-
Ford Explorer Community - Maintenance - Modifications - Performance Upgrades - Problem Solving - Off-Road - Street
Explorer Forum Covers the Explorer ST, Explorer Sport, Explorer Sport Trac, Lincoln Aviator,
Mercury Mountaineer, Mazda Navajo, Ford Ranger, Mazda Pickups, and the Ford Aerostar
Register Today It's free!
SOA Question
- Thread starter JTX
- Start date
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!.
XplorerKid
Rolling on 37"s
- Joined
- July 25, 2002
- Messages
- 4,521
- Reaction score
- 8
- City, State
- Winter Haven Fl
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1997 Xplorer
JTX said:
well as far as i know, you will need a new rear brakeline....
Also, The SOA nets you on Average 5.5" of lift, so if anythign the little bit of height difference wont be noticable....
XplorerKid
Rolling on 37"s
- Joined
- July 25, 2002
- Messages
- 4,521
- Reaction score
- 8
- City, State
- Winter Haven Fl
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1997 Xplorer
JTX said:
Well all that i am tellign you is from research i have done....
But most can retain their stock D-shaft after a SOA...
Edit: I know i have read of alot of people keeping there Rear D-Shaft, But i just did a search and FOudn that most get there lengthened, From what i just read you can get away with stock for a while, but if you plan to Articulate, like im sure you do, i know yours aitn a street queen, than you should get it lengthened..... Hope i have helped, some how
jrgaylor
Elite Explorer
- Joined
- April 15, 2002
- Messages
- 2,765
- Reaction score
- 37
- City, State
- Washington
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1985 BroncoII
I am SOA and I still have the stock driveline and brakelines, so far neither have limited my articulation.
Some people have to lengthing their drivelines others don't, it is just like some people can fit 31's on a stock 1 gen. explorer and others will rub stock.
So if you plan on having to do it and you don't it is a bonus.
Some people have to lengthing their drivelines others don't, it is just like some people can fit 31's on a stock 1 gen. explorer and others will rub stock.
So if you plan on having to do it and you don't it is a bonus.
jrgaylor
Elite Explorer
- Joined
- April 15, 2002
- Messages
- 2,765
- Reaction score
- 37
- City, State
- Washington
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1985 BroncoII
On my explorer I did nothing to the rear brake line, I did reroute the drivers side e-brake cable to under the rear mounting bracket. I can get pics later after my battries charge if needed.
jrgaylor
Elite Explorer
- Joined
- April 15, 2002
- Messages
- 2,765
- Reaction score
- 37
- City, State
- Washington
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1985 BroncoII
First picture shows how my explorer is seating when I took the pictures, the left rear tire is just barely touching the ground.
The red dot in the second picture is on the rear brake line with slack in it.
The red dot in the third picture is the ebrake cable out of the factory mounting postion,which would limit my droop in the stock location.
And that is a 31" spare.
The red dot in the second picture is on the rear brake line with slack in it.
The red dot in the third picture is the ebrake cable out of the factory mounting postion,which would limit my droop in the stock location.
And that is a 31" spare.
Attachments
easnoddy
Active Member
- Joined
- June 18, 2003
- Messages
- 69
- Reaction score
- 0
- City, State
- Bogart, GA
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1997 Sport 4WD
jrgaylor:
Okay, so I'm looking at your mods and you have the Duff 2.5" suspension lift, 2" coil spacers in the front and a SOA in the rear. Did you use the stock spring pack? Did you remove the overload spring? (I don't see it in the pics)
It almost looks like I could do the full 2" TT (currently at 1.25") on the front on my 97 sport and go SOA like you in the back (with the stock shackles) and there will be about 2" difference in the clearance between the front and the back fenderwells (My X rides tail-low even with a 4-door pack and warriors). It also looks like I could attach my stock-length Rancho RSX's to the top sway bar hole without having to get longer shocks (for a while at least).
On my current setup (1.25" TT, Warriors), the front fenderwell is 1" higher than the back. So if I add another .75" in the front and take off my Warriors (1.25") in the back, the front fenderwell will be approximately 3" higher than the back. If I go spring-over the rear would gain 3.25" from the axle tube and approximately 1.25" from the new perches. Hence the back would be 4.5" higher than stock and approximately 1.5-2" higher than the front. I don't mind the back being 2" higher than the front. It would look like the newer Tahoe's and most new 4x4 trucks.
I'm also planning to do the PA 2" BL and run 33's. It looks like jrgaylor can clear 33's EASILY. I don't mind trimming a little plastic and am removing the front wind-scoop.
What does everybody think? I think my only issues will be driveshaft length and brake lines.
Okay, so I'm looking at your mods and you have the Duff 2.5" suspension lift, 2" coil spacers in the front and a SOA in the rear. Did you use the stock spring pack? Did you remove the overload spring? (I don't see it in the pics)
It almost looks like I could do the full 2" TT (currently at 1.25") on the front on my 97 sport and go SOA like you in the back (with the stock shackles) and there will be about 2" difference in the clearance between the front and the back fenderwells (My X rides tail-low even with a 4-door pack and warriors). It also looks like I could attach my stock-length Rancho RSX's to the top sway bar hole without having to get longer shocks (for a while at least).
On my current setup (1.25" TT, Warriors), the front fenderwell is 1" higher than the back. So if I add another .75" in the front and take off my Warriors (1.25") in the back, the front fenderwell will be approximately 3" higher than the back. If I go spring-over the rear would gain 3.25" from the axle tube and approximately 1.25" from the new perches. Hence the back would be 4.5" higher than stock and approximately 1.5-2" higher than the front. I don't mind the back being 2" higher than the front. It would look like the newer Tahoe's and most new 4x4 trucks.
I'm also planning to do the PA 2" BL and run 33's. It looks like jrgaylor can clear 33's EASILY. I don't mind trimming a little plastic and am removing the front wind-scoop.
What does everybody think? I think my only issues will be driveshaft length and brake lines.
jrgaylor
Elite Explorer
- Joined
- April 15, 2002
- Messages
- 2,765
- Reaction score
- 37
- City, State
- Washington
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 1985 BroncoII
easnoddy-you are correct, stock springs,no overload,stock shackle.
The f-150 spacers are 1.5" and i think i actually got about 3" of lift from the JD coil springs.
you did not add in the height of your leaf spring pack for the lift in the rear.
IMO up to 2" of rake is OK.
You may want to consider using a mono leaf in the rear if you are only doing a TT in the front.
Someone else may chime in but, I do not think I would do this on a 2nd Gen (2" TT and SOA) If you do this give us a report of pics
The f-150 spacers are 1.5" and i think i actually got about 3" of lift from the JD coil springs.
you did not add in the height of your leaf spring pack for the lift in the rear.
IMO up to 2" of rake is OK.
You may want to consider using a mono leaf in the rear if you are only doing a TT in the front.
Someone else may chime in but, I do not think I would do this on a 2nd Gen (2" TT and SOA) If you do this give us a report of pics
Explorer Features
Explorer Features
