2002 Limited 4WD

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
TECH: Suspension Geometry, Alignment Specs, and Shakedown Run
palomar05.JPG

Alignment and Suspension Tech:
With summit just a little over a week away, I thought that it was time to shake this booty around and see what falls off *crosses fingers*.

First off, my alignment specs and some suspension geometry tech.

Before I put the Solo gear on my Sequoia, I was using (keyword search) DJs Specs for my alignment specs. And they were great. My car tracked straight, tires wore evenly, and steering control was predictable.

With the Solo gear, not so much. I mentioned before that the Solo gear changes the suspension dynamics. Because of the way the outer heim steering mounts to the lower uniball housing, the point where the rod reacts to the joint is physically lower compared to OEM. This means that the length of the steering arm from the steering rack mount to the ball joint housing mount is longer by ~3/8" comparing Solo to OEM.

I'm not going to bore you with the math and geometry, but the added length of the steering rod makes a huge difference when the suspension loads/unloads, thus affecting steering/tracking. The suspension doesn't follow a completely up/down motion. It actually moves in an arc. What this means is that when the suspension moves up/down, the tires toe in/out as the steering arm moves radially. The added length in the steering rod results in an additional +/- 4deg of toe in/out when the suspension cycles over OEM.

To compensate for this change, I had to do a few things.

I changed the lift with an additional 5/8" of pre-load bring my lift to ~1-3/4". This puts my suspension to favor more uptravel and less downtravel. That way, the amount the suspension can toe out when it cycles downward is minimized.

Next, the alignment needed to be dialed in. This took trial and error. Thankfully, the shop I had do the job was super cool about it.

Alignment Specs:
Camber: L<-0.1> R<0.0> Cross <-0.2>
Caster: L<2.3> R<3.1> Cross <-0.8>
Toe: L<0.05> R<0.00> Cross<0.05>

This gave me back the driveability and predictably I needed up to 75mph. Tracks straight, no shimmy, and only "normal" steering corrections.

For the chagrins of it, I tried highway driving w/o front swaybar. That's a no go, especially on paved backroads with lots of twisties. All the added weight requires the front swaybar for controlability purposes.

Shakedown Run:
After sorting this whole deal out, it was time to take her out. I didn't want summit to be the first road trip since the rebuild and going out without really knowing if I missed anything just seemed like a bad idea. Thankfully, she did great. I didn't beat on her, but I wasn't gentle either. I made sure to bottom out the suspension when I could and tires were fully inflated to street pressure. This way, maximum shock loads were experienced.

Washboards were a breeze, but the front shocks faded quickly compared to the rear. The rear shocks held up great and stayed controlled. It reinforced the notion that the added weight in the suspension, front bumper, winch, and gear had exceeded the 2.5 coilover shock performance range. It's just not equipped to handle all the additional weight. So that will need addressing. Despite that, the fronts barely kept up.

I thought I heard some rubbing on the passenger side, but could not find wear marks. I hope I don't have to re-tub that side.

My impressions off-road can be summed up in one word. This kit is awesome. Steering response was tight. No slop. Turns on a dime. I am glad I took the time to dial this all in. The rear setup also held up great. My rear cargo was carrying extra weight to simulate camping gear and coolers, etc. The Dobinson shocks soaked up everything I threw at it.

All in all, she's ready for Sequoia Summit.

I had planned to commemorate the moment with a summit golden hour photo shoot, but was denied. Oh well...
palomar06.JPG
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
MODIFICATION: ScanGauge II

GOAL:
Monitor coolant and transmission temperature.

PURPOSE:
During summit, my coolant threw itself up all over my clean engine bay. One replacement radiator cap later, all was well.

However, this incident really made paranoid about loosing coolant suddenly and overheating during the drive back to CA. Better situational awareness would be nice.

DURATION: 1 hour

MATERIALS:
ScanGauge II
Velcro
Misc nuts and bolts

COST: $150

HOW-TO:
I mounted my ScanGauge on my kick panel. I wanted it out of the way, but still visible from the driver's seat.
2018-08-18 19_07_34.jpg

Out of the box, the ScanGauge II measured coolant temperature (WT), but it did not measure transmission temperature for my MY2002 Sequoia.

With the help of a fellow Sequoia owner, the following code was provided for the X-Gauge feature of the ScanGauge II to allow monitoring transmission temps:
2018-08-18 07_41_14.jpg

I mounted the ScanGauge on a bracket that's bolted onto the kick-panel. The ScanGauge is held in place using 3M outdoor Velcro. The reason for this was I wanted the capability to pull the display closer to me for scanning codes, entering trip data, etc. Keeping it hard-mounted would make the process annoying.

I routed the wiring thru the fusebox panel loosely coiled.
 
