DOGMAN
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- August 2, 1999
- Messages
- 439
- Reaction score
- 0
- City, State
- Mission, KS
- Year, Model & Trim Level
- 91 XLT
Would appreciate opinions on this.
Since I'm going to be installing a 2" body lift soon on my 91 4dr, I've been studying a number of the writeups on this site about this subject.
I've noticed that the lift blocks are installed on top of the upper rubber body mount bushing, so that the body rests directly on the lift block.
My question is: What about installing the lift blocks with the upper rubber body mount bushing next to the body, which would mean that the lift block would be resting directly on the frame?
The reason I ask this, is that I was looking at pictures of the lift block installation, and it seemed to me that with the lift block next to the body, there would be more tendency for the body to lean, since the 2" or 3" lift block has created a 2" or 3" torque arm to act against the upper body mount bushing, which sits on the frame.
If you installed the lift block underneath the upper rubber body mount bushing, so the lift block is resting on the frame and the body is on top of the upper body mount bushing, the torque arm of the assembly would be reduced to approximently the stock setup without the lift block, provided the lift block does not rotate on the frame.
It seems to me that mounting the lift block between the upper body mount bushing and the frame would decrease the amount of lateral (side to side) movement between the body and the frame as compared to mounting the lift block between the upper body mount bushing and the body. The longitudinal (up and down) movement between the two methods should be about the same.
Anybody ever thought about this? Do you think one method has an advantage over the other? Or are they going to be similar in performance, so it doesn't really matter? Or am I just some wacko that is WAY too ****?
What do you think?
Since I'm going to be installing a 2" body lift soon on my 91 4dr, I've been studying a number of the writeups on this site about this subject.
I've noticed that the lift blocks are installed on top of the upper rubber body mount bushing, so that the body rests directly on the lift block.
My question is: What about installing the lift blocks with the upper rubber body mount bushing next to the body, which would mean that the lift block would be resting directly on the frame?
The reason I ask this, is that I was looking at pictures of the lift block installation, and it seemed to me that with the lift block next to the body, there would be more tendency for the body to lean, since the 2" or 3" lift block has created a 2" or 3" torque arm to act against the upper body mount bushing, which sits on the frame.
If you installed the lift block underneath the upper rubber body mount bushing, so the lift block is resting on the frame and the body is on top of the upper body mount bushing, the torque arm of the assembly would be reduced to approximently the stock setup without the lift block, provided the lift block does not rotate on the frame.
It seems to me that mounting the lift block between the upper body mount bushing and the frame would decrease the amount of lateral (side to side) movement between the body and the frame as compared to mounting the lift block between the upper body mount bushing and the body. The longitudinal (up and down) movement between the two methods should be about the same.
Anybody ever thought about this? Do you think one method has an advantage over the other? Or are they going to be similar in performance, so it doesn't really matter? Or am I just some wacko that is WAY too ****?
What do you think?