2002 Nissan Pathfinder w/ Old Man Emu suspension

Moody

Needs to get out more
Ronin152 said:
Hey man can you take some pictures of the front struts?
Sure, I am not certain you'll be able to see much unless I take off the tires, but you can get the idea...I -think- I have some front spacers I had made around here you could add some lift with...I can't remember if I recycled them or not. The autocad drawings came from another kind expo member...and I had a shop make them.
 

Ronin152

New member
Yeah I just wanted to check it out. Thanks man. Did you use the strut spacer with the lift or just used that by its self? Did the cruiser outfitters give you a good deal? Do you know by any chance if the ome struts / shocks are mono or twin tube? Are the rear shocks noticeabley larger in diameter then the stock ones? Sorry man for all the ?'s I just want to make sure I make the right decision.
 

Moody

Needs to get out more
Ronin152 said:
Yeah I just wanted to check it out. Thanks man. Did you use the strut spacer with the lift or just used that by its self? Did the cruiser outfitters give you a good deal? Do you know by any chance if the ome struts / shocks are mono or twin tube? Are the rear shocks noticeabley larger in diameter then the stock ones? Sorry man for all the ?'s I just want to make sure I make the right decision.
No, I didn't use any spacers. Cruiser Outfitters is very fair.
I have no idea if they are mono or twin tube. I bet it is on the arbsa.com website though.
Rear shocks were roughly twice the size of the stock setup. It is really an excellent setup. I enjoy driving the Nissan around town more than I do my 80 since it is almost sporty with the OME suspension, and is much more powerful...
 
After you did the lift did you notice any extra vibration from the front CVs at highway speed?

Why would you consider it an upgrade?

The mounting style for 99.5 and later shocks is an upgrade because the shock are allowed to move parrallel with the axle during flex. This reduces stress on the shock busings.

Moody, would you happen have pictures of what the lower shock mounts look like?
 

Moody

Needs to get out more
system-f said:
After you did the lift did you notice any extra vibration from the front CVs at highway speed?



The mounting style for 99.5 and later shocks is an upgrade because the shock are allowed to move parrallel with the axle during flex. This reduces stress on the shock busings.

Moody, would you happen have pictures of what the lower shock mounts look like?

No vibrations at all. Amazing difference over stock (and worn-out) suspension.

I don't have pics-my wife daily drives this, and is student teaching so she is gone a ton, but I will get those pics for you and Ronin152.
It is supposed to snow all weekend, but I will snap some pics.
 

Moody

Needs to get out more
Here are some more pics, hopefully this will show what you folks are looking for.
IMG_2777.jpg

IMG_2776.jpg

IMG_2775.jpg

IMG_2774.jpg
 

nissandoms47

New member
The only downside I can see to the newer r50 rear shock mounting style is that the lower shock mount hangs down sooo low compaired to older r50s.
 

Ronin152

New member
Wouldn't the lower be ok because its so close to the wheels that and thing that could possibly hit it would be lifted out of the way because the tire would travel over it first except for maybe a oddly shapped rock or something.
 

vengeful

Explorer
You'd think so. Ask Pezzy about her mishap on Whompum sometime. :oops:

For those not in the know, Pezzy, who drives a 99.5 Pathfinder, with the new style rear suspension, ripped off a lower shock mount, on a trail called Whompum at what used to be Paragon Adventure Park in Pennsylvania.
 

Moody

Needs to get out more
Ronin had asked for the measurements post-lift. Specifically from the ground to the bottom edge of the fender at its peak. For reference, I am running the stock 255/65/16 tires, which are at approximately 1/2 tread.
Rear: 33 inches
Front: 33.5 inches


If anyone has the stock measurements, I would be interested to see how it compares.
 

Ronin152

New member
Hey man thanks so much for the measurements. Adjusted for your tire size and tire wear my ride height was Front: 31.85625" and Rear: 31.40625". So according to that you gained Front:1.64375" and Rear:1.59375". Thanks man thats exactly how much lift I was looking for.
 

Moody

Needs to get out more
Swapped the street tires for a set of Bridgestone Dueler AT, in the 245/70/16 size. According to a general metric tire converter, my factory 255/65/16's measured in at 29.1x10x16. The new Bridgestones measure in at 29.5x9.6x16.
Slightly taller, but skinnier.

I was slightly concerned I would lose some of the peppiness of the Nissan motor, going with the somewhat taller tire. I figured the skinnier tire would offset it, and it did. I am seeing the same mileage overall, and it still has the 'get up and go' that make driving the Nissan enjoyable. I am really pleased with the Bridgestone tires, and I even took them up to a lake last Sat. with 4wd engaged. I had driven the road before the suspension and on the stock size tires, which was fine, but now having the suspension in place and the new AT tires, it made all the difference. I had -no- tire slippage at all, and the little extra height was nice as the road is extremely rocky.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,534
Messages
2,875,615
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top