LT 285/65/18 Cooper Discoverer STT pro all terrain

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

m_lars

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Posts
186
Reaction score
84
Location
Utah
It’s not a “lift” because it is generally accepted that a lift implies something more than stock can provide. You cannot really use 34” tires without the spacers or a body lift because you’d have to run the struts extended too far all the time. It would be ********, literally.

The compressor would possibly just **** itself after an hour on the highway at Plus 2”.
A lift in my mind is a physical and permanent change which simply raiseing the EAS as high as it can go anyway on its own, is nothing like.
Hence , it’s not a lift any more than just pressing the factory lever UP is a lift.

Also, the spacers lift the minimum zero air clearance by 2”. No electronics do that, period. Once again, lift vs not. ;)

I’m gonna need to chat w Mr Z about CV’s and limit straps...that I have left off for now... do I need to bring cv w me just in case? Probably.

Why would the compressor quit because you’re running a higher ride height? The system doesn’t run higher pressure because it’s sitting higher.

In the case of the LR3, doesn’t a body lift give you the exact same benefit of clearance at zero air as the spacers without the worry of cv damage? I guess you initially got me on the “body lift is true lift” comment, but now that you’ve pointed out it’s the only way to run 34” tires, you may have changed my mind.

P. S. It is not socially acceptable to use the “R” word anymore, especially when you are talking to the father of a special need child.
 
Last edited:

zelatore

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2014
Posts
6
Reaction score
2
I saw that truck and attempt to find the owner on Instagram, I think it was bear republic expeditions. Bummer the mystery was never solved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, Barron is a friend of mine out here. He drives an LR3 but in that case was riding with another friend of his who runs a tour company, 4-points adventures. Mostly toyota guys. The truck had a CA plate but nobody recognized it.
 

Gov na

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2018
Posts
19
Reaction score
5
Location
Montana
285/65 is not the best choice for the factory 8” wheels. The guy above w 265/70 has the best size because they provide max height while fitting the best during turning as well tucking into fenders at full compression.

285/65 is a lot wider than the 265/70 and without the full spectrum of physical mods, they’ll run like hell in several places.

While it gets mentioned that 1” ‘lift’ via IIDtool helped, it doesn’t change anything whatsoever in the full function and clearance of these tires. The strut will move and that 1” becomes irrelevant.

The only true ‘lift’ is to use the strut spacer which actually limits the fully tucked position where rubbing can occur. It’s kind of like having the HD steel spring kit on as far as the ride height and tire position.

Tell me more about your '07 LR3 add-on's please.
 

jwest

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
2,041
Reaction score
409
Location
Seattle WA
Why would the compressor quit because you’re running a higher ride height? The system doesn’t run higher pressure because it’s sitting higher.

In the case of the LR3, doesn’t a body lift give you the exact same benefit of clearance at zero air as the spacers without the worry of cv damage? I guess you initially got me on the “body lift is true lift” comment, but now that you’ve pointed out it’s the only way to run 34” tires, you may have changed my mind.

P. S. It is not socially acceptable to use the “R” word anymore, especially when you are talking to the father of a special need child.

1-it’s not about air pressure (yet it may actually be higher due to lifting the vehicle via that column of air) It’s about keeping up with demands on the system. Speculation vs observed use:

Anyone who’s used these a lot in high mode has experienced the compressor at some point getting hot or sending a warning message about “excessive” changes or whatever. I’m not sure how it works exactly but I do know it happens.

Common sense would also suggest simply running the struts extended full time is unwise or else it would’ve been designed to operate that way in the first place. It’s a bad idea for several reasons though and it’s not about preferences or emotional issues.

The strut extended will have very little extension travel left (down travel for highway changes), different spring rate possibly, a longer column of air having to hold higher forces due to highway speeds which amplify the forces of weight. On a trail these forces in the struts and air occur slowly without the momentum of speed behind them.


2-if your compressor fails, and you are downgraded to riding the bump stops, the vehicle itself will literally become ‘********’. Even before any failure, the vehicle will perform in slower or limited fashion in cornering, manuevering, etc due to having screwed up suspension travel.

It is an actual word that has literal and/or implied meaning just like many others but I hear you. I think it would be ‘********’ behavior to run 80 mph with the suspension stretched out like that also requiring the compressor to work overtime. I could also just call it idiotic, stupid, ignorant as hell, etc.

*No offense meant to individuals with actual developmental problems.

3-A body lift allows for larger tires as well but through a much more involved effort while yet providing no gain in ground clearance on its own. However, the strut spacer provides immediate ground clearance if using factory strut length and only really introduces that angle stress into the cv/axle parts.

FYI-I tried all the other easy routes before. Lots of testing showed it was all BS. I can get the full ground clearance that any rod ‘lift’ BS provides simply by inducing the ‘extended mode’ with no aftermarket crap at all. The truth is none of that matters without a bigger tire that won’t just grind into the fender wells or frame during actual high articulation use.

