Giant 64 kit vs q80

hobbyturnedobsession · Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:22 pm

I agree with Tony. His bronco works great with a 2.5" width spring. I opted for the 3" because i thought with no sway bars and pulling trailers that id find the 3" better suited for my setup. I love my j40 spring pack. Ive never had an issue bottoming out myself but they do ride a bit stiffer. Its all in preference.

Agui-E7TE · Post by **Agui-E7TE** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:32 pm

tcm glx wrote:
D1cker1 wrote:Augi,

Can another .5" on a spring really provide that much more stability you think?
Could it be the rear shock setup/valving?

Just my two cents..... I'd say so many different things play a roe here....track width, shock valving, coil spring rate in the front, coil over vs coil and shock, etc etc etc........

I've seen both Randy and Jeremy's truck incredibly well, and can equally say the same about a 2.5" spring. Valving is what is important here IMO.

Auggie, bottoming out hard can be a lack of proper bump setup as well as shock setup.

Nope! Bottoming out was due to flying through the whoops at a hair over 70 mph and then passing a slow JK towards the right making us hit a piece where the sand drops off at least 4 ft (possibly 5 ft).

We did this at full speed going at least 70 mph becuase if we had let off it might have been worse especially with four people in the Bronco. It was hard enough to cause the twin electric fans to fail. One sheared all but one fan blade and the other one was vibrating hard enough to make us think the engine was misfiring... even though it was off. Oh yeah, we also managed to pull the ECU out far enough to keep us from getting fuel or spark. The bumpstops held up on the initial hit but the bolt that holds them sheared off and then we had no bumpstops. They were still in great useable shape.

Agui-E7TE · Post by **Agui-E7TE** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:39 pm

D1cker1 wrote:Augi,

Can another .5" on a spring really provide that much more stability you think?
Could it be the rear shock setup/valving?

I think so. I've driven Jeff's Bronco plenty of times on the highway and off road and it does really awesome. It's at the level that I someday hope to get my Bronco to. I have F53s and although the springs do feel softer and ride awesome off road at moderate speeds (haven't really gone over 55 in the dirt yet in mine), they are not as stable on the highway. I would also think that it's easier to break a 2.5-Inch wide spring compared to a 3-inch wide spring which doesn't require spacers to take up the slack.

I will admit that I like that I can make my Bronco sway on the highway without changing lanes

Of course that doesn't mean it handles better... probably quite the opposite. It's mostly for scaring people who try to cut me off.. unless they're really talented and can impress me with a crazy pass.

Agui-E7TE · Post by **Agui-E7TE** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:44 pm

mkiefer wrote:
Fyi.. the j40 pack moves the rearend back. so you will need a d-shaft and the one thats here rubs the tires on the rear of the wheel openings. I think breaking the bumpstops off is a shock issue mostly.. More spring wont hurt though. I think 3 inch springs are better for most guys here, but not any of the ones that are off the shelf.

I wouldn't mind having to get my D-shaft lengthened but I'm also planning on swapping in a Currie F9 in the future so Maybe that wont be an issue for me.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 7:02 pm

philofab wrote:Some of you guys put way too much thought and worry into this stuff. All of it works and allows you to have fun.

I did the Baja trip with 12" Rancho RS5000s and stock leaves with a pro comp add a leaf kit. Leaves work pretty well and are proven, weather or not you choose a 64 kit or Deavers.

I'd still have F64s and SAW bypasses but I'm linking my Bronco so I can pull bitches at the local No Fear store.

I agree with philo. If we were all building race trucks, or dedicated prerunners i could understand putting soooo much thought into leafs. I'm running Autofab spec 3" national springs, and i like them. My truck is probably stiffer than most, but i'm very pleased with it's off road performance. On the road, i like the feeling of stability the springs give.

If i can keep up with Rick and Brian, then in my mind, my setup works just fine.

Agui-E7TE · Post by **Agui-E7TE** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 7:09 pm

Nick wrote:
philofab wrote:Some of you guys put way too much thought and worry into this stuff. All of it works and allows you to have fun.

I did the Baja trip with 12" Rancho RS5000s and stock leaves with a pro comp add a leaf kit. Leaves work pretty well and are proven, weather or not you choose a 64 kit or Deavers.

I'd still have F64s and SAW bypasses but I'm linking my Bronco so I can pull bitches at the local No Fear store.
I agree with philo. If we were all building race trucks, or dedicated prerunners i could understand putting soooo much thought into leafs. I'm running Autofab spec 3" national springs, and i like them. My truck is probably stiffer than most, but i'm very pleased with it's off road performance. On the road, i like the feeling of stability the springs give.

If i can keep up with Rick and Brian, then in my mind, my setup works just fine.

