hawairish

This topic went way off topic. But, @Astrorami is just pulling legs here. I'll leave my opinion about what I think of that Russian kit out of this discussion (it'll come up elsewhere I'm sure). @MTGunner, I don't have any experience with Nexen tires or those Rodians, but as a general perspective, we're quickly becoming a consumer base where once-thought "off-brand" tires are becoming "new-brand" tires that are probably worth a shot. Consider that automakers have already begun making them OE, and that top retailers like Walmart and Tire Rack are willing to buy enough of them to push the brand. I generally take that acceptance (and any underlying quality-assurance and certification processes) as a good sign that tire is of reasonable quality. Tires are what I consider another totally subjective purchase item. People love Duratracs, though I tend to hate them because I had a set that failed in ways that I don't think it should have. Does it seem like a good tire? Yes, and I liked them up until they failed on me. Should that stop you from buying them? No, not all. But, I honestly feel anyone could have had the same experience with any set of tires. That all said, if it reads like a good deal, meets your needs, carries a good warranty, and the majority of reviews are good, I'd totally give them a try.

OE rears are 120 lbs/in, OME 140 lbs/in. That additional 40 lbs of load handling (2 springs x 20 lbs) isn't much for a spring that had about the same free height. The 9448s at 225 lbs/in are still a reasonable jump over OE, though we don't know what AC rates are. Other LR springs had different rates and lengths, though.

If that's a valid number, that's awfully stiff...150% more than an OE spring (150 lbs/in), and 90% more than OME (200 lbs/in). That seems exceptionally harsh. Two front bumpers and two winches with steel rope would only compress the front end 0.5". I'm for a "truck" like feel, but that's "semi-truck" feel. Still, I've not tried them (and likely won't), so it's just an impression.

Mostly correct. For rear, 2" spacers and LR9448s. I'd say that if you plan to go with a bumper and winch, the AC's could be a good choice. They seem to have a much higher spring rate than OMEs judging by complaints of stiffness, but with enough weight to help compress them, it might work out well. Otherwise, if you'll be without bumper and or winch, I'd still consider the MD or HD springs and a spacer for ride quality. Also, heads up that the $167 springs that AC sells are OMEs (description includes their duty rating); the $180 springs are their house springs.

Something I've found myself reminding others about is that OME springs and shocks are intended for increased load handling, not lift. I don't consider them lift springs at all; it's not what they're meant for (that's not to say they don't provide lift). For R50s, all their springs have an estimated lift of 15mm when used according to their loading specs, which are standardized for all their springs: Light duty: no accessories Medium duty: bumper or winch, up to 50kg or 110lbs Heavy duty: bumper and winch, up to 100kg, or 220lbs I get about an 1.25" of lift from them because my winch and bumper setup is towards the low/mid range of the HD application, maybe around 140 lbs. Still, I rely on my strut spacers for lift, and the springs for handling, and they don't disappoint.

Stalled is the right word, but not forgotten. The collaboration between @TowndawgR50 and I is still underway, and I think once we've gotten off the ground, then we'll be exploring bumper and skid options. For now, we've tabled the bumper brackets, though. Next step in that regard is expanding my plasma table to get some larger stuff going. I'm really hoping we get there soon! Too true!

You could, but you wouldn't want to. Water drainage is one thing, but you'll also collect dirt and such. Best bet is to avoid the shocks with metal covers if planning to invert, or plan on swapping the bushings.

Might want to check the continuity of the switch that’s on the shifter, on the solenoid circuit. I had intermittent issues with my shifter a while ago. The previous owner bypassed it by wedging a short piece of hose in the shifter release. I didn’t like that, but found out the real issue was that switch. Cost me a maybe a buck from Digikey, before shipping, but was an exact fit. Soldered it in, no problems since.

What RainGoat said. They can be had for pretty cheap, but replicating would be a pretty tall task anyway. However, if we get around to producing some bumpers, we'll definitely be exploring carrier options.

Something that @Astrorami noticed is that the newer carrier is also aluminum, instead of steel on the older ones. It's also slightly different than the Terrano version, which was a little shorter and didn't center the tire on the liftgate.

I'm not a fan of how narrow the upper rails are either...it looks like like a mohawk at times, but I've always loved the look of the rails from the side, which is one reason I've been hesitant to go higher than the rails. Basically, whatever rack I'd make would be flat vs. the slight arc on the rails. The reason I like the wider approach is because it provides an overhang for under-mounting light brackets, hooking tie-downs to it, having a few extra square feet, and not having to lean against the truck to bring stuff up and down from it. I want the over-rail mount because the space between rack and roof might be usable for other storage (flat water containers, folding table, etc.). All those reasons are what keep me on the bubble.

