Colorado lift on TB?

by **TuckerJack** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:07 am

So, I'm sure this has been a subject of interest at some point, but will a Colorado or GMC canyon lift work on a TB? And if the axles going through the oil pan is an issue, then why hasn't anyone entertained the idea of maybe fabricating some motor mounts to drop the engine? Or maybe fabricating some kind of adaptor/extender plate fixed on top of the oil pan to drop it down a bit would work? That way the only real difference would be the amount of oil that you would need in the pan. I understand that the Colorado uses leaf springs in the rear, but maybe the front can be utilized for something? Just an idea! Let me know what everyone thinks!

by **NC_IslandRunner** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:58 am

Can't say as I've heard of anyone trying to or even thinking of using a Colorado lift, most likely because we already have good lifts available, someone might have but I've never read about it. As for the oil pan issue, that's been tossed around and by the time you got done making custom parts you could have swapped in a solid axle for less $$$, even the SAS guys are looking to replace the oil pan though, that would reduce the amount of lift needed to clear the front differential of the solid axle.

by **v7guy** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 11:06 am

ummmmmm, no

If anything raising the engine makes the most sense. Going that route you could drop the diff into a bracket and go from there since lifting the motor gives you more room. Converting to a rear sump is doable for $250 or so if you hire a local guy to convert a pan. The Colorado pickup tube just needs lengthened to adapt it from the I5 to the I6, (other than lacking a cylinder the I5 is essentially our motor)

The Colorado has a completely different suspension than we do. Specifically the shock mount is totally different as is the lower a arm mounts.

But if you've gotten far enough that any of this is in the realm off possibility for you then you wouldn't be asking these question because you would have already done a google image search and compared them to what you see on your truck. :finger:

Basically, if you're looking to do anything beyond the MarkMC lift you're likely looking at something completely custom. By the point you look at changing shocks and their mounting you're looking at a "why not" snowball effect... for example, if changing the shock mounting is of interest then you need a new lower control arm to mount the shock to. You have to change the upper mount to fit accordingly. Then if you're building a new upper mount and a new lower a arm, then you've still got to build a bracket to lower the diff and house the intermediate shaft, within the confines of the stock subframe (good luck). If you're hacking off the stock subframe then you're moving the lower control arms down so you can clear the diff and then you need a longer spindle to make up the difference. At that point why aren't you just extending the arms for more travel and running a bigger diff? Why are you bothering with stock anything?

It really never ends. Then you're still limited by the angle a CV joint can run at.

The average guy can do it, you see it on the forums all the time (just not this one). But you've gotta do some hard looking and realize you're cutting up your entire truck and all the success is on you and your math and research. I'd like to see guys tackle this sort of project.

by **The Roadie** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 11:40 am

Man, if we had their suspension design instead of the one the GM gadget team stuck us with, it would be heaven. Look at the bolt-on ball joints! The easy pivot lower strut mount!

Look at the fantastic kits you can buy like this 4" one from Rancho for only $1500!

Man, people even sell adjustable ball joint mounts to fix camber problems. Droool.

by **v7guy** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 11:58 am

not to mention bigger four bolt bearings. oh to dream.

by **HARDTRAILZ** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:11 pm

Colorado are easy to make tall. Seen some nice ones.

by **dvanbramer88** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:20 pm

I went to Rousch Creek with more than a few nice ones.

They're very capable and build-able rigs.

by **TuckerJack** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:56 pm

Ha thanks for all the thoughts guys! I love being able to bounce ideas off the forum and get a gist of what and what not to do. I'm really hoping to make a contribution to TB performance like Mark has. I mentioned what I wanted to do to a coworker last night that went to some mechanic school. His words were "the TB wasn't meant to go off road. If you wanted an off road machine, save up money and get a bronco. The TB was designed to be a family SUV sedan." BLASPHEMY I SAY!!! Then why did they put 4wd in it?!? Although it could be argued that it wasn't meant to be an off roader due to the shitty designs and high failure rates of some parts, but it's a little late for everyone on this forum (myself included) and we won't go there haha.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

by **mikekey** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:03 pm

Bronco's roll over and are the choice vehicle of off-road trailer park dwellers everywhere.

by **The Roadie** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:07 pm

Yah. Try living for a week out of only the stuff you can bring with you in a Bronco. Try two people. We can do it in style!

YouTube Videos · by **Trail X** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:08 pm

The TB WAS designed to be a family SUV.

This is my word. And as such is beyond contestation

by **dvanbramer88** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:11 pm

TuckerJack wrote:The TB was designed to be a family SUV sedan. Although it could be argued that it wasn't meant to be an off roader due to the shitty designs and high failure rates of some parts,

Sure you're not describing a Jeep Cherokee (XJ)

GMT360's have too much frame, too much horsepower, have a real truck transmission and axles, have too much towing capacity, and weigh too much to be lumped in with "SUV Sedan" or crossover.

And Broncos like to eat their transmissions like nobodies business.

:hijack:

MY Youtube Channel · by **TBYODA** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:15 pm

TuckerJack wrote:His words were "the TB wasn't meant to go off road.

Show your buddy some of JD you tube videos that show how off road capable and misunderstood platform the GMT360 is with really modest upgrades.