Likes: mulze42
Jan 9, 2017
85
35
18
31
MODIFICATION: ScanGauge II

GOAL:
Monitor coolant and transmission temperature.

PURPOSE:
During summit, my coolant threw itself up all over my clean engine bay. One replacement radiator cap later, all was well.

However, this incident really made paranoid about loosing coolant suddenly and overheating during the drive back to CA. Better situational awareness would be nice.

DURATION: 1 hour

MATERIALS:
ScanGauge II
Velcro
Misc nuts and bolts

COST: $150

HOW-TO:
I mounted my ScanGauge on my kick panel. I wanted it out of the way, but still visible from the driver's seat.
View attachment 1393

Out of the box, the ScanGauge II measured coolant temperature (WT), but it did not measure transmission temperature for my MY2002 Sequoia.

With the help of a fellow Sequoia owner, the following code was provided for the X-Gauge feature of the ScanGauge II to allow monitoring transmission temps:
View attachment 1394

I mounted the ScanGauge on a bracket that's bolted onto the kick-panel. The ScanGauge is held in place using 3M outdoor Velcro. The reason for this was I wanted the capability to pull the display closer to me for scanning codes, entering trip data, etc. Keeping it hard-mounted would make the process annoying.

I routed the wiring thru the fusebox panel loosely coiled.
one of my friends with an fj got one of these and loves it, might have to add it to the list haha
 

Leon M

New Member
May 2, 2018
10
1
3
44
Looking through your older posts I noted that you had King coilovers originally on it. Can you explain why you switched to ICON? I had Kings on a Tacoma years ago and was happy with them. I'm not ready to buy anything soon but I'm doing research.
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
Looking through your older posts I noted that you had King coilovers originally on it. Can you explain why you switched to ICON? I had Kings on a Tacoma years ago and was happy with them. I'm not ready to buy anything soon but I'm doing research.
I started with ICON ET, but I was not impressed with it, didn't ride that nice, and started leaking with less than a year after I bought it.

I switch over to Kings and loved them. However, after adding all the weight with gear, the Kings were maxed out and were not performing as well.

So, I had the ICONs rebuilt and revalved with 14" 700lb springs.

Honestly, even with the rebuilt ICON setup, didn't fair much better. The added unspring weight causes the both Kings and ICONs to fade quickly.

To correct the content of my posts, I am on Kings right now since it has performed better than the rebuilt ICONs.
 
Oct 10, 2017
146
16
18
28
I started with ICON ET, but I was not impressed with it, didn't ride that nice, and started leaking with less than a year after I bought it.

I switch over to Kings and loved them. However, after adding all the weight with gear, the Kings were maxed out and were not performing as well.

So, I had the ICONs rebuilt and revalved with 14" 700lb springs.

Honestly, even with the rebuilt ICON setup, didn't fair much better. The added unspring weight causes the both Kings and ICONs to fade quickly.

To correct the content of my posts, I am on Kings right now since it has performed better than the rebuilt ICONs.
So does that mean that there will be a new Sal study soon on the best recipe for the front coilovers?
 

Leon M

New Member
May 2, 2018
10
1
3
44
So does that mean that there will be a new Sal study soon on the best recipe for the front coilovers?
I hope so. I'm totally using Sal's build as a recipe for mine. =) I'm modifying it to not be quite as capable but the idea of keeping the center of gravity low really resonates with me. The wife is short and I have small kids so I don't want something they need a ladder to climb into.
 

Leon M

New Member
May 2, 2018
10
1
3
44
I started with ICON ET, but I was not impressed with it, didn't ride that nice, and started leaking with less than a year after I bought it.

I switch over to Kings and loved them. However, after adding all the weight with gear, the Kings were maxed out and were not performing as well.

So, I had the ICONs rebuilt and revalved with 14" 700lb springs.

Honestly, even with the rebuilt ICON setup, didn't fair much better. The added unspring weight causes the both Kings and ICONs to fade quickly.

To correct the content of my posts, I am on Kings right now since it has performed better than the rebuilt ICONs.
Thanks for the info Sal. When I'm ready to get my coilovers, I hope you're okay with me bugging you for advise on specs. =)
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
So does that mean that there will be a new Sal study soon on the best recipe for the front coilovers?
Study is done, sort of. I contacted King about a custom CO setup with resis to see if I could get the most wheel travel out of my setup. With the weight of bumper, winch, and the added unsprung weight of the Solo kit and 34s, 2.5 shocks are just not enough to keep up with it all. Resis required.

Per King, it was doable, but it would cost almost 3k with a 12wk lead time. Pass.

With the upper and lower uniball, I would need a shock that is 21-3/8 long fully extended coupled with a 14" spring to prevent binding. This would give 11-12" of wheel travel. Not bad for a Mid-Travel setup.
 
