• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

Pic thread? Looking for m1009's with minimal lift.

TCUCV

New member
213
0
0
Location
Chocowinity, NC
Hey etech, doesn't seem like much of a flex there . . . I've been wheeling and have rubbed 31's w/ no lift. I think if you actually put that blazer to the test those fenders would look a lot different. I've been pondering putting 35's on with no lift, but would definitely have to cut the **** out of the fenders to make them work. I agree they do fit in the fender well, but only if you go over ant hills.

Good looking truck but just my $.02 on your setup
 

etech

New member
35
1
0
Location
Blythe California
the front stock shocks were the limiting factor for flex, they were working as limiting straps, have my new shocks on and the only place it rubbed with this set up was the fender well bulge on the front of the fender well of the drivers side. it worked well, and ya I trimmed the fenders but not too much, the 39" bfg's measure a actual 38.5 inches tall... and while flexing the tires tucked up nicely, however your simi correct on the rear, I had to run wheel spacers to keep the rear tires inner side walls from contacting the inner fender well, and if the axle travels straight up then it hits the sidewall steps of the baja tire ( the ribs on the sidewall) on the outer finder lip, I have been unable to roll the inner fender lip and the extra edge was hitting the tire. this made me decide to develop the shackles and other items for the truck as well as ( Gasp) more lift... with that said

here is the new set up for my CUCV, still have stock leafs as they flex rather well, and ride nice, I have build the custom front long travel shackles like in the solidworks drawing I have posted before, for shocks I have 10" travel sway a way resi race shocks up front, and they will soon be replaced with 2.5 inch sway a way bypass shocks, and out back I have 2.5 inch sway a way resi shocks, the shackles up front made for another 1.5 inches of lift and out back Im planning on doing custom leaf packs but for now I went cheap and used lift blocks, 2" back, that brings the total lift ( minus the hight of the tires lifting the truck, ) to front 1" with zero rate leaf springs from orw and my shackles another 1.5"= 2.5 inches front, keep in mind too that I did have to move the front axle forward 1.5" with the zero rate leafs this set up would not have been possible with out doing that. out back is stock with the addition of the race shocks and 2" blocks. the front pulls about 10" travel while the rear is pulling about 13.5" of vertical travel. I'm happy with the set up, it wheels well, and gets around rather good, its a little taller then I would have liked, ( i'm looking for a set of kodiac steps for my daughter and wife to get in but have not found any)

Next up are longer brake lines as they get tight now at full flex and full drop, and a cross over steering as my drivers side tire hits the steering shaft when fully turning to the right, and a dana 60 front and 14 bolt rear axle, or have been toying around with maybe doing mog axles on it. or c303 axles... would be different but sorta fun, just not sure how they will do at freeway speeds, I hear the hubs may not be able to handle the high speeds of the freeway, any input from anyone that knows about the portal axles would be greatly appreciated.

here are a couple pics from the last test session,
 

Attachments

Last edited:

etech

New member
35
1
0
Location
Blythe California
Tcucv, to answer your previous post, all you have to do to fit 35's on is get the orw zero rate leaf, and move the front axle forward, I'm my opinion the axle is too close to the firewall on these style trucks any way,( something any one can see turn your tires and get out and look, they are off set in the fender opening) do a little trimming( really not much on the front) heck you may not even need to trim if you go forward, i trimmed before i moved the axle forward, So really cant say on that part, and none on the rear, 35's WILL clear, tuck, and turn with no problem... except they do hit the steering tie rod at full turn to the right due to moving the axle forward, only enough to tear the grease boot on the front tie rod. bigger tires will actually rub the tie rod. My .02 cents is go for it.. To me people seem timid to try new things, and rely on the magazines too much to tell them whats possible, as a Mechanical Engineer and a off road racer, I see things every day that the general public say is not possible, which is why I'm a firm believer in experience is the best teacher.

I don't like running 39's on my blazer, but I did only because I get them cheep,( basically recycled from our race truck) we run a race and have tons of these really expensive tires left over, its a shame to see them go to waste, as retail on them is over 700 +/- each, if you can find a shop that will/can order them, and they are not the street legal bajas, which many shops can get those. if i had my choice Id run 37's. that would eliminate a ton of extra things I had to do to make these work.

