serious question about 6" lift

Ok well, I found some people that can help me swap in a solid front axle on my XK I know the computer might be an issue but I don't think the computer can tell the diff between a IFS and a solid axle especially since it will be locked. My question is how hard or is it even possible to get at least a 6" lift with the IFS. Will I have to get custom control arms or what. I know the issue is keeping the CV angle as stock as possible to not cause damage and wear it out every 3k miles. I've been real impressed with the XK and wish to hit harder obstacles. Also need to get wider tires and have them push out beyond the fender wells as well since I landed on that tree last weekend. Obviously this will be a mod for much later on down the road but I like to research things well in advance. I just need to figure out if I should just start on the solid axle idea or what. Oh the goal would be at least 35" tires not even sure if a 6" will be enough to get 35's. Well I have thick skin so lets here some opinions and experience let it fly thanks,:cool:

How would you even mount a solid axle ? I guess there would be a LOT of fabrication to be done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeilSmith

How would you even mount a solid axle ? I guess there would be a LOT of fabrication to be done.

---

I really have no idea to be honest with you. I know very little about suspension and axles. I would just have to trust this dude I guess if thats the route I end up going in.

Hey Sal, have you chatted with txbajacommander from the 'other' forum (he might be on this forum too, not sure)? I think he has a 6" lift and claims no problems. Might give you some insight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strokeZ

Hey Sal, have you chatted with txbajacommander from the 'other' forum (he might be on this forum too, not sure)? I think he has a 6" lift and claims no problems. Might give you some insight.

---

The problem is his XK is only 2 wheel drive. So 6" on the rear is no big deal and on the front with out having to consider CV axle angles and stuff like that is why he can get away with it and have no issues.

ahhhhh gotcha. that does make a huge difference.

Are you talking about getting a 4" Super Lift and adding the 2" spacers or a real 6" lift? If you are doing the pre mentioned, then I believe it has been said that your cv's would be at the same angle as like just running the spacer lift.....????......IDK, just saying what I've read (somewhere, I don't remember..LOL).

One issue that I see with that approach is the new SL xmember is already cut out for the front axle and it is very close when done right so as not to interfere. If you further increase the angle, you may have to cut more of the xmember and that may weaken it substantially.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamJEEP

Are you talking about getting a 4" Super Lift and adding the 2" spacers or a real 6" lift? If you are doing the pre mentioned, then I believe it has been said that your cv's would be at the same angle as like just running the spacer lift.....????......IDK, just saying what I've read (somewhere, I don't remember..LOL).

---

I would prefer a true 6" lift. But if adding the superlift dosent change the angle of the CV axle that might not be to bad I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strokeZ

One issue that I see with that approach is the new SL xmember is already cut out for the front axle and it is very close when done right so as not to interfere. If you further increase the angle, you may have to cut more of the xmember and that may weaken it substantially.

---

I would prefer not to do an axle swap if I don't have to. It's just an option a remote one but still an option.

The superlift replaces steering components to bring all the angles back to the stock specs. So theoretically you can add your current lift to the superlift and be no different in terms of CV angle that you are today. I would still want to fully research the front driveshaft interaction with the new crossmember and see how the u-joints would be impacted and make sure that the EGR module will function properly with the additional lift over 4". I can tell you that going from the RR lift to the SL was significant. After switching the 265's to 285's I am about 3.5" taller than the RR at the roofline. The rear diff is only about 0.6" higher than before, mainly due to the difference in tire radius.

Good topic and if stacking spacers can be done safely, then its something that I myself would consider in the future.

My biggest concern is the angles of the CV axles because off roading the way I do these will get stressed out. There are lots of benefits to going to a solid axle like getting it locked and articulation and stuff but not sure it is worth all the work and problems it will cause as well. If I can get 6" of lift keeping the IFS the benefits would be huge in ground clearance alone. I just don't want to be wearing out parts constantly and breaking down.

Fully agree with that Sal! I am certainly no expert in this, I just know what I do by talking with the installers / manufacturers. I know there are others on the forum that might have more background and expertise. Would be good to hear their opinion as well.

