Marlin Crawler's New Rock Crawling Long Travel IFS Suspension System (#RCLT)

Not entirely accurate. You're getting similar downtravel numbers to other LT kits (more than stock) without trimming. And a significant steering upgrade. But to take full advantage of the extra $$ for the kit, you gotta be willing to break out the grinder and go to town. I won't have to touch the firewall for 37s, but the inner fender will need to be to be modified, apparently more than I had originally thought

 

Hell, thats badass

 

True, cause once once you SAS with one tons and get a similar ride height, you no longer have a taco, you have a buggy. And most west coast stuff is a lot more fun when not in a buggy and trying to keep the body straight-ish and just pick the right lines. When you overbuild too far it takes the fun out of 95% of everything else you have to wheel.

 

Agreed, plus I live near LA, so any decent trail is at least an hour drive. The best ones are 2+ hours. V8 4Runners sit too high when SAS'd for my liking (to clear the motor), so that was never really a consideration for me on this build.

 

Similar downtravel as in more overall compared to the average LT Kit? Or, slightly more downtravel compared to stock/mid travel numbers?

 

Mine are SCS -10s. Mike told me that a mild body mount chop would be all I need to do on that side for 37s. My body mount is already cut way back so I think I should be good back there. If I need to cut into the firewall for 37s, then they straight up lied in their marketing.

 

Downtravel numbers will be right between a Total Chaos +2 and +3.5 kit. The horizontal uniballs allow more uptravel than kits with verticals, but you gotta cut to get the most out of it. However, from what I've read, a TC +2 really only nets you an extra inch or 2 of downtravel over an "extended travel" setup.

 

Big travel numbers are a secondary benefit for me. The main benefit for me of this setup is the overall strength and steering upgrade.

 

Yep or stretching it so long that they are longer than a dclb

 

So with the 200 rack and tundra you are going to loose steering angle and radius.

 

Looks like a few things happening here:
1.) You're getting more uptravel than me. I notched the crossmember that the factory upper link frame mounts attached to as much as I could, and still have 1/2" of clearance between the notch and upper link when fully stuffed. With both wheels at full stuff I have some clearance to the un-modified fender, but with one side at full droop and one side fully stuffed the tire kisses the bottom of the fender.
2.) Your axle is further back than mine. I wanted to clear the rear door, nothing more (4Runner has a longer wheel base than an FJ). I was counting on replacing the factory panhard but surprisingly I was able to keep it. I did add some gusseting and plates to beef it up.
3.) The ARB diff cover looks like it doesn't stick out as far as the OX, at least at the top.

Sorry for the crap picture, this is 1/2" shy of both wheels at full bump.

 

Actually people who have put in the 200 series rack are reporting a sharper turning angle and more bumpsteer. @iconicfj on IG

 

I've been wanting to truss the rear tubes. Your posts have helped push me along. I like what you got going on.

This is correct from the factory specs on the FJ, the LC200 has 14mm more stroke on the rack. iconic moved the rack position forward 2" and has a long travel kit that probably moves his center line maybe 1" forward. The rack with stock tie rods is also marginally wider between inner pivots. This all adds up to the geometry changes he's experiencing. I think he's also experimenting with the bushing design as the dual offset bushings could walk around under load. He'll have it dialed in in no time. I just started prepping my rack last night. Can't wait to get that in.

Edit: just to note the RCLT kit has a fabbed spindle, so the steering geometry is most likely dialed in for the specs on this rack, so I wouldn't be concerned about these details unless you're adapting it to someone else's kit or stock arm geometry.

 

Thank you sir!

Right, that makes sense that his geometry is a bit different than RCLT will be with the 200 series rack because of the spindle position. I know he'll get it sorted tho. I've been following his brother's build thread on T4R for years. Those guys know what they're doing. Sometimes I wish I had another me to bounce ideas off of haha.

 

It would really suck if Marlin fucked up the bump steer on this kit, that's a pretty important issue for a rig that will see the highway.

 

IFS is better for high speed? But I think your right, getting everything out of this kit will require enough fab skills and money that SAS is comparable.

If course the initial idea was to make an IFS that could compete with SAS in the rocks, and get IFS handling on the way home; so, success?

 

I think the reason iconicfj was having more bump steer is because his tie rods are pointed back a bit. He mounted his rack to the driver side diff mount like RCLT, which pushes it forward a few inches, but his spindle doesn't move the outer TRE mounts far enough forward to match up with the new rack mounting location. I wonder if the RCLT spindle moves the TRE mount up a bit, which would also help with bumpsteer. I'll lay them side by side when I get my stock ones out.

 

The main thing for bump steer is getting the tie rod arc to match the outer CV arc. A larger diameter rack with an OEM spindle will never work right, my adventures with a tundra rack and OEM width suspension are well documented, and the stuff of death wobble nightmares.

 

I have no hangups about cutting and even rebuilding the inner fenders. But I'd be hesitant to tackle a SAS, even after doing the rear 3-link. There's so much more that goes into a front end solid axle than a rear.

 

Agreed. And yes, it would be a shame if they didn't get that right. My rack is tired AF and bump steers like a mofo. I'm looking forward to that being reduced and I'll be disappointed if it's the same or worse.