As a racer we go by these standards. Mini/ mid size trucks, should run 33's to 35's for prerunning and daily driver duties, and recommend 37's for race. Full sizes should run 35's if mostly on the street and daily driver but 37's work well for hd trucks, and 37 to 39's for race trucks, starting this year many of the full size race trucks will be running 42's, which i think is totally crazy, why would any one want to add another 50 pounds of unsprung weight for only 1.5 inches of ground clearance.. ( current tire size we run is 39x13.50x17r, the new tires are going to be 42x14.50x20R, many teams have a hard time keeping drive train parts alive with the 39's, my bet is were going to see a lot of broken trucks on the side of the road at the next race when the 42's roll out. which is good for us. )

with all this said, I like things different, I don't like to lift my truck x amount because 4wheel mag said I have to to make it work, as a Engineer I know I don't have to do that in order to make it work, and as a racer I like the low and wide look with large tires while no one can deny that a lower center of gravity will always help the handling of any vehicle especially a truck with a short wheel base and lots of top end weight of the 1009. I strive to not build cookie cutter trucks, and like to push the envelope to see what I can get a way with, or in this case as little as i can get away with. The goal of my cucv was to make a reliable inexpensive truck for a chase vehicle that can be fun on the weekends, and gets decent millage while not caring about the fuel quality of the gas in Mexico, can provide chase support for our race team, and be really reliable, all while soaking up the bumps decently and still have the ability to get out on the trails while carrying a load. So far this truck is exactly that truck. While its not finished, it is well on its way.

I appreciate your or anyone's input for that matter and it makes me very happy to hear what others have done and their ideas, I'm sure most here are of the same feeling, which is why I posted here in the first place to brake the thought that you have to lift it high to clear the tires. Which is what most all racers already know. The thread heading said looking for 1009's with minimal lift. I have a 1009 with minimal lift clearing very large tires, and it works for me while maybe not for others I just wanted to show it can be done, proving that thinking out of the box can be rewarding in its own right... just my .02 cents. thanks and sorry for the long post, I get carried away.

with that said cheers to you, and hope to hear some more and see what others have done.. keep the pics a flowin'
:beer:
 

Woodsman

New member
36
0
0
Location
New Albany, IN
33's with 2 inch rough country lift
I've been lurking around here for the last few weeks and looking for ideas of what to look for in a M1009. Sometime in the very near future I see one of these sitting in the driveway. In the past I drove the civilian version of these and really liked the truck, although lately I've come to really like the MV version. Seriously looking at them now. This would be my daily driver and I'm not looking to climb trees or mountains, just an occasional off-road venture where necessary.

With that said, I found this thread and really like the looks of this truck and hoped you guys would tolerate some questions from a FNG.

In an effort to not disturb the handling of the vehicle (trying to maintain the center of gravity) if the lift is 2", should wheel spacers also be used to shift the tires outward? Any known problems with using spacers?

And, it is my understanding you can still get a 33" spare on the factory tire rack. Is that right?

And, since I'm a FNG at all of this lift business is the lift used here a body lift or a suspension lift? Try not to flame me, I seriously don't know. What is the benefit of either one?

Thanks guys. This looks like a lot of fun.

edit: I forgot to ask; with a 2" lift and 33" tires what is a decent estimate of the distance from ground to the rocker panel? from the picture it doesn't look much different than an H3.
 
Last edited:

67_C-30

New member
645
3
0
Location
Sweet Home Alabama!
I've been lurking around here for the last few weeks and looking for ideas of what to look for in a M1009. Sometime in the very near future I see one of these sitting in the driveway. In the past I drove the civilian version of these and really liked the truck, although lately I've come to really like the MV version. Seriously looking at them now. This would be my daily driver and I'm not looking to climb trees or mountains, just an occasional off-road venture where necessary.

With that said, I found this thread and really like the looks of this truck and hoped you guys would tolerate some questions from a FNG.

In an effort to not disturb the handling of the vehicle (trying to maintain the center of gravity) if the lift is 2", should wheel spacers also be used to shift the tires outward? Any known problems with using spacers?

And, it is my understanding you can still get a 33" spare on the factory tire rack. Is that right?

And, since I'm a FNG at all of this lift business is the lift used here a body lift or a suspension lift? Try not to flame me, I seriously don't know. What is the benefit of either one?

Thanks guys. This looks like a lot of fun.

edit: I forgot to ask; with a 2" lift and 33" tires what is a decent estimate of the distance from ground to the rocker panel? from the picture it doesn't look much different than an H3.
If you are going with 33's, no lift will actually be needed, but if you do want to go with a 2" lift, a 2" suspension lift with be the best route. You could do a 2" body lift, but they look like crap, IMO, because the bumpers are 2" lower than the body. A 2" lift is pretty economical with 2" springs in the front, and 2" blocks in the rear (you can't run blocks in the front). A 33 will fit in the spare tire carrier. On the height of the rocker panel, I'd say it will probably be a little higher than the H3, because new vehicles, by design, had lower floors and rockers. Mine has 33's, and I will get a measurement from mine tomorrow, and you can figure 2" higher since mine has no lift.