I so wish the XK had been designed with a solid axle front and rear. I just know from little experiance helping out with drag cars, adding rack and pinion and putting 9" ford rears in Chevy muscle cars. It takes quite a bit of fab work. It has to be RIGHT. Imagine the trouble getting the housing mounts in the correct spot, aligning with the rest of the drivetrain properly. What is there up in front to even weld to ? Not to mention when the computer freakin shuts down when you start it up. LOL !!

The most I would do is the 4 inch Superlift with an extra 1 inch spacer. Anything more then will start to give you problems. It would be similar to Phunkeydudes old setup. But with that you would really need either the jeepinbyal UCA's or the HD Uni-ball UCA's. Unless you were to take off both front and rear flares like seen on the jeepinbyal website you can forget about 35 inch tires. I think 34's (305/70R17) would be more like it if you had the proper back spaced wheel or used 1.25-1.5 inch spacers on the stock wheels. Also I believe KMAX looked into a SFA. Its possible, but would cost a small fortune.

so if you got the the SL and the UCA's would double stacking with the rc 2" lift work you think. Keeping in mind that it will be taken off road rather frequently. I did figure the stock flares would have to go and be replaced with something else something that may have kept me off that tree I slid into this weekend.

If your going to be taking it off road frequently I wouldnt go with a 2 inch on top of a 4. Id get some custom spacers like phunkeydude did for an extra inch of lift. That will keep your cv's at a better angle and put less stress on the UCA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 07JeepXK

If your going to be taking it off road frequently I wouldnt go with a 2 inch on top of a 4. Id get some custom spacers like phunkeydude did for an extra inch of lift. That will keep your cv's at a better angle and put less stress on the UCA.

---

I saw some double stacking threads around. I don't want to loose my wheel travel either. What parts in the suspension are causing the limits of the lift. Is it just the upper and lower controll arms?

Hey Sal, been wondering - what is the incentive to go 6" vs 4"? Are you just looking for more ground clearance? You might want to check kmax's comments from his last moab trip (in pictures). The issue he had may be amplified if you try to go higher w larger tires.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strokeZ

Hey Sal, been wondering - what is the incentive to go 6" vs 4"? Are you just looking for more ground clearance? You might want to check kmax's comments from his last moab trip (in pictures). The issue he had may be amplified if you try to go higher w larger tires.

---

It's all about the tire size 33" to small and wheel articulation. I'll have to check his thread out when I get home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sal-XK

I saw some double stacking threads around. I don't want to loose my wheel travel either. What parts in the suspension are causing the limits of the lift. Is it just the upper and lower controll arms?

---

The whole IFS is whats limiting your travel. I think you would need longer front control arms,long travel struts of some kind. I also don't know how much the rack and pinion is limiting it? I think getting rid of the rear swaybar and putting "disco's" swaybar disconnects up front will give you a bit more travel too...
Double stacking is kinda Ghetto IMO. They used to do that in the old days with blocks in the rear,and was totally illegal in the state of NJ. If you don't get better coils up front you'll feel very wobbly side to side. I noticed it with my RC Spacers up front .
Solid axle swap will probably cost a couple thousand to do it right. You might need a different t-case if you cant get the driveshaft on the same side as the front axle. Then a new steering box and all new steering components,then to get the geometry correct so you don't have any death wobble like Cherokees get..

If I was going bigger I would do the 4"or4.5 from Rusty's offroad,a set of 33s and just pick better lines when your wheelin. My 01 Cherokee with a 3.5" Rubicon Express lift,trimmed fenders and 33 BFG KM2's it handles all the blue,green and a couple of black trails in Rouch Creek. Then again it was a solid axle coil sprung vehicle !!:cool:
Attachment 387Attachment 388Attachment 389

Hey guys - I did look into the solid axle swap in great detail a while back. Here's a writup I did that covers most of the issues, though more would likely be discovered during the process.

I keep seeing offhand comments about a solid axle swap on our rigs and I was seriously considering it a few weeks back, if for nothing more than to be the first (that I know of). Liberty guys do it all the time, but I haven’t seen an XK with it yet. So I decided to write up what I’ve researched about this mod.

