasons stated in a previous post ^^^^^)
I think the coilover option (if suitable ones are available etc etc) may be a good option to get the most out of what we already have, with out spending big $$$$.

I don’t think many of us would have the money to do a SAS, and it would probably be easier to buy another 4b.

Chuck ya torsion bars out, put in coilovers, shave back ya bumpstops a bit and that should give ya the best out of the IFS.

agree, easy to fab up a decent mount system and a coil over custome made to suit would be around $500 with coil ea

How much would an SAS cost in comparison?

[lay80n]

If you want to make a IFS setup that works, look no further than the trophy trucks from the states. Having said that, there is a lot of work, and in the end a SAS conversion. You can easily get a coilover setup that will support the front of a roza, but getting one that is good offroad and short enough to accomodate the pathetic travel fom the roza IFS will suck, and the money will not really show any gains. As said, more travel is limited by the arms and bumpstops, as well as CV angle. Without major re-engineering you arent going to get your money and time's worth from it.

Layto....

I agree that the IFS on those comp trucks work well, they have been specifically engineered and designed for a particular purpose, ie offroad racing. They have quite long arms and I think you will find coilovers as well.

The IFS was designed and introduced on 4b’s to improve onroad handling without a lot of thought given to offroad capability. I think IFS performs this designed function in 4b’s quite well. However it doesn’t help those of us who want offroad capability.
I think the thing that is probably most relevant to most feroza owners, on this site, is getting the most out of what we already have, I think I would be safe in saying that not one of us uses all available suspension travel in our current IFS setup. (For reasons stated in a previous post ^^^^^)
I think the coilover option (if suitable ones are available etc etc) may be a good option to get the most out of what we already have, with out spending big $$$$.

I don’t think many of us would have the money to do a SAS, and it would probably be easier to buy another 4b.

Chuck ya torsion bars out, put in coilovers, shave back ya bumpstops a bit and that should give ya the best out of the IFS.

agree, easy to fab up a decent mount system and a coil over custome made to suit would be around $500 with coil ea

How much would an SAS cost in comparison?

Mate, i think Tiny means that it would $500 per corner for the coilovers and brackets, and you still got standard roza travel, just much better controlled. So $1000 for the front end, you got standard or close to standard roza travel, gotta get it engineered and if something does break you pay again. Great gain.

Layto....

[Clint]

I think u are missing my point, layto.
I accept that the standard feroza IFS has bugger all suspension travel.
But i also suspect that not one of the ferozas, that have the torsion bars wound up to give greater ground clearance, are using the the full travel that IS available (all be it bugger all).

The point i am trying to make, is coilovers may allow the use of the full range of motion of the front suspension, that is potentially there.
And that the torsion bars will not allow in their wound up state. This for a fraction of the cost and effort that a SAS would involve.

[mudaholic05]

i think what clint is trying to say is that if the bars are wound rite up hard there is no downward travel ,as well it would stiffen the whole lot up producing a rough ride,coilovers would allow u to lessen the weight put on the bars allowing for more movement

[HotFourOk]

If there is a certain amount of preload on the torsion bars, hence a certain amount of lift -- just by using coilovers will not produce more downward travel due to the CV's travel and upper control arm.

It is true that more upward wheel travel could be gained by not having the torsion bars opposing the travel so much, but if the same lift is used, other aspects must be modified for extra travel.

You could use ball joint spacers (even just upper ones) or do a ball joint flip? and space the front diff down to lower the CV angles quite easily, and in conjuction with coilovers could give acceptable results and provide some extra travel for a lifted IFS rig.

[Clint]

If there is a certain amount of preload on the torsion bars, hence a certain amount of lift -- just by using coilovers will not produce more downward travel due to the CV's travel and upper control arm.

It is true that more upward wheel travel could be gained by not having the torsion bars opposing the travel so much, but if the same lift is used, other aspects must be modified for extra travel.

You could use ball joint spacers (even just upper ones) or do a ball joint flip? and space the front diff down to lower the CV angles quite easily, and in conjuction with coilovers could give acceptable results and provide some extra travel for a lifted IFS rig.

Agreed

[joe72777]

Just a thought I have some old body lift blocks could those be used to lower the dif housing to correct the cv angle. maybe lower it an inch or so. I still think kent has the best setup though.

[MightyMouse]

Another oar in the water....

Winding up the bars to get clearance stiffens the spring rate and removes
droop travel, all bad for off road especially with the travel being limited by
the design of the chassis. It makes picking up a front wheel and loosing
traction very common

Having added 7" to the control arms of my roza and taking the geometry
into account i now have more travel and clearance and have 50% bump and 50% droop, along with clearance for 33's at that travel ( currently on
31's ).

Because of the longer arms the CV angle hasn't changed - in fact at
"normal" ride height the CV's are just off horizontal which is where they
should be. Spring rate is also excellent, the "heavy duty" torsion bars
are corrected back to normal by the longer arms.

The 'bad" news is that its now ...WIDE.... wheras a Coil and upright conversion could ( probably - I havn't seen one ) keep the stock width and the stock rear axle.

As I have a wide, locked Toyota rear the front now matches the back.

None of this is simple or free - but IMO its easier than coils if you want
modest gains.

If my IFS does get the chop, and it will be more because I need a front locker, I would be more likely to go for a live axle and leaves ! Not a
difficult job - except for the stud pattern.

And last as a PS - dont widen the rear without the front. If you like driving
a car that tries to kill you at every opportunity then do it.

[lay80n]

Another oar in the water....

Winding up the bars to get clearance stiffens the spring rate and removes
droop travel, all bad for off road especially with the travel being limited by
the design of the chassis. It makes picking up a front wheel and loosing
traction very common

Having added 7" to the control arms of my roza and taking the geometry
into account i now have more travel and clearance and have 50% bump and 50% droop, along with clearance for 33's at that travel ( currently on
31's ).

Because of the longer arms the CV angle hasn't changed - in fact at
"normal" ride height the CV's are just off horizontal which is where they
should be. Spring rate is also excellent, the "heavy duty" torsion bars
are corrected back to normal by the longer arms.

The 'bad" news is that its now ...WIDE.... wheras a Coil and upright conversion could ( probably - I havn't seen one ) keep the stock width and the stock rear axle.

As I have a wide, locked Toyota rear the front now matches the back.

None of this is simple or free - but IMO its easier than coils if you want
modest gains.

If my IFS does get the chop, and it will be more because I need a front locker, I would be more likely to go for a live axle and leaves ! Not a
difficult job - except for the stud pattern.

And last as a PS - dont widen the rear without the front. If you like driving
a car that tries to kill you at every opportunity then do it.

For solid swap keeping stud pattern, i think some jeep dana 30's and 44's had 5 on 5.5 PCD

Layto....

[MightyMouse]

That's worth remembering, I hope they have 5.285:1 available as a diff ratio.

Deffinately for Holux - but of course the stud patterns "wrong"

[lay80n]

That's worth remembering, I hope they have 5.285:1 available as a diff ratio.

Deffinately for Holux - but of course the stud patterns "wrong"

Check on some of the state side gear suppliers, DANA's have about eleventy million ratios available for them.

Layto....