Last edited:

Leon M

New Member
May 2, 2018
10
1
3
44
Study is done, sort of. I contacted King about a custom CO setup with resis to see if I could get the most wheel travel out of my setup. With the weight of bumper, winch, and the added unsprung weight of the Solo kit and 34s, 2.5 shocks are just not enough to keep up with it all. Resis required.

Per King, it was doable, but it would cost almost 3k with a 12wk lead time. Pass.

With the upper and lower uniball, I would need a shock that is 21-3/8 long fully extended coupled with a 14" spring to prevent binding. This would give 11-12" of wheel travel. Not bad for a Mid-Travel setup.
3K huh? That's a bit rich for my blood. Do you think their OEM Tundra coilover would be okay without all your extra gear? I don't have any plans in the near future of adding a bunch of weight to mine so I'm wondering if I could get away with that approach.
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
3K huh? That's a bit rich for my blood. Do you think their OEM Tundra coilover would be okay without all your extra gear? I don't have any plans in the near future of adding a bunch of weight to mine so I'm wondering if I could get away with that approach.
For sure. I would go with their extended travel CO to get the most out it. They rode great before I added all the weight.
 
Oct 10, 2017
146
16
18
28
3K huh? That's a bit rich for my blood. Do you think their OEM Tundra coilover would be okay without all your extra gear? I don't have any plans in the near future of adding a bunch of weight to mine so I'm wondering if I could get away with that approach.
For sure. I would go with their extended travel CO to get the most out it. They rode great before I added all the weight.
We are talking about the King OEM coilover for the Tundra?

So if you are passing on the custom what is your next plan of action?
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
We are talking about the King OEM coilover for the Tundra?

So if you are passing on the custom what is your next plan of action?
yeah, King Extended Travel CO for the tundra.

I have Fox's with resis on order. Lord knows when they'll show up. 10wks and counting. It is my hope that with the adjusters on the Resis, I can trim out the ride how I like and get under control. Also, with the additional fluid, it'll resist fading under prolonged use.
 
Jan 5, 2018
9
1
3
49
Seattle, WA
I have the Fox 2.5 RR with dual compression adjusters. I'm really happy with them so far (20k miles). Both low speed and high speed compression adjusters have a wide range and make a huge difference in ride quality. I've been able to dial in a ride that suits my taste and my load and also to match the back end. I've never experienced any fade but then again, no winch bumper yet.
I'm on a quest to find adjustable RR shocks for the back end. I spent about 30 minutes on the phone with a tech from Fox trying to find something in their truck lineup that would fit our travel requirements (per Sal's measurements). He found two that looked close travel wise - Dodge 2500 fronts and JK 4-6" lift front but both would have to be revalved for our application :(
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
I have the Fox 2.5 RR with dual compression adjusters. I'm really happy with them so far (20k miles). Both low speed and high speed compression adjusters have a wide range and make a huge difference in ride quality. I've been able to dial in a ride that suits my taste and my load and also to match the back end. I've never experienced any fade but then again, no winch bumper yet.
I'm on a quest to find adjustable RR shocks for the back end. I spent about 30 minutes on the phone with a tech from Fox trying to find something in their truck lineup that would fit our travel requirements (per Sal's measurements). He found two that looked close travel wise - Dodge 2500 fronts and JK 4-6" lift front but both would have to be revalved for our application :(
you know this already, but Jim's on it.

The fade gets pretty bad on washboards even on low speed. I swear I've chipped a tooth or three.

I've seen similar feedback on the Fox's which is why I went with them. Sadly, they don't extend as much as Kings, so ill lose some travel (3/8").
 

Sam

New Member
Sep 19, 2018
11
0
1
39
Question: Did you pass on a long travel suspension setup because of the added width? Seems that a long travel kit(total chaos or camburg) would have priced out similar. Wondering....
 

Sal R.

Active Member
Apr 6, 2017
310
142
43
San Diego
Question: Did you pass on a long travel suspension setup because of the added width? Seems that a long travel kit(total chaos or camburg) would have priced out similar. Wondering....
In a nutshell, yes.

But the +6" additional overall width wasn't the only factor.

To accommodate a LT kit, I'd have to remove more material on the firewall to clear the tire, trim the fenders (since I won't run glass), and an LT would be really hard on the OEM LBJs over the stock geometry, due to increased arm length, for 14" of wheel travel.

For the cost to gain additional articulation of an LT kit, I don't get any more reliability over the stock geometry since they all use OEM LBJs.

With the Solo kit, I have more strength and reliability over stock suspension setup with the added benefit of 11" of wheel travel, thanks to the lower uniball joint. Fair trade-off, I think.
 
Last edited:

Sam

New Member
Sep 19, 2018
11
0
1
39
The Camburg long travel kit comes with uniball lowers and uppers. You’re right regarding the fiberglass fenders being a must with the LT kit.