My goals – it would have to still be a decent daily driver and it would have to off-road better than it does now (otherwise, what’s the point?). By the time I finished looking into it, I wasn’t convinced either goal could be met without more trial and error than I was willing to endure, much less the open-ended financial aspect of something like this. And once started, there would be no turning back without great cost as well. Bottom line for me – I couldn’t experiment to this degree on a three year old, 35K rig that I depend on every day.

I went through the front end with a local fabricator, Mike at RMB 4x4 (rmb4x4.com) who’s done many SFA swaps on 4-runners and such. He was eager to do one on the Commander and the consensus is yes, it could be done pretty easily. I estimate about 7K to 8K to do the job, more if you swap out the rear axle to a JK spec D44 with electric locker and/or additional fabrication to lift the rear to match the front – more on that later.

I’m speaking from the point of view of a Quadradrive II guy. I apologize for not knowing more about the other available systems, but I will say - my suggestion to anyone serious about this, and I suspect that will be very few people – start with a non-QDII Commander. I was not interested in ditching what I consider a great rear axle for a JK rear axle. A lot of guys who build really big JK’s start with an X model since they’re going to ditch the axles anyway. That being said, I don’t know how the electronics will fare by removing only the front ELSD unit. (My assumption is the new JK front axle locker would be activated by a toggle switch as it is an on/off type unit as opposed to the ELSD which is variable from open to “lock”.) The electronics are a big question. ABS shouldn’t be a problem and ESP can be turned off. But there’s a lot more there working together than just those two systems. With QDII, the traction control would not know what to do without the ELSD front axle as would the stability program if you attempted to make it function. Maybe these systems could be made to work somehow, but someone smarter than me would have to figure it out. Otherwise, it appeared I might live with some of the systems non-functional and warning lights on the dash glaring at me.

I would start with a JK spec front Dana 44 with the electric locker. That would run around 3K give or take from Mopar. Problem with that right off the bat – it’s a 4.11 ratio. So if you choose to keep your current gear ratio (Commanders don’t come with better than 3.73 and I think that’s only in the QDII rigs), you’re already swapping new gears into the new front axle. And to go from 4.11’s to something worse like 3.73’s just hurts! Otherwise, if you can swap the gears in the rear to 4.11’s, you’re better off. But again, QDII guys (at least) can’t do that as aftermarket gear sets are not made for the ELSD rear axle. So there’s the motivation to put in a new JK rear axle, and another $2,500 bucks. But at least you then get the 4.11’s.

Everything having to do with the IFS comes off. Steering rack, knuckles, struts/coils, upper and lower control arms, bracketry/tabs to mount all that, etc. Some of it gets torched off, thus the “point of no return” I referred to. This isn’t something that can be reasonably undone. A Saginaw-type steering box would have to be mounted and with some reinforcement didn’t look like a big issue. This would have to be carefully done, however, as the unibody doesn’t lend itself to the stresses the box would see since it wasn’t engineered for it in the first place (like a ZJ or WJ). Especially since presumably, one would be turning 33’s or larger tires. It shouldn’t be too tough to modify the steering shaft (from steering wheel to steering box).

The factory strut towers are a good starting place to mount the new coils. The inner fender/fenderwell area would essentially be rebuilt using steel plate to reconstruct the basic shape of the inner fender. This would spread the load a little more than the OEM setup in anticipation of the larger stresses the unibody would see over time. Take a look at the WJ Mike built in the “complete builds” section of his site. It’s the ’01 Grand Cherokee with the flames down the side. He strengthened the front suspension mounting areas to handle the duty of a Dana 60 front end on that thing. The Commander build would be quite similar. The new axle will require a track bar (panhard rod) to control axle lateral movement. We thought extending the steel reinforcing down a bit might provide a way to mount the track bar to the chassis. This is another area where strength is important – track bars can’t come loose. For the control arms, my thought was the forked Rubicon Express long-arm parts for a 4.5” lifted JK. There is one point of attachment to the chassis and it makes install much simpler. We looked at modifying a cross member made for an XJ long arm lift which could be reliably welded to the Commander and is quite stout. This would provide a good mount for the front control arms. If the factory cross member is kept, it would have to be modified to allow further droop of the new front driveshaft.

