I cannot understand the purpose of a leveling kit??

[Sheepdog]

OK yes it affects somethings of course...

Yes, I know- that's why I posted it.

...but it does not keep you from towing with your ranger...

It doesn't keep you from playing Russian Roulette either, but both of those things have safety issues.

...and it does not lower your towing capacity.

What do you mean by "towing capacity"?

Ford's trailer tow weight ratings are for stock vehicles, with stock suspension and stock tires. You've re-engineered your vehicle- there IS no trailer tow weight rating for that.

I don’t believe you’re correct about losing 2.5” of suspension travel with a 2.5” spacer.

Well, that would make you wrong.

It doesn’t work that way.

Sure it does. Why would you think otherwise?

Everything is just offset by 2.5 inches. All the travel stays the same it’s just moving in a slightly different place.

No, everything is NOT "offset by 2.5 inches". The only thing that's "offset" is the top of the coilover, which is "offset" from everything else in the front end that is still in the same place- your control arms can still only go as far up as they could before, or at least they would, but now that you've moved the coilover down, they can't. And more importantly, the upper control arms can only go down so far before they bottom out or bind at the upper ball joint. But the coilover has a new home, 2.5" "offset" from where it's supposed to be.

It would be like if you stood in front of your front door, and "offset" yourself by 2.5 feet to the side, and then tried to walk through the doorway. That's the relationship the entire front end of your truck now has with your front coilovers.

Sponsored

 

[AdamHarris]

Well I won’t quote your every word but you are not understanding front suspension geometry. And you aren’t being honest in this discussion by saying things like “abs” are affected. Your door analogy is flawed and not applicable to a suspension arc discussion.

 

[Tracy Bowman]

My new favorite thread! Quite the amusing read. You guys crack me up

 

[Tracy Bowman]

Oh, and though I love how y’all’s Rangers look with the leveling kits (they look great!), I LOVE the way my Ranger looks just as it is. My two cents.

 

[Sheepdog]

Well I won’t quote your every word but you are not understanding front suspension geometry.

I understand front suspension geometry just fine. It is one of the areas I have been ASE certified in. I have successfully built and developed both two and four wheel vehicles in multiple disciplines of motorsports.

And you aren’t being honest in this discussion by saying things like “abs” are affected.

My honesty is unimpeachable.

If you unweight one or more tires from topping out the suspension, while materially braking, it will activate the ABS system.

And activating the ABS system IS affecting it.

Your door analogy is flawed and not applicable to a suspension arc discussion.

I was trying to simplify it for you. How about if it's a rotating door, and you're laying down on your side...

 

[VoodooRanger]

Anyone that has seen my truck post-level has said that is the way the truck should have come from the factory. It looks so much better when I paired it with the 285 tires.

 

[Rviator]

I don't either. The only logical use of a leveling kit is for off roading with some improvement in ground clearance and ability to fit bigger tires.
As far as aesthetics go I prefer a raised rear on a truck when empty so you don't get the tail dragging overloaded look when hauling. I however have never known a pickup that would settle in the rear. My F-350 had a rake when empty, went away when loaded.

 

[Blue Streak]

I'm leaving my rear end alone. Maybe by the time it sags I'll be to old to notice.

 

[1911tex]

Would you buy a low (medium or high) mileage used truck that had its suspension geometry compromise the trucks' original factory specifications? Would you take the word of its owner that your children would be just as safe as the trucks factory new safety ratings? Not me! For those that say yea..."I trust the words of the owner of this truck"...have at it...I know there are a lot of gullible folks out there...who have no clue as to the voracity of the owners sales pitch. Yes, there are a lot of mullets that believe anything and there are a lot of attorneys who make a living going after unscrupulous sellers.

 

[THLONE]

I'm leaving my rear end alone. Maybe by the time it sags I'll be to old to notice.

Most rears and fronts sag with age unless they are dampered.

 

[HenryMac]

Anyone that has seen my truck post-level has said that is the way the truck should have come from the factory. It looks so much better when I paired it with the 285 tires.

There are two approaches, lower the rear, or raise the front. I don't mind the factory rake, but asthetically the truck would look better if the rear was lowered.

Then the centerline of wheel openings in the fenders would be closer to tire/wheel centerlines.

And don't take my word for it. Every rendered image of every 4x4 or FX4 Ranger posted on the shopford.com site has the front and back lowered.

Adding 1,098 lbs of cargo helps to achieve the rendered look..

 

[HenryMac]

why are you here? If your stance is, never change a thing, then why join the forum in the first place?

He's got a Ranger. It's an easy concept. We all learn a lot here from others that also have Rangers.

 

[Jqueen]

So I have heard several times that people who complain about the bed height or people who don't like the rake are really just people who wanted a lifestyle truck and not a "real" truck with which to do work.

I'm pretty sure that's not true, as my 1985 f350 crew cab with the 6.9l diesel had a lower ass end, and not much rake as compared to the Ranger. It also had 16 inch rims, which was bigger than the 15's standard on F150's. All 3 are things I wish my XLT Ranger had (lower bed, less rake, smaller rims). I'm not clear why work trucks in the past didn't need to be jacked up,, but today's trucks doing?

I want a 6 foot bed too, but did need the usable back seat.

 

[Jqueen]

All that said, I'm not raising the front or swapping tires (although I'm open to lowering the rear if we can retain payload).

 

[Racket]

Like others, my truck gets mixed use. Granted I went from a sedan to the Lariat and wanted a 'nice' ride. Fiddled with the engine and some cosmetics, replaced the oh-so-trucklike shocks in the back for a better ride then 'compromised' with an inch and a half lift in the front to keep a little rake but not upset the stance when towing. The 6x12 U-haul trailer doesn't get close to the weight limits of the truck but right now is the biggest thing I care to haul.

I admit the cosmetics were a driver. But I'm upgrading my tires to Michelin's because they perform better (ABS included).

If it's not one's thing, I'm fine with that. Trucks are not precision driving machines (although this one has a lot of refinement I didn't anticipate when I bought it) and I don't feel I'm spending unnecessary monies to get the vehicle I think I need.

Sponsored