I guess we're due for an update, right @TowndawgR50? Things are moving along! Albeit, a little slower than we anticipated perhaps, but we're still at it. SFD designs and costs have been our primary focus, but we've not limited ourselves to discussions about other great ideas. We're making some initial hardware and material purchases over the next few days, as we're both anxious to get some prototypes made now that designs and numbers on paper (er, digital paper). We've given a significant amount of thought to the strut spacers in particular; I was tweaking the CADs for them tonight, actually. They're definitely a departure from what many are expecting. Behind the scenes, we've been in contact with several members who've expressed interest in kits already, and we're stoked about that and absolutely appreciate the support! We've also added a new tool to our arsenal (it arrived today actually!): a finger brake press. This will allow us to put some structural bends into plate, which opens the doors to a few additional design and product options. Lastly, we've been mulling over a company name since the end of December, but one particular name has grown on us and we've been informally using it. Can't share it yet, but I can tell you it's not HawDawgs.

Same boat here. I even just took measurements of the roof and rack over the weekend. Going above the rack frees up useful area by going wider, but with some other trade-offs. I'd suggest doing a Google image search for "DepHep racks". Personally one of my favorites. I did a recessed rack the other year (thread here) and that's the mounting style I'll likely stick with. I'm leaning towards a recessed rack again, but this time steel, full-length, and with integrated crossbars so that I can still haul longer items when needed. I've got some other features I'd like for it, in particular useful tie-down points, accessory mounts, camp lighting, and large slot for a folding table (this would require raising the rack surface and sliding a table between the rack and roof from above the liftgate).

Well, good point!

I think we need to start a SW chapter to rival the PNW chapter that's been growing steadily.

Thanks, guys. I'll give it another look eventually. I was kind of hoping the guy would just cave in and sell it for scrap (I'm not entirely convinced keeping it alive is justifiable), but the same could probably be said of the vehicles I keep. I'd absolutely hate to pull the covers off again to double check the timing. From the sound of it, the guy who did the previous work was very experienced, but also in his 70's I'm told. He probably just gave up. At the same time, it's not clear to me what prompted changing the belt in the first place. My neighbor isn't the preventive maintenance type (at all), and from what he says, prior to this issue, the van ran fine. I've got the previous timing belt and it looks fine to me, too. But yeah, it was a pain to work on. I'll see what I can try for the MAF or other intake/sensor items...anything to avoid pulling those covers. The fact that the engine almost instantly bogs down when I barely touch the TB cam just has me thinking it's intake related, but I'm still baffled why a code hasn't been tossed yet...but that alone might suggest a timing issue if all sensors register okay?

Chatted with my neighbor today. Confirmed that the last guy who worked on it pull the front cat and exhaust off to replace the rear cat, and he confirmed the system was still free flowing. Started it up today with similar symptoms as before, except the 2nd start today it idled closer to 700rpm. Same smoke, but I suspect it may just be heating up some oil/dirt build-up. An obvious hazard either way. Still no codes, though. Did notice that the temp gauge didn't budge and the radiator and hoses stayed cold. The slightest touch of the throttle body cam immediately bogged the engine initially, but I did get to one point where revved a tiny amount. The engine eventually stalled out right as I was about to try the throttle again. Still hoping someone's come across this issue before.

I got pulled into a helping a neighbor who's got a 00 Quest 3.3L that's not running...I know, sorry, not a Pathfinder, but hey it's more about the engine. Long story short, a few months ago "something" in the engine bay got glowing hot (presuming front cat), and he had some guy do some work on it months ago. I was told the fuel filter was swapped, a cat was swapped (not the front), and the timing belt was changed (sorta). He asked me to take a look at it over the weekend, so I did. The guy who did the timing belt got exactly that far, not bothering to put the covers, pulleys, belts, or hoses back on, and never came back. I offered to put it back together and see if I could get it started. As far as I could tell, all the alignment marks on the three sprockets aligned with the dimples on the backing plate, but being a transverse-mount engine, a few things prevent getting a good look at the LH alignments. I had the timing pages from the Quest FSM for reference. Got everything reassembled eventually. Battery was drained, so I got it charged up to 13.5V over the past couple nights. I threw the battery in, replaced the crappy terminals, and gave it a go. So, here's where I'm at: 1st attempt, it turned over and started. Couple turn-overs before it caught. Rough idle, low idle around 500rpm. Giving it a little gas almost killed it, but it recovered. 2nd attempt, turned over and started quickly. Same rough and low idle, same reaction to gas. While "idling", I notice some light smoking coming from around the 2-4-6 manifold, but the overhang on the valve cover prevents me from seeing the exact source. But, does look like it could be coming from the gasket. I shut the engine off. For the above, no particular noises. Engine was running pretty quietly, actually. After engine off, no hissing or other noises. Restart attempts at this point fail. Engine turns over endlessly, but doesn't catch with or without the gas pedal. Every now at then, the fuel light would come on briefly during starting, but not always. No engine codes, stored or pending. Fuel pump and ignition fuses good. Full tank. When key in, turned to ON, the fuel system priming is audible prior to starting. I did pull the distributor cap and rotor to check the contacts, they were ok. I saw no indication that the distributor had been removed or adjusted recently. My best guess it that the front cat core has degraded and clogged the exhaust, but would that be a logical reason to explain why it started fine initially but then wouldn't start? Would built-up exhaust pressure do that? For this engine, the 1-3-5 (towards firewall) manifold routes forward and joins the 2-4-6 manifold as it goes into the front cat, which is located between the engine and radiator. I never saw it when it was reported glowing, and my pyrometer during a few minutes idling showed it reaching 350°F. I don't know what's normal. The O2 sensor is conveniently on top and might allow me to peek into the cat, but I didn't try to remove it because everything was still hot. He (neighbor) did say a cat was replaced, but I didn't do a visual inspection underneath...perhaps the issue was farther upstream. The nuts on the 2-4-6 manifold did look like they had been tightened at some point, so I don't know if it was already inspected otherwise. Any ideas?