On the wheel spacers they won't be necessary, but I prefer running a 1.5" spacer on the rear to space out the rear wheels to match the front. In stock form, the front wheel track is wider than the rear. Below are before after pics of my truck with and without the spacers on rear.
 

Attachments

ooo

New member
1
0
0
Location
nyc
Hi. This is my M1009 with stock springs running 33x12.5 R15 BFG Mud Terrain KM2s. I have them aired down to 17psi while exploring Pennsylvania coal mining country. I cut out the tiny bit of the bottom back of the front fenders as mentioned in other posts and adjusted the steering stop bolt since the driver side tire rubbed slightly on the pitman arm tie rod end when turning hard left. I haven't had any issues since.

I want to thank everyone on this list for all the help you've given me getting this thing in order since I bought it in late December. I have put over 5000 miles on it since then which include driving the James Bay Winter Road with temperatures at -15 degrees fahrenheit. This forum is absolutely amazing. Thanks Again!
 

Attachments

CUCV85

Member
309
4
18
Location
central/ny
this is how they should have been Stock...

Here are before and after shots of my M1009. Tires in both photos are 33x12.50x15 Goodyear Wrangler DuraTracs. After photo has 2" Rough Country suspension lift.
I have the 4 inch Rough Country. Mine is to high with 33 1250 BFG AT ko's
I should have gone with your 2 inch!

Oh well, when I wear the tires off I will have to go to 35's same brand love the tires just went to high of lift. Bought the tires when had the stock set up.
 

Anubis8472

New member
149
3
0
Location
Redford, Michigan
If you are going with 33's, no lift will actually be needed, but if you do want to go with a 2" lift, a 2" suspension lift with be the best route. You could do a 2" body lift, but they look like crap, IMO, because the bumpers are 2" lower than the body. A 2" lift is pretty economical with 2" springs in the front, and 2" blocks in the rear (you can't run blocks in the front). A 33 will fit in the spare tire carrier. On the height of the rocker panel, I'd say it will probably be a little higher than the H3, because new vehicles, by design, had lower floors and rockers. Mine has 33's, and I will get a measurement from mine tomorrow, and you can figure 2" higher since mine has no lift.

On the wheel spacers they won't be necessary, but I prefer running a 1.5" spacer on the rear to space out the rear wheels to match the front. In stock form, the front wheel track is wider than the rear. Below are before after pics of my truck with and without the spacers on rear.
Yeah that offset is intended to increase traction and stability.
The wider front axle for stability, and the more narrow rear axle is to allow the rear tires to bite fresh terrain instead of trudging in the front's rut. To me it's one of those things that don't look so bad knowing it's purpose.

When it comes to lift/tires/looks ratio the key really is to go big on tires and small on lift 'IMO'.
All these pics makes me wish I had one of my old '78 K-5 with it's (don't recall size) tiny 6" wide bias ply's echoing in those big chevy fenders.
For that I went to 33x13.5's with a set of very 'square' looking off road tires and the look was phenominal. They would rub only on a heavy compression, and on a full turn they would just kiss the steering arm/rubber boot.

One thing I've noticed with my M1009 is that the rear sits lower in relation to the front, my old '78 didn't do that. I thought my rear springs must be sagged, but looking through the pics it looks like that's normal for these.

Do any of the TM's etc. list a factory ride height for these? I havn't been able to find anything, but those numbers would be helpfull in determining tire size/lift preference. I'm planning on 33x12.5's and considering maybe a two inch lift, depending on how healthy my springs are.
 

cpf240

Active member
1,479
5
38
Location
Free in Northern Idaho
We are thinking about 33s for our M1009, as it will ( does ) need tires soon. A lift was not in the discussion, but I do like the looks of the 2" lifts I've seen here, so that may happen one of these days as well.

My goal, at the moment, is to find a 33" that does not rub, at least not in normal day to day road use. It seems that there is some variation amongst tire brands as well as tread patterns within a particular brand that may, or may not, cause the tires to rub with no lift. The stock wheels will be used as well.

I was glad to see that one responder mentioned that a 33" will still fit the stock spare tire carrier, as I don't have that safari rack yet!
 
Top