If not using it that way ever, then it’s all a poser game anyway.

Even posing though, IMO, ought to be done well ;) So, that would be through using strut or body spacers and bigg ass tires.

The factory 18” wheels are actually the best choice in the largest tire game because they have the tightest offset and narrowest width. This allows the best ‘tuck factor’. I tested mine with a 25mm spacer thinking the track width would be a benefit in high lean situations but the loss of various clearance zones made it not worth any benefits.
 

jwest

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
2,041
Reaction score
409
Location
Seattle WA
Tell me more about your '07 LR3 add-on's please.

Not sure what you’re asking for but my above post has confusing typo : should read “RUB like hell”. The mods for large tires are covered in depth in other threads especially those with heavy duty builds: Frame, body metal, fender liners, minor relocation of wires and hvac tubing plus other items if using factory bumpers.
 

jwest

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
2,041
Reaction score
409
Location
Seattle WA
In the case of the LR3, doesn’t a body lift give you the exact same benefit of clearance at zero air as the spacers without the worry of cv damage? I guess you initially got me on the “body lift is true lift” comment, but now that you’ve pointed out it’s the only way to run 34” tires, you may have changed my mind.

You’re bringing up a lot here actually ;)

This is theoretical because the vehicle isn’t simply body on frame. There may be other negative issues created or trade offs if everything isn’t based on its attachment to the frame.

At zero air, yes, a 2” body spacer would equally raise the fenders away from the tire. Yet you gain no ground clearance unless a larger tire is used..obviously.

Of course a body lift should mostly allow the suspension geometries to stay as factory.

There’s a thread on body lifting a Range Rover Sport on another forum. It was not cheap and it is not really a value path IMO.

Keep in mind that doing only a body lift (no strut length spacers or changes) will only result in ground clearance increases created by tire size so that means factory 30” to 34” gains 2”. That’s a ton of work and expense for just 2” but I like the idea of it’s potebtial benefits such as you mentioned. I could see adding strut length to allow a 36-37” tire like the RRS.
 

m_lars

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Posts
186
Reaction score
84
Location
Utah
You’re bringing up a lot here actually ;)

This is theoretical because the vehicle isn’t simply body on frame. There may be other negative issues created or trade offs if everything isn’t based on its attachment to the frame.

At zero air, yes, a 2” body spacer would equally raise the fenders away from the tire. Yet you gain no ground clearance unless a larger tire is used..obviously.

Of course a body lift should mostly allow the suspension geometries to stay as factory.

There’s a thread on body lifting a Range Rover Sport on another forum. It was not cheap and it is not really a value path IMO.

Keep in mind that doing only a body lift (no strut length spacers or changes) will only result in ground clearance increases created by tire size so that means factory 30” to 34” gains 2”. That’s a ton of work and expense for just 2” but I like the idea of it’s potebtial benefits such as you mentioned. I could see adding strut length to allow a 36-37” tire like the RRS.
Do you even remember what you say in your original posts. You throw out issues that no one else is talking about, and then argue against it like it was my idea... Do you enjoy goading people, or does it come unintentionally? It’s 2am I have snow to plow. Hopefully it’s the 8” forecast and not another 1” miss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

jwest

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
2,041
Reaction score
409
Location
Seattle WA
You need to state what you think I argued against as if it was your idea or that of anyone else. LOL does this simplify it for you: rods and electronic "lifts" are not lifts. Physical changes are. Ideally we would not alter suspension geometries but it's a trade of for ground clearance as well as tire sidewall increase and tire type choices. The strut spacer is the current best mix of benefits gained vs trade offs.

Not sure what "issues" I threw out but anything related to lifting the vehicle, using larger tires, ******** rod lifts, iidtool highway to hell lifts, etc, are all related and therefor are in fact what we are "talking about".

Go play in the snow. We both know it's good for you.
 

jwest

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Posts
2,041
Reaction score
409
Location
Seattle WA
....on 2nd thought, you guys do whatever the hell you want. The results of someone else's bad choice are not my problem. I think I'll just quite trying to help people not waste time on BS I already went through years ago when nobody had done anything yet to learn from on the lr3. Go waste your $, time, and break **** to figure it out yourself.
 

remember5

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Posts
408
Reaction score
126
JWest, it's ok man, we've been there and done that and opinions are like ass holes, everyone has one. I enjoy reading everyone's thoughts but for me ground clearance is the goal which as stated earlier can only be achieved with taller tires, regardless of the method used to get there. I used Proud Rhino rods and Goodyear Wranglers in 275/65. Now I'm eye to eye with the JK's, LOL. I hope everyone has a great New Year and I thank everyone for their advice in the last year, it seems like I've spent more time under the truck than in it.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
36,255
Posts
217,952
Members
30,493
Latest member
A562NV
Top