Seems nice, but not $5K nice, and not excellent condition. It was a luxury vehicle, and Infiniti is a luxury brand, but today it's just another Pathfinder. I paid $5K for my 04 SE in 2012 with 145K, OME lift kit, sliders, skids, and clean exterior and leather interior (untorn seats, too), no issues...from a dealer. That truck, private sale, for that price...I couldn't do it. You could get all those features in a Pathfinder LE for less, too. What I see/think: If having cruise control matters to you, I'd be cautious about that one. The Intelligent Cruise Control system was a step above the normal cruise control system. I'm not even sure it was offered in Pathfinders, only QX4s. Finding any replacement parts might be difficult. However, I've looked at two VIN-specific parts diagrams and neither seem to indicate the sensor referenced in an 03 QX4 Owner's Manual. Hard to tell if there's a sensor present on the front bumper in the pics. The control module for that VIN also cross-ref'd to the module in a normal cruise control system. Perhaps this one doesn't have the ICC system. Perhaps the parts show up in another section I didn't see. Even then, the parts are simple, abundant (except maybe the ICC-specific stuff?), cheap, and easy to replace...gotta wonder why it hasn't been repaired. A Navigation system with probably 16+ year old maps is no longer a selling point...not even sure if you could update the maps if you wanted to. The Nav unit also has the climate controls integrated into it so replacing it is not a viable option (it's been done, and I wouldn't recommend it). Otherwise, it just has a single-DIN radio that would be replaceable. Missing spoiler. That driver's seat. High miles for price.

It's more about braking efficiency, less about safety (not that brakes aren't a safety item). Regardless of the valve proportion, you'll have braking power, but it may contribute to more brake wear up front over the long run. I'd document something, but I don't have any reference since my 04 doesn't have an LSV. Although my Frontier does, it's a slightly different design, and my truck's been lowered and adjusted enough to meet OE specs. Similar concept of course, but I wouldn't be able to account for any differences. I know the FSM has some procedural items, but you're right in that we might need some specialty instructions for lift.

Nay. It's behind the driver's rear spring, on a bracket under the floor pan:

Check out the Factory Services Manual for your truck (https://nicoclub.com/archives/infiniti-qx4-factory-service-manuals.html), then check out the EC chapter; subsections are sorted by P code. Doesn't look like the 97 manuals mention it, but later models do. That particular code deals with a bypass valve, which is a solenoid. The FSM details the full/proper diagnostics, but the gist of it is that you need to inspect the solenoid. Make sure it clicks with 12V applied and that the two ports on it open and close (easiest test is to just blow into a port with and without voltage applied). The solenoids aren't cheap, but the ones on my trucks (04 Pathfinder, and a 98 Frontier where the charcoal canister ruptured and sent charcoal granules into the entire emissions system clogging hoses and valves) can be disassembled and reassembled with pliers and a screwdriver. I've used a pin/needle to extract any tiny debris that's clogged them open/closed, then reassembled. You also need to check for any loose/cracked hoses, cracked plastic, and potentially the cut valve itself (again, see the FSM for full steps). Green thing is the bypass solenoid, white thing is the cut valve.

Got my new license plate.

I'm late to the party, but I'll echo @TowndawgR50's comment in principle, noting that my 04 doesn't have an LSV. But yes, by lifting the truck, the LSV be allowing the minimum rear proportioning available. The valve is meant to increase rear proportion when a load is detected, but the lift basically does the opposite to an extent. To restore the function, you'd likely have to move the spring arm up a few inches like Slart mentioned, but I agree that it might not matter much. I'd just as well suggest disconnecting the spring and calling it a day, or otherwise finding a way to put the lever in a static position that simulates stock-height (or a loaded position if more rear bias is desired).

I'd love to know the end result. I've always seen them on RockAuto, and I'm not particularly fond of the shift patterns on my 04 (mainly 3<-->4 down/upshifts), though I'm not sure what the kit does to improve it, or if it's all sensor/computer driven. Are the kits intended to be a performance aid, or a rebuild option? (Oddly, those kits have application overlap for some 90's Mazda RX-7/MPV/929 according to RA, too.) I think we'd all be interested in hearing more about your engine mods, too! Welcome to the forum!