VIDEO : The Gold Standard of Shocks

Just wondering since the 392 XR supposedly has a 2” lift from the factory if these would work without any additional lift 🤔
 
JT@623 said:
Just wondering since the 392 XR supposedly has a 2” lift from the factory if these would work without any additional lift 🤔
Click to expand...
So, what's really lame about the 392 and the XR is that they come with taller front bump stop towers. If you look, even stock, you will see that your yellow jounce is sitting really close to the bump stop pad on the axle. This is a real problem in that it really limits the amount of up travel you have and again, even stock, I found that I bottomed them out a lot. With the new lift I have, I installed the bump stop extensions provided and find that they still limit my up travel even though the Ohlins shocks still have travel to go. That said, I'm already looking into seeing if I can or if it's even advisable to reduce the extensions to take more advantage of the shocks dampening abilities.

That said, even if you could run their 2"-3" shocks without any lift, I don't know how well they would work due to the up travel imitations you have.
 
wayoflife said:
So, what's really lame about the 392 and the XR is that they come with taller front bump stop towers. If you look, even stock, you will see that your yellow jounce is sitting really close to the bump stop pad on the axle. This is a real problem in that it really limits the amount of up travel you have and again, even stock, I found that I bottomed them out a lot. With the new lift I have, I installed the bump stop extensions provided and find that they still limit my up travel even though the Ohlins shocks still have travel to go. That said, I'm already looking into seeing if I can or if it's even advisable to reduce the extensions to take more advantage of the shocks dampening abilities.

That said, even if you could run their 2"-3" shocks without any lift, I don't know how well they would work due to the up travel imitations you have.
Click to expand...
So, would a stock jounce from a regular JL or JT work and give you more travel?
You probably have a dozen or so sitting around in boxes.

Edit: Nevermind, I read up on it and the longer tower in the upper coil perch is a completely different part number and fixed to the coil perch.
 
Last edited:
kevman65 said:
So, would a stock jounce from a regular JL or JT work and give you more travel?
You probably have a dozen or so sitting around in boxes.

Edit: Nevermind, I read up on it and the longer tower in the upper coil perch is a completely different part number and fixed to the coil perch.
Click to expand...
Correct, it's the tower, not the jounce that's different. On a regular JL or JT, they measure 5" tall. On a 392 or XR, it measures 7". Not sure why Jeep felt the need to add the 2 extra inches but it really hurts up travel performance up front.
 
wayoflife said:
Correct, it's the tower, not the jounce that's different. On a regular JL or JT, they measure 5" tall. On a 392 or XR, it measures 7". Not sure why Jeep felt the need to add the 2 extra inches but it really hurts up travel performance up front.
Click to expand...
For some reason I thought the jounce itself was longer.
 
wayoflife said:
As already answered, yes.

And to be fair, these are not coilovers. What you have now is really nice and depending on what you have, better.

Not sure why one bolt wouldn't be enough to hold a can that doesn't see any movement in place.
Click to expand...
That's a good point
 
Hydro bumps FTW. I know it's further down the rabbit hole and a wise man once posted
1687624926651.jpeg
But I like the rabbit hole, enough to pay extra...

And there's so many brands and lengths available now, dial in your bump where you want it.
 
JimLee said:
Hydro bumps FTW. I know it's further down the rabbit hole and a wise man once posted
View attachment 393213
But I like the rabbit hole, enough to pay extra...

And there's so many brands and lengths available now, dial in your bump where you want it.
Click to expand...
LOL - Also, the only problem I've seen with dial in bumps is that the only option you get is firm, firmer and firmest and most of the time, the lowest firm is too firm and the higher options are useless.
 
Doesn't the top spring cup (with the jounce in it) just bolt up?

So, wouldn't you be able to swap out the upper spring cup with one from a standard JL or JT?

Or is the 392 completely different and that is not possible?

I just LOVE puzzles like these and trying to figure out a work around. (No, not REACH around, shut up WJCO......)
 
kevman65 said:
Doesn't the top spring cup (with the jounce in it) just bolt up?

So, wouldn't you be able to swap out the upper spring cup with one from a standard JL or JT?

Or is the 392 completely different and that is not possible?

I just LOVE puzzles like these and trying to figure out a work around. (No, not REACH around, shut up WJCO......)
Click to expand...
The spring cup is welded on the tower and in any case, the tower is what's longer, not the cup. When installing something like an air bump, you have to use a cutoff wheel to remove the cup.
 
wayoflife said:
So, what's really lame about the 392 and the XR is that they come with taller front bump stop towers. If you look, even stock, you will see that your yellow jounce is sitting really close to the bump stop pad on the axle. This is a real problem in that it really limits the amount of up travel you have and again, even stock, I found that I bottomed them out a lot. With the new lift I have, I installed the bump stop extensions provided and find that they still limit my up travel even though the Ohlins shocks still have travel to go. That said, I'm already looking into seeing if I can or if it's even advisable to reduce the extensions to take more advantage of the shocks dampening abilities.

That said, even if you could run their 2"-3" shocks without any lift, I don't know how well they would work due to the up travel imitations you have.
Click to expand...
It’s the same with the diesel. Annoying but I’m using just 1” of Bumpstop for over 3” of lift in the front. I am clearing everything. Seems it’s the oil pan they’re worrying about, at least with the diesel. After testing everything mine is fine all around with this setup. I couldn’t use the “needed” bumpstop the springs wanted, because it’s would bottom out. I have about 1/4” before the shock bottoms at full bump.
 
HighwayTrout said:
I was about to ask about an update too.

Any concerns with the coils sagging in a year or three?
Click to expand...
Hard to say for sure being that we've only had this lift on for a few month but so far, I have not seen any sag or any real changes in height since things settled out. The 392 is heavy for sure though and you can definitely feel it but then, I felt it stock too. Rancho did make sure to send heavier spring rated coils for the front to help out but fortunately, they haven't been stiff feeling.
 
wayoflife said:
Hard to say for sure being that we've only had this lift on for a few month but so far, I have not seen any sag or any real changes in height since things settled out. The 392 is heavy for sure though and you can definitely feel it but then, I felt it stock too. Rancho did make sure to send heavier spring rated coils for the front to help out but fortunately, they haven't been stiff feeling.
Click to expand...
Nice. 👍
 
wayoflife said:
So far so good! I'm actually really loving these shocks although, I did pair them up with some soft coils. I think that's how they really shine.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the update. If there’s enough money left after changing the engine, I’m gonna give these shocks a good look. Or Old Man Emu
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom