Standard WJ ride height

[drover]

Bb have a look thru the stickies here, the subject has had big coverage especially as to whats legal or not. Have a yarn with your chosen suspension mob they should be able to tell you what 2" lift actually is based on.
It's actually a can of worms I reckon, lots of heresay, but the pics Bodgie posted is actually what the Transport blokes would base things on.

[Hanna]

Originally Posted by bbbflash

Ok, now I'm confused. I have a 17" rim on 235/65. When I measure from Center of rim to the bottom the the wheel arch, it reads almost 500. I also measured from the bottom of the rim to the wheel arch and it is almost spot on sitting at 740mm. Is that standard height? My build sheet didn't say anything about an upcountry package. I would like a 2" spring and coil lift for now so am I correct in thinking that when I get that the measurement from the bottom of the rim to wheel arch will be 780ish?

Sorry mate - I just read back through my post and realised I got the measurements wrong. I have fixed it now to avoid confusing others...

My suspension measurement is around 525-530mm hub-to-arch all round (unladen). This makes my bottom of rim-to-arch measurment about 745-750mm. It is slightly higher in the rear, probably due to the 10mm spacers. To confirm the 2 dimensions, I measured from the bottom of the rim to the wheel centre and it is almost exactly 220mm.

Your rims are 17", which means your rim-to-arch measurement will be 12.7mm greater than another WJ/WG with the same suspension, but running 16" rims. (i.e. 17"/2 = 8.5", 8.5"-8"=1/2" = 12.7mm). So you say that your WG is 740mm rim-to-arch, making the "comparative" ride height 727mm - only 18mm shorter than mine. Then you say the hub-to-arch measurement is almost 500mm, making the difference to mine more than 25mm. Something about your measurements don't quite add up??

Anyway, either way you look at it I reckon your WG already has a lift kit installed - probably a 30 or 40mm kit.

I'm not sure where bodgie found those standard ride height dimensions, but they cannot be right. Even if you take the minimum vertical measurements of 505mm (F) and 525mm (R) from the table, they are still almost as high as mine is now with the 3" IRO lift.

If you read anywhere on the US forums (Just like this thread for example: http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f13/0...-gives-815600/), the standard ride height for American WJ's was: Front 18" (or 457mm) and Rear 18.25" (464mm). If you add 3" (or 76.2mm) to those measurements and you have 533mm (F) and 540mm (R). If you then account for the sag in my second-hand springs of roughly 10mm, those measurements are pretty much spot on.

I reckon yours probably has a 40mm lift kit installed which has sagged a little as well. i.e. 457mm + 40mm = 497mm (F) and 464mm + 40mm = 504mm (R). The "Up-country" suspension upgrade on Australian WJ/WG's was actually supposed to be only 3/4" (or 19mm), so there's no way you'd be sitting at your current height without an additional spring lift upgrade, especially since your springs would have sagged over time. Unless you somehow managed to get lucky on a set of factory springs that were made on a Friday afternoon?

All things said and done, I know not all Jeeps would have rolled out of the factory the same, but if even some of the measurements you posted are correct, your Jeep has a lift. Just accept it as good luck!!

Why don't you post a side-on photo of your Jeep on this forum as that will confirm it 100%.

Cheers,
Hanna

[drover]

Bodgie would have got the specs from here; http://myrta.com/rvd/searchRVD.do?submitValue=start enter 21178-575361 in the CPA box and hit search it will download the vehicle data sheet on the WG CRD. I actually think the height data is a bit out of whack myself.

[Hanna]

It's definitely out of whack - but I've just realised that this is not a bad thing at all!! If this information is what is listed on the official Federal Department of Transport documents, then I can lift mine another 18mm at the rear and still be at "Standard" height, even with my 3" lift!

Not only that, I can also go 50mm above that (both front and rear) and still be legal!!

Better still, looking at the data sheet for my WJ Limited here:

http://myrta.com/rvd/searchRVDResult...bmitValue=view

Namely:

SUSPENSION DATA SHOWN IS FOR STANDARD SUSPENSION -FOR UP-COUNTRY SUSPENSION - (LAREDO) FRONT
424MM, REAR 548MM (LIMITED) FRONT 569MM, REAR 586MM

Technically, I can go to 569mm + 50mm = 619mm (F) and 586mm + 50mm = 638mm (R) and still be legal!!!

(i.e. Another 94mm (F) and 108mm (R)).

So, essentially I can go to a 6.5" lift front and rear and I'll still be legal.....

Of course, we know this is all bullshit, but honestly what chance are you having insurance knocked back or getting booked by the cops if you can show that you're within the specifications provided in the official DoT documentation? Serious question!

I can feel an upgrade coming on....

[bodgie]

I reckon that is a pretty fair argument, as long as the vehicle is within the official compliance heights there should be no arguments.

But then again we are talking about insurance companies.

Jason

[briteway]

I'm with you there Hanna! It seems that my WH was 12mm lower all around but could be due to sag after many years.

I also took measurements after body lift, I should measure it again to see if there was any sag since and then maybe I could squeeze in another inch.

[drover]

I had thought that a few years back but didn't want to advertise it.....