Long Travel IFS 4x4

[Guest Deathrunner]

HOw come companies like total chaos don't make long travel; kits for the 4x4 pathfinders?

 

They make LT kits for hardbodies and Xterras??

 

I have a Long travel kit for my Toyota 4Runner and it seems that the technology would be the same for the Pathfinders....what gives?

[derogate]

I'm going to take a wild shot in the dark here and say Supply and demand. There just isn't the demand for an item that would take soo much time and research to fab up.

 

.. I think.

[mws]

I think you're right. I was just lamenting about that with my nephew this weekend - it's a bummer such a fine machine gets such limited support. It is MUCH more difficult and expensive to do a good IFS, so you need to be able to sell a bunch to recoup your design and tooling investment.

Combine that with how relatively few Pathys there are,

And then factor in how remarkable competent they are stock,

and well, there just isn't enough demand.

[FLApathy]

but isnt an HB and a pathy pretty much the same thing

[88pathoffroad]

Total Chaos only makes long-travel kits for 2WD HB's. The demand just isn't there...

 

And Toyotas have the torsion bars attached to the UCA's, not the LCA's like Pathfinders. Way different setup.

[Mr. Pickles]

Good call on the UCA placement 88 differences. And its like anything else with the Pathfinders or Nissans in general, the red-headed stepchild phenomenon. But the beauty here may be leaving things as they are (relatively) and suprising people with what you can do regardless.

[Guest Deathrunner]

Total Chaos only makes long-travel kits for 2WD HB's. The demand just isn't there...

 

And Toyotas have the torsion bars attached to the UCA's, not the LCA's like Pathfinders. Way different setup.

Shouldn't make a difference where the torsion bar connect. Yes, Toyota was smarter for putting it on the Upper and hiding it behing the frame rail, but.......

 

2wd's connect to the bottom...

 

Chevy has LT kits and they connect to the bottom

 

Alot of people with LT kits ditch torsions all together for a coil over (Yes it can be done with the axles in place)

 

 

I guess it is just demand, are there really that few pathfinder around? I see just as many as 4runners.

 

I did see one custom LT pathy and it was AWESOME. Here are some pics:

 

X

Edited August 24, 2005 by 88pathoffroad

[Filthy Luker]

The pics don't work for me. Can you upload them to http://imageshack.us or something?

[GrimGreg]

The pics don't work for me.

Me either.

Edited August 24, 2005 by GrimGreg

[88pathoffroad]

Shouldn't make a difference where the torsion bar connect. Yes, Toyota was smarter for putting it on the Upper and hiding it behing the frame rail, but.......

 

2wd's connect to the bottom...

 

Chevy has LT kits and they connect to the bottom

 

Alot of people with LT kits ditch torsions all together for a coil over (Yes it can be done with the axles in place)

 

 

I guess it is just demand, are there really that few pathfinder around? I see just as many as 4runners.

 

I did see one custom LT pathy and it was AWESOME. Here are some pics:

2WD's also don't have front axles or a diff in the way. It's way easier to extend control arms with less drivetrain in the way. You're right, placement of the torsion bars doesn't matter, but it doesn't help on ours.

 

You neglect to mention that the LT Pathfinder you found is 2WD as well...man, this is some nice fabrication. I bet that cost a pretty penny.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the way, the original images were almost 1 MB each and they were actually bitmaps, not JPG's. I fixed it.

[GrimGreg]

The owner used to be on AC and had a pic of his Parthy in the air after that kit.

 

I don't care about long travel, but I would like to be able to switch to coilovers and ditch the T-bars on mine.

[Filthy Luker]

Ahhh.. i remember this one...

 

2WD, expensive but ohh so very cool. I am so torn on this one.

[Harbinger]

With all the custom fabrication and 2wd only applications, wouldn't a SAS be more cost-effective? Or are there advantages to be had with LT IFS?

Edited August 24, 2005 by Harbinger

[Filthy Luker]

With all the custom fabrication and 2wd only applications, wouldn't a SAS be more cost-effective?  Or are there advantages to be had with LT IFS?

2WD LT IFS (+good motor) = Supa happy fun time on the desert.

[Guest Deathrunner]

Sorry about the image size. Hopefully these ones won't be too big.

 

I know that one is 2WD, but I couldn't find any 4WD, it wouldn't me much harder to incorporate axles into the dsign....just more careful placement of the coilovers....or retention of the torsion.....and travel would have to be limited to whatever the CV angles could handle. Of course the axles would need to be lengthened, but that is no big deal, they do it for t-100s and tundras all the time.

 

Here is my 4runner. I don't see why this can't be done to a pathy. I almost wish I hadn't done it to my 4ruynner already, I would definitely love to do it to the pathy. But I can't afford to do 2 of em.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[headpeace]

sweet yota bro, to bad it wasn't the path :sniff:

[88pathoffroad]

Did your LT kit include new axles? Cause the Nissan CV's are pretty short. I've maxed mine out several times with just a UCA lift and stock t-bars.

[Guest Deathrunner]

Us Toyota guys are lucky. T-100's use the same IFS, basically. Except they have a wider track....so thier cv axles are longer, by about 3".

 

Well, with 3.25" longer arms, these axles work great....in fact most 4x4 lift kits are designed to work with the t-100 axles. If you want to put a kit like this on a tundra or t-1oo, you have to cut the axle and weld in an extension. It's not that big of a deal from what I understand.

 

A guy at the shop that I go to has a long travel t-100 and it works great.

 

I just get really frustrated knowing how well these setups work and not seeing any body with a very capable rig like a pathfinder running it.

[derogate]

I dont see why it would be super super expensive to run a setup like that yota has on a pathy? it MUST be possible somehow. ANd then it'll still be cheaper than doing an SAS.

[Guest Deathrunner]

Ok, let's looka t it this way.

 

First off it can be about cheaper or more expensive than an SAS (At least on yotas).

 

A readily available kit like mine or the total chaos one will run between 1700 and 2500.00. Now that is just the arms. Then you have to fabricated shock hoops, then you need to lengthen your axles, then you need to get thicker tbars....the stock ones will fail with the increased leverage. You're gonna want to tun some nice shocks, so figure about 600.00 for a pair (That's the lower end price of rebuildable 2.5x8" shocks). Because of increased wheel uptravel, you will need fiberglass flares (About 300.00 for a pair), Then you need to extend your tie-rods. If the rear a arm mounting points aren't attached on pathy's (I forget, yotas aren''t), then you will want a truss.

 

With readily available stuff, my toyota front end, cost me about 5,000.00. Now that is considering I had a shop do all the work, and that I picked the most expensive kit and some expensive fiberglass. You could do this to a yota for like 3,000-3,500.00 if you did the work yourself and bought more conservative parts.

 

Obvioulsy a pathy will cost more since it would be custom, but if you can weld, you're gonna save alot of money. Plus if you design the kit, you aren't paying all that profit for the companies.

 

A cheap SAS can run close to 2,000.00, but a well done SAS will cost alot more. So it is a toss up.

 

I do a variety of driving.... roads, high speed desert stuff, moderate crawling, trail riding....so I wanted a versatile front end. If I only did crawling, I belive an SAS to be the better solution. But Long travel IFS will work well if you keep the tires to a modest size (33's) and don't hang on the skinny pedal in tight situations.