.. And that's just what I've sort of realized. I like the on road stability and would sacrifice the ride off road for more stability down the road. My plan is to rebuild my F53s to Q80s and try it for a bit and see if I like them. If it's too squirly down the road, I'll go with J40s. My basis wont be on off road performance but rather on road handling.

cuz_im_CR · Post by **cuz_im_CR** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:02 pm

What is the difference between the Q80 and the F53? I called deaver and they said they no longer stock the f53 and if I wanted the F53 it's a 3 week lead time and 800$!

Agui-E7TE · Post by **Agui-E7TE** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:07 pm

The F53 is the same spring as a Q80 except that the Q80 is a 4-Inch lift spring and it has an extra leaf in the pack. The F53 is a 3.5-Inch lift spring. I'm guessing the reason they stopped making them is because all the Bronco guys run a 4-Inch lift C&T beam up front so the Q80 would make more sense to keep it level.

economig · Post by **economig** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:38 pm

F53 is way better for flex... And I might have a brand new set for sale... Never mounted, no wait time...

Willing to take $799

Ha ha Jk, jk

robertcrav · Post by **robertcrav** » Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:58 pm

Lol, and I'll take $700 for a set just freshened from Deaver

cuz_im_CR · Post by **cuz_im_CR** » Wed Sep 12, 2012 12:33 am

well i currently have a F53 pack in the rear with a 2.5x16 3 tube bypass and the factory bump stop.

i got my bronco dialed in but it does bottom out too hard still. im trying to figure out if its worth investing the money in the springs i currently have or should i just drop the coin on the 64 kit. so i guess my question would be is the 64 kit going to be that much better versus the Q80 or F53 pack? i get the springs will last longer but i want to know if it will handle better.

Or should i just add a Hydro bump to my current setup and a bigger shock as it seems to get quite a bit of shock fade after driving for 20 minutes.

cuz_im_CR · Post by **cuz_im_CR** » Wed Sep 12, 2012 12:35 am

economig wrote:F53 is way better for flex... And I might have a brand new set for sale... Never mounted, no wait time...

Willing to take $799

Ha ha Jk, jk

i wish i would of known the guy you bought them from. He probably would have given me a much better deal...

AussieRod · Post by **AussieRod** » Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:56 am

I’m gonna throw my full 2 cents worth in here (and probably put my foot in my mouth doing it). Don’t take this as any kind of criticism, just my opinion.
I agree in principal with Philo, some of us are over thinking this, but then again, it pays to put some thought into a few things before deciding on the springs that would suit YOUR application. Consider these areas, How much of my driving time will my vehicle be fully loaded V unloaded (ie: DD)? What is my desert time V highway time? How much can I afford to spend?
These factors need to be considered into the equation.
Keeping in mind, a J40 (3” wide) spring pack is designed for a Bronco, the F53 (2.5” wide) is for a 2WD F150 pick-up, the Bronco is heavier unloaded than a pick-up, but the pick-up will be heavier at full load than a Bronco (due to the higher load capacity). Nearly all 2WD pick-ups spend their time on asphalt, so the twisting loads associated with going off road are not part of their lifespan. A 3” spring was probably used for 4WD pick-ups (and Broncos) to allow a longer service life for the spring, being able to better withstand the twisting / bending loads felt with axle articulation. The spring hangers are also thicker, for the same reason.
Yes, the F53 is softer, and allows more flex, but it is narrower and will break faster if it is used in high stress situations for LONG periods (ie: pre-running / chase vehicle use) than a 3” spring might. Its clear that without using a 2 link, the centre of the main leaf, regardless of width will fail first due to the flexing from wrap-up. F53’s will also have more sway with the softer spring rate than a J40. I am all about using what works for the application, and there are many rigs I have personally witnessed that work REALLY well with many different combinations of spring widths, types, configurations and all seem to do the job intended. Much of the differences could be attributed to shock positioning, type and mostly shock tuning. A longer shackle is IMHO an essential part of the rear suspension, as it allows more drop-out and also, more importantly, raises the height at which the spring will go into negative arch (the BIGGEST leaf killer!). Spacing down your bump stops might sound like limiting up travel, but keeping the negative arch to an absolute minimum can save a lot of wear and tear on the leaves over their lifetime. Ford fitted the 3” leaf to the 4WD vehicles it built for a reason, so I believe one might think about sticking to factory spring width in their application, and working from there. Like the TTB, leaf springs do an amazing job for how simple they are and take a lot of punishment. Use what works best (and fits into your budget), but above all, enjoy the use of your vehicle, whatever type it is.

economig · Post by **economig** » Wed Sep 12, 2012 5:36 am

cuz_im_CR wrote: i wish i would of known the guy you bought them from. He probably would have given me a much better deal...

