William Oliveri

I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
width is 2.5").

I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
where the back springs are 2.5"?


Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?

Thanks,

Bill

William Oliveri

Mine looks like section 4 in this pic:

http://www.tellico4x4.com/suspension/7686.htm

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>

William Oliveri

Mine looks like section 4 in this pic:

http://www.tellico4x4.com/suspension/7686.htm

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>

William Oliveri

Mine looks like section 4 in this pic:

http://www.tellico4x4.com/suspension/7686.htm

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>

CRWLR

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>

You need the shackle on both the front and the rear. The shackle keeps the
springs from ripping the frame to shreds.

When the springs flatten out (as they do constantly as you go over bumps and
stuff) they get longer from mount to mount. The shackles provide a pivot
point that allow the springs to lengthen a little bit. The rear of the front
spring and the front of the rear spring is a fixed-position mounting point,
and the shackles provide a place that can move when the springs lengthen. Of
course, when you have a tire that is hanging, the spring is as short as it
can be (from mount to mount, not along its curve), and the shackle allows
the spring to move that way too. If you don't have shackles, the springs
will not bend down to absorb bumps, nor will they articulate very well.

My suggestion is that you get some new shackles that are stronger than the
stock shackles that you currently have. Check out the offerings from Currie.
They are a little longer than stock, but the benefit is that they are very
beefy and are not prone to bending and twisting sideways. They will give a
firmer feel on the highway. I also went with the polyurethane bushings on my
CJ. These are stiffer than the rubber bushings, so they resist body roll and
wandering suspension components. Whatever you do, DO NOT use your existing
bushings over again.

CRWLR

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>

You need the shackle on both the front and the rear. The shackle keeps the
springs from ripping the frame to shreds.

When the springs flatten out (as they do constantly as you go over bumps and
stuff) they get longer from mount to mount. The shackles provide a pivot
point that allow the springs to lengthen a little bit. The rear of the front
spring and the front of the rear spring is a fixed-position mounting point,
and the shackles provide a place that can move when the springs lengthen. Of
course, when you have a tire that is hanging, the spring is as short as it
can be (from mount to mount, not along its curve), and the shackle allows
the spring to move that way too. If you don't have shackles, the springs
will not bend down to absorb bumps, nor will they articulate very well.

My suggestion is that you get some new shackles that are stronger than the
stock shackles that you currently have. Check out the offerings from Currie.
They are a little longer than stock, but the benefit is that they are very
beefy and are not prone to bending and twisting sideways. They will give a
firmer feel on the highway. I also went with the polyurethane bushings on my
CJ. These are stiffer than the rubber bushings, so they resist body roll and
wandering suspension components. Whatever you do, DO NOT use your existing
bushings over again.

CRWLR

"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>

You need the shackle on both the front and the rear. The shackle keeps the
springs from ripping the frame to shreds.

When the springs flatten out (as they do constantly as you go over bumps and
stuff) they get longer from mount to mount. The shackles provide a pivot
point that allow the springs to lengthen a little bit. The rear of the front
spring and the front of the rear spring is a fixed-position mounting point,
and the shackles provide a place that can move when the springs lengthen. Of
course, when you have a tire that is hanging, the spring is as short as it
can be (from mount to mount, not along its curve), and the shackle allows
the spring to move that way too. If you don't have shackles, the springs
will not bend down to absorb bumps, nor will they articulate very well.

My suggestion is that you get some new shackles that are stronger than the
stock shackles that you currently have. Check out the offerings from Currie.
They are a little longer than stock, but the benefit is that they are very
beefy and are not prone to bending and twisting sideways. They will give a
firmer feel on the highway. I also went with the polyurethane bushings on my
CJ. These are stiffer than the rubber bushings, so they resist body roll and
wandering suspension components. Whatever you do, DO NOT use your existing
bushings over again.

CRWLR

You need to know if the current springs are the same as the new springs. The
spring perches near the center of the frame are the ones that are driving
the boat here. The perches in the center must be the same size as the
springs, or you will have fabrication issues to deal with. The perches on
the ends where the shackles go can be easily replaced if needed.




"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>

CRWLR

You need to know if the current springs are the same as the new springs. The
spring perches near the center of the frame are the ones that are driving
the boat here. The perches in the center must be the same size as the
springs, or you will have fabrication issues to deal with. The perches on
the ends where the shackles go can be easily replaced if needed.




"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>

CRWLR

You need to know if the current springs are the same as the new springs. The
spring perches near the center of the frame are the ones that are driving
the boat here. The perches in the center must be the same size as the
springs, or you will have fabrication issues to deal with. The perches on
the ends where the shackles go can be easily replaced if needed.




"William Oliveri" <wuji@bigvalley.net> wrote in message
news:bu1vne$cqobu$1@ID-193866.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I just received my 4" lift kit for my 83 CJ7 and noticed that the front
> springs are narrower than the rear. I called the guy I bought it from and
> he couldn't give a reason for the difference other than that the stock
> perches are made for those widths (front spring width is 2", rear spring
> width is 2.5").
>
> I was thinking that the front holds then engine and therefore "should" be
> heavier and so I was wondering why the front spring width on a CJ7 is 2"
> where the back springs are 2.5"?
>
>
> Also, on my current setup it looks like stock springs which some type of
> shackle on the front (can't remember on the back). When I install these
> springs and shocks should the shackle remain there or should there be no
> shackle what so ever (looking for quality here)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>