PackMule
Well-Known Member
Looks like Casey250 has a lot of videos out there. Do you know which one he referenced it in? Rough date he posted it, or # on the video would be good to research it down.Casey250 on youtube has a bunch of videos of the JLRD he wheels. In one of the first videos with the new JL, he put a lift on it and noticed the bumpstop was different on the diesel. He suspected something hangs lower in the engine compartment, so Jeep modified the bumpstops for less up-travel to keep the axle from hitting. I'm not sure if he did further research, but it's worth checking out. It also seems like the stock Fox shocks are way too soft in both compression and rebound, at least my stock setup was.
So, here's info we have on this thread:
- Gruffid has 2-5/8 uptravel on diesel rubicon.
- I have 2-15/16 on diesel rubicon.
- ScottLars has just under 3" on Sport-S diesel
- Renegade estimates he had about 3" on gas rubicon
So, seems as though FCA engineers targeted 3" as the uptravel on all JTs.
I've seen other posts on other threads indicating displeasure the gas rubi springs/shocks were too soft. Rubi's are heavier than other builds. Diesels are heavier still.
My suspicion is even though the static clearance of all builds are at ~3" uptravel, and heavier builds have stiffer springs, that doesn't translate to the same road experience with heavier builds... so the spring rates and or shock tunes on the heavier builds do not absorb the same terrain as the rates and tunes on the lighter builds. The heavier weight seems to compress that residual 3" on more minor bumps than on lighter builds, even with the stiffer springs.
So, us rubi-diesel owners are going to have to look for stiffer aftermarket solutions. Even more so if we are adding either static weight (armor, winches, canopies) or dynamic weight (overlanding, trailering, or payload) to our use of the JT.
Sponsored