Another unknown – how much further would we have to lift the commander in order to provide some up-travel for the solid axle without getting into the bottom of the motor? It appears (by drawing an imaginary line through the center of my front wheels), I’d have to go up 2 or 3 more inches at least (in addition to my 4” kit) to give the front axle some reasonable room to move. I came to the conclusion I’d have about 6 to 8 inches of lift over stock. Depending on bumpstop location (to limit wheel stuffing), you can run 35’s without too much trouble I think.

This would mean lifting the rear even more. While you could squeeze 6” of lift with stock control arm locations and aftermarket control arms, 8” with the factory control arm locations isn’t realistic, another can of worms must be opened. I didn’t consider this in the cost because it was too much of an unknown at the time, but figure another grand or two in modifying the rear end from a 5-link to a 3, as there’s no reasonable way to modify the upper control arm locations at the chassis. Again, I’d go with the Rubicon Express forked control arms to a new cross member, etc. Rear coil and shock absorber locations could probably remain unmodified and an adjustable track bar could be easily adapted to work with that amount of lift.

As for modified or custom parts (or parts sourced from other applications) – Steering shaft, draglink, track bar(s), control arms, coils, shocks, driveshafts, brake lines, ABS/wheel sensor wiring extensions, cross members, gearset(s), assorted bolts/nuts and probably stuff I haven’t even thought of yet. RMB does exceptional work and Mike was looking at about two weeks once he had everything he needed.

Maybe one can see how the “daily driver” appeal is fading?

I’m sure there are plenty of details that I haven’t even considered yet, but this would be a big project for a primary vehicle. Feel free to mention other aspects I may have left out, but I think I got the general scope. I’m sure someone will eventually try this, but I’ve decided I like my XK enough as it is to not potentially turn it into something I can’t stand to drive. Thoughts?

I think sticking with the IFS is the way to go. The cons are out weighing the pros on this swap big time. I'm guessing 33" is the max tire with the 4" lift? Also you cannot do a body lift on a unibody correct? Getting the wheels out 2" past the wheel flares how much trimming do you think I would have to do to get 35"? Or is that just a bad idea? I've only hit the under body a few time ( I'm very careful and meticulous about my lines) but I want to take some of the harder lines.

I agree about sticking with IFS on the XK. The risk, even if it turns out well, is a vehicle that doesn't handle or ride as well, and is seriously devalued for everyone but a very select buyer. Even if you could get the articulation into the TJ/JK realm, you now have a vehicle that is at least 8 to 10 inches taller than stock (including tire height) so stability in off-camber situations becomes questionable. If you look at the solid axle swap Liberties, they're all pretty tall just to get the necessary room for the front axle under the motor. So unless you can invest in a used XK and want the bragging rights of being the first (might get yourself into a magazine!) to do a front axle swap, then like you said, the cons outweigh the pros. It's much easier to get a JK unlimited and do all the lifting you want, even if you become "just another JK" on the trail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmax

I agree about sticking with IFS on the XK. The risk, even if it turns out well, is a vehicle that doesn't handle or ride as well, and is seriously devalued for everyone but a very select buyer. Even if you could get the articulation into the TJ/JK realm, you now have a vehicle that is at least 8 to 10 inches taller than stock (including tire height) so stability in off-camber situations becomes questionable. If you look at the solid axle swap Liberties, they're all pretty tall just to get the necessary room for the front axle under the motor. So unless you can invest in a used XK and want the bragging rights of being the first (might get yourself into a magazine!) to do a front axle swap, then like you said, the cons outweigh the pros. It's much easier to get a JK unlimited and do all the lifting you want, even if you become "just another JK" on the trail.

---

Totally agree with you ! It is what it is and it won't be what you want to drive as a DD. Get a Rubicon JK, heck leave it stock and it will do more then our XK's!

From the Superlift website: A lifted WK or XK will clear 33½ to 34½ tall rubber, depending on wheel width and offset. The V-8 equipped Jeeps (especially the Hemis) will have no problems pulling this size tire, even without a gear ratio change.