lol

SC150 · Post by **SC150** » Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:57 pm

I've got Geoff's kit with the "Link Killer" shocks. I've got an F150, but it's got the shell, rack, dual spares, etc. The weight over the tires is probably pretty comparable.
As far as the ride with this spring/shock combo goes, I love it. It's VERY soft, though and probably not for everyone. It takes some getting used to on the road, but it's definitely manageable. I would want a stiffer ride with more ponies. Easy enough with a bit more valving.
I haven't noticed any sort of traction issues (wheel hop), but that may be due to my tired engine. I've had a bunch of different set ups in the back of full size fords, and wheel hop was always an issue. Not so on my truck now. Two link would be a peace of mind in my set up, but definitely not necessary from what I can attest to after beating the daylights out of it.
The spring under set up seems much more sensitive in regards to weight. I would notice a difference when fully loaded in my old spring over trucks, but it wouldn't be as drastic.
I mentioned all this to Geoff and he has different length shackles for different applications. I'll probably end up going to a shorter shackle to gain more ride height and get out of the bump a bit more. I might sacrifice a bit of travel, but I doubt I'll notice.

tcm glx · Post by **tcm glx** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:24 am

SC150 wrote:I've got Geoff's kit with the "Link Killer" shocks. I've got an F150, but it's got the shell, rack, dual spares, etc. The weight over the tires is probably pretty comparable.
As far as the ride with this spring/shock combo goes, I love it. It's VERY soft, though and probably not for everyone. It takes some getting used to on the road, but it's definitely manageable. I would want a stiffer ride with more ponies. Easy enough with a bit more valving.
I haven't noticed any sort of traction issues (wheel hop), but that may be due to my tired engine. I've had a bunch of different set ups in the back of full size fords, and wheel hop was always an issue. Not so on my truck now. Two link would be a peace of mind in my set up, but definitely not necessary from what I can attest to after beating the daylights out of it.
The spring under set up seems much more sensitive in regards to weight. I would notice a difference when fully loaded in my old spring over trucks, but it wouldn't be as drastic.
I mentioned all this to Geoff and he has different length shackles for different applications. I'll probably end up going to a shorter shackle to gain more ride height and get out of the bump a bit more. I might sacrifice a bit of travel, but I doubt I'll notice.

Pretty cool first hand experience. With your shell, you should be pretty close in weight.... How much travel are you pulling? How much is bump and how much is droop?

SC150 · Post by **SC150** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:14 pm

I believe it was 19 or 20 inches all said and done. Mark would know how much bump and droop it has. I really have no idea. Maybe 6-8" of bump travel?? It's pretty crazy how well it does in the rough. There's about a 25 mile stretch of 1.5-2 foot whoops on the North Road going to San Juanico that I run a lot. Used to have to take the long way around. I'm literally able to mash it @ 65 through the entire stretch without spilling a drop of my bee... soda. I didn't think a leaf sprung truck could work that well.

cs_drums · Post by **cs_drums** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:54 am

SC150 wrote:I believe it was 19 or 20 inches all said and done. Mark would know how much bump and droop it has. I really have no idea. Maybe 6-8" of bump travel?? It's pretty crazy how well it does in the rough. There's about a 25 mile stretch of 1.5-2 foot whoops on the North Road going to San Juanico that I run a lot. Used to have to take the long way around. I'm literally able to mash it @ 65 through the entire stretch without spilling a drop of my bee... soda. I didn't think a leaf sprung truck could work that well.

Wha your wheelbase? Did you get he 2.5 or 3.0 bypasses?

Deleted Account · Post by **Deleted Account** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:54 pm

cs_drums wrote:
SC150 wrote:I believe it was 19 or 20 inches all said and done. Mark would know how much bump and droop it has. I really have no idea. Maybe 6-8" of bump travel?? It's pretty crazy how well it does in the rough. There's about a 25 mile stretch of 1.5-2 foot whoops on the North Road going to San Juanico that I run a lot. Used to have to take the long way around. I'm literally able to mash it @ 65 through the entire stretch without spilling a drop of my bee... soda. I didn't think a leaf sprung truck could work that well.
Wha your wheelbase? Did you get he 2.5 or 3.0 bypasses?

it has 16 inch king 2.5 prerunners.. and they are mounted near verticle. And its 118

tcm glx · Post by **tcm glx** » Mon Sep 24, 2012 9:27 am

Just some clarifying information.... spoke to Scott at Deaver and the Q80s are still a 9 leaf pack, same as the F53s however they are using different thickness on the leafs themselves.

Picked up a set last week and was confused as to why it was still 9 leafs on them.