Go here

by **TuckerJack** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:19 pm

Haha this is awesome. So glad I joined this forum! But sadly, I am not talking about a jeep. The transmissions are notorious for having terrible sun shells that cannot handle the torque (my belief is this is more common with V8s than I6s), the 4wd disconnect probably wasn't the smartest design, and the stock limited slip G80 is known as the "gov-bomb" because they break down. However, these problems can all be upgraded and fixed! TBs are diamonds in the rough, they just take a little TLC, time, and money before they're contenders with other off roader's. Amen to whoever decided they wanted to be the first to experiment with a family SUV sedan

First there was one, then there was many

by **The Roadie** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:36 pm

TuckerJack wrote:First there was one, then there was many

You've found "the one". It was extremely lonely for a while in 2005-6 on a different web forum surrounded by SS go-fast trucks, lowered rigs with 20" spinny-rims, and the thumping-audio-bass crowd.

My pics of getting dirty and denting things on rocks were soundly mocked. But when I went to meets, I looked like Pigpen on Charlie Brown, next to a line of all-too-similar shiny rigs, but WHICH ONE did they all want to sit in?!? The Roadiemobile! :excited:

by **TuckerJack** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:52 pm

[quote="The Roadie"][quote="TuckerJack"]
"You've found "the one".
:woot:

I salut you sir! You created a movement. Maybe I can have my name added to the list of contributors to the GMT360 platform! I've got plenty of ideas and a keen sense for improvising and fabricating. Not too bad for a Psychology major at East Carolina University, eh? :drive:

by **The Roadie** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:05 pm

Actually, there was one guy before me, but he wasn't active on forums for a long time. Member "JamesDub" from central CA. A lift fabrication company near him made a single one-of-a-kind lift kit around 2003. James bought it, but it didn't get publicized much. I saw the lift company's web page for it, showing James' truck, but when I called them, they had abandoned making more of them, citing no market. SuspensionMAXX made the first commercial lift spacers, and I bought one of their first kits. Then BDS announced a taller spacer, and I bought one of their first kits. And I have the terrain out here to offroad it hard, summer in the mountains and winter in the desert. And I like to take pics and videos and get more suckers to spend money and do the same thing to help ratify and justify my hobby. So that's how offroading got discussed on various forums (first trailvoy, then here, now also gmtnation)

by **bartonmd** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:59 pm

TuckerJack wrote:Haha this is awesome. So glad I joined this forum! But sadly, I am not talking about a jeep. The transmissions are notorious for having terrible sun shells that cannot handle the torque (my belief is this is more common with V8s than I6s), the 4wd disconnect probably wasn't the smartest design, and the stock limited slip G80 is known as the "gov-bomb" because they break down. However, these problems can all be upgraded and fixed! TBs are diamonds in the rough, they just take a little TLC, time, and money before they're contenders with other off roader's. Amen to whoever decided they wanted to be the first to experiment with a family SUV sedan

First there was one, then there was many

Load is the biggest thing with the sun shells, so it's mostly seen on the same transmission in the 1/2 ton trucks that weigh 600# more and tow 3000# more than us. The sun shell issue was not only just on the early ones, but it's really not a common thing on TBs. The 4WD disconnect, while it could be oiled instead of greased, isn't actually a horrible design for anything near stock tires. If you are on 35's and beat on it constantly, especially with a front locker, yes, the SD is a weak point until you put the AWD sleeve out of a TBSS/Bravada/Ranier into it. Most of us have well over 100k on the stock untouched SD. G80 is the same thing. If you're not an idiot and you've got anywhere near the stock tire size, the G80 isn't actually that bad. The 8.0 behind the I6 SWB TBs is a little weak if you beat on it with larger tires, but there haven't been many problems with the LWB and SWB V8 G80s in the 8.6" rear end. The same can be said for Jeep stuff, too. A Dana 30/35 aren't a match for 35" tires, a 2.7:1 T-case, and 300HP + a heavy foot, either.

I would say that the TB is closer to a truck than a sedan. More so than a Cherokee. 300HP I6 or 303HP 5.3L V8, full frame, 2.7:1 T-case, 4L60E 1/2 ton truck transmission, very nearly a 1/2 ton axle in the I6 SWB models and an 8.6 that's the same size rear end as a 1/2 ton Chevy, etc..

Mike

by **TuckerJack** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:46 pm

Whew! Thanks for the info mike! I'm not sure if you've read my introduction or not, but bigger tires are definitely in the future (33s are the goal). For all the mod plans I have in store, go check out my welcome thread! And then PM me with any thoughts or concerns about my future mods! It always helps to have a veterans input!

First there was one, then there was many

by **bartonmd** » Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:35 pm

TuckerJack wrote:Whew! Thanks for the info mike! I'm not sure if you've read my introduction or not, but bigger tires are definitely in the future (33s are the goal). For all the mod plans I have in store, go check out my welcome thread! And then PM me with any thoughts or concerns about my future mods! It always helps to have a veterans input!

First there was one, then there was many

33's are still fine, as long as you don't beat the shit out of it like an idiot. Yes, things have failed, but 33" tires is still within the range where the powertrain lives OK. Put an 8.6" rear in it out of an EXT from a junkyard for $500 and an hour's work. Done.

Mike

Offroad Trailblazers and Envoys