Well, it seems after much discussion that the best way to achieve a 6" lift so far is to go with the Rusty's 4" lift, JBA UCA's and adjustable front struts, 2" spacer lift. This is where I have landed on the discussion. I would like to discuss this further though because new products and idea's are popping up all the time. From what I am gathering is if I get custom made brackets to drop the diff another inch or two then stacking shouldn't be a problem I'm guessing. This should allow me to run 35" tires which is my goal. So lets here your opinions on this setup threw brain storming we will eventually figure a solid way to do this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 06blkhemi

Totally agree with you ! It is what it is and it won't be what you want to drive as a DD. Get a Rubicon JK, heck leave it stock and it will do more then our XK's!

---

I've already proven this is not the case. A stock JK has almost no ground clearance especially considering its length. Also the stock shovel sitting as low as it does is a double whammy against the thing. You think were tripods in the XK watch a stock JK with no disco's stock tires on a trail :eek: If his shovel don't get hung up first.:D

What would be nice is to be able to keep the CG low as possible with cutting the fenders mild lift and 35s.. Mine feels so top heavy already I don't think I personally would feel comfortable driving it.. My XJ with the 3.5" Rubicon Express Superflex TJ Flares and 33s would keep up with a Wrangler all day long on the trails.. Kinda miss it but I love how much bigger isize and the Hemi power that the XK has !!

Well I have 33's and 4" lift but don't feel top heavy at all. I think the new rims pushing the stance out certainly helps the stability. Perhaps you will need to go a bit farther as you go up to 6". I have often read - if you are going up you gotta go out!

Fitting 35" tires is the end goal. If I could do it with just the spacer lift I would. I just don't want to cut so much of the XK away you can't tell what it is. But I'm getting there anyway thats the wifes opinion anyway LOL

I plan on pushing my tires out probably an inch or two past the fender flares.

I personally would like to do a solid front axle swap. I looked into it and I was told about 5-8K to accomplish this. Does anyone know if an Atlas transfer case would work in our XK?

Sal I see that you are running the 4.7L V-8 like mine. I tow a trailer with mine and have noticed a significant reduction in power since moving up from the stock tire size. I can even tell the difference starting from a dead stop (especially on a hill) when not towing. I knew there would be some power reduction with the larger tires, but I was suprised it was so noticeable. Have you considered (or is there even a way to know) how much power reduction 35" tires would cause? Would the 4.7 still have the power to mount the rocks and obstacles you would be able to clear?

I really didn't notice any power loss myself but I'm sure that has a lot to do with my driving habits. I very rarely put the skinny pedal to the floor for any reason and I'm usually never more then 5MPH over the speed limit. While rock crawling I'm always in 4LO and never once been in a situation were more power was needed. In fact I find spinning the tires requires very little effort. I know what your saying I've seen guys on obstacles with there foot to the floor and they weren't moving or spinning there tires LOL. I would imagine that it would take much bigger then 35's to cause this on the 4.7L in while in 4LO. I'm guessing a new TC would solve this if your getting something bigger then 35's. IMO 35's would be the max for all around use.

Wandering - I have gone up in tire size twice now and have not really noticed a power loss. What I have noticed is that the engine kicks down more frequently when going up hills etc, however off the line the vehicle is about the same. I do have a chip on the ECU but its been there since I had the stock tires. I do like to bury the throttle but rarely exceed the speed limit (I have another vehicle for that!).

All of my cars have two modes - full brake, or full throttle. I don't find much use for what is in the middle....unless it is on cruise control. I teach high speed pursuit driving, so I am sure you can see my predjudice.

Off road, I have never had a power problem. I just noticed an on road decline after the bigger tires and I am not smart enough to figure out how to extrapolate that to off road and even larger tires. I just know that I used to get pushed back into the seat when I stomped the stock XK. Now it gets up to speed quickly, but that "shove you into the seat feeling" is gone.

After I went to the 4" SL and 285 tires. I noticed a loss in power. So I got the jet chip cai, and cat back. Love the power now. What about the guy on the other forum who is going back to his 6" with 35's.