CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
Alcan Spring
- Thread starter TJ1978
- Start date
SuperAwesomeDOOD
Registered Member
I dunno, front stock is 47” and they make them 48”.
4link kit
Are you just talking about the rear kit and keeping the leafs? Or coilovers?
Refer to ktm's pic . . 4link both end . . Its not my money
ORD 48" fronts on this one. I had to get a custom front driveshaft from Tom Woods to handle the amount of travel, since I don't have a high pinion 60.
I wish I could afford the ORD coilover kit. Not going to happen anytime soon.Refer to ktm's pic . . 4link both end . . Its not my money
Really, unless your going to be rock crawling with it, I'd just go stock length springs. It'll ride Great and still flex awesome without all the work of moving mounts and such.
Going off the shelf springs, yeah, get longer. But not needed with the customs.
Going off the shelf springs, yeah, get longer. But not needed with the customs.
I don't remember if Stephen said it out right to me, but I've always had the impression he wasn't too sold on 52" front springs. The custom 48"ish springs can work just as good. I think its a matter of, sure you can do 52" springs but the stock length is just fine. At least in reference to the custom ORD springs.
SuperAwesomeDOOD
Registered Member
It seems like there’d be more low hanging fruit too, as the shackle would be pushed back under the frame. Unless you move the main eye further forward which would decrease approach.
Stephen and I have discussed this so I hope he doesn’t mind, the 48 inch springs can be setup to provide 10-12 inches of travel which is usually more than any stock steering can handle. Also when you get past that the trucks will get more floaty and harder to control on the road due to a much lower rate. The 52 inch stuff basically gives you a bit more linear rate and more travel than that but exacerbates those traits more. The general consensus is if you want a 52 that’s usually someone not wanting coilovers or who is pushing their rig to the limits. The 48 is for the rest of us who wheel reasonably and push limits but not quite as extreme. In short terms the 52 isn’t probably worth the squeeze cause the 48 will do all the 52 will do but be more responsive and less floppy overall.
I had 52” ord’s in front and rear. Stephen told me to get 48 front but I wanted the 52’s, because in my brain I needed them to match lol. They were amazing, but when I swapped to the Dana 60 and 40’s, it was too much unsprung weight for the springs to control laterally. It needed a track bar. Hence the now 4-link lol.
Cons of a 52" front:
require new mounts which cost cash, effort or both
springs cost more just because they're a little longer
The front of the spring will stick out farther eating up approach angle. This one makes the 52" spring less suited to hard rocks than people thing because you have to first get the tire to the rock to use the suspension flexibility to get over the rock.
Pros of the 52" swap:
the extra length does allow more travel or can give you a desired travel amount at lower stress. This second part is rarely a requirement since as mentioned above, long travel with leaf springs is hard to drive fast. But we're working with a hill and hole racer now that would be a good candidate for the longer spring to keep his desired travel amount so it does happen occasionally. That steering wheel is going to be a handful but when the rules say leaf springs, you run leaf springs.
That's about it. The softer spring rate that people think is automatic isn't so much. We can make the rate what we need independent of length for the most part. What I like to say about that is an 8 foot long dump truck spring isn't going to be soft and flexy because it's 8 feet long. It's going to carry a dumptruck because it's built to carry a dumptruck.
For most people, sticking with the stock length works best till you are ready for links and round springs.
require new mounts which cost cash, effort or both
springs cost more just because they're a little longer
The front of the spring will stick out farther eating up approach angle. This one makes the 52" spring less suited to hard rocks than people thing because you have to first get the tire to the rock to use the suspension flexibility to get over the rock.
Pros of the 52" swap:
the extra length does allow more travel or can give you a desired travel amount at lower stress. This second part is rarely a requirement since as mentioned above, long travel with leaf springs is hard to drive fast. But we're working with a hill and hole racer now that would be a good candidate for the longer spring to keep his desired travel amount so it does happen occasionally. That steering wheel is going to be a handful but when the rules say leaf springs, you run leaf springs.
That's about it. The softer spring rate that people think is automatic isn't so much. We can make the rate what we need independent of length for the most part. What I like to say about that is an 8 foot long dump truck spring isn't going to be soft and flexy because it's 8 feet long. It's going to carry a dumptruck because it's built to carry a dumptruck.
For most people, sticking with the stock length works best till you are ready for links and round springs.
So what I get out of that post is.....
we are all upgrading to dump truck springs, because Stephen said so.
we are all upgrading to dump truck springs, because Stephen said so.
@Stephen I thought my mind was made up on buying some sweet ORD 52's until you made this post. Damn you! 
Is it really that huge of a difference for that extra 5" when driving on the highway with your new crossover swaybar? I want that smooth Cadillac ride on a rough trail going 60mph without paying the coilover tax.
For the rear, I was going to stick with 56" since 64" looks to be a pain with the mounts and the K5 tank clearance.
Also, do you have any of the 8' long dump springs in stock?
Is it really that huge of a difference for that extra 5" when driving on the highway with your new crossover swaybar? I want that smooth Cadillac ride on a rough trail going 60mph without paying the coilover tax. For the rear, I was going to stick with 56" since 64" looks to be a pain with the mounts and the K5 tank clearance.
Also, do you have any of the 8' long dump springs in stock?
Enjoyed the insider Texas joke here...
If you want Death Sauce don't ask them for Creamy Jalapeno....
-G
Sweet! How much lift on the springs?
Last edited:
I thought I was the only one who got that. Now I want free birds. Blazer trip!!Enjoyed the insider Texas joke here...
If you want Death Sauce don't ask them for Creamy Jalapeno....
-G
Pro tip. Move your 47s forward and optimize your shackle to match your springs. Better approach angle and predictable behavior offroad. I like the firmer shorter spring personally.
52s were intended to be cheap and typically the collateral damage from swapping them doesnt really work out now that custom springs are very attainable for normies.
52s were intended to be cheap and typically the collateral damage from swapping them doesnt really work out now that custom springs are very attainable for normies.
I believe that they were supposed to be 3.5" since I have a D60 giving it another small bump up.
I know that the rear is shackle flip with tired K10 springs and a 1" zero-rate. It sat right until after BB20, now the rear springs are done, squat butt again.
I need to go order some new rears, but I have to finish some other projects first.
I did go pick up a set of 4 ORD spec springs for a friend today. The guys at Alcan told me how they have been slammed, and ORD had sent them lots of orders! They were pleased!
