KING 2.5 OEM performance shocks issues

[DrillRX]

Recently purchased a set of King 2.5 performance coilovers (25001-392A front, 25001-393A rear) for my Bronco and was told by King that they would only be approx 1/2" taller than the factory SAS shocks. After installation the front has been lifted 3 1/4" and the rear not lifted at all. I'm pretty sure the wrong springs are in these shocks. They are the newer version with a single spring In the rear.

If anyone has these installed and can tell me what the part number of the actual springs are, it would be most helpful. The number on the coil itself. Mine in the front are SPR 3-16-550 D24. The rear are SPR1003 F23.

Thanks!

Sponsored

 

[CitrusBronco]

Give the guys at Accutune a call, I bet they can help you out right away.

 

[Mdsuits]

Those are the springs that come on them…they fronts on a 2 dr definitely sit high. They will settle as they get broke in…..my rear has always set pretty low as well with the hard top on. I know someone suggested 3-18-250s in the rear as a slightly firmer spring….i think the ones on there are like 225-230ish.

 

[DrillRX]

Those are the springs that come on them…they fronts on a 2 dr definitely sit high. They will settle as they get broke in…..my rear has always set pretty low as well with the hard top on. I know someone suggested 3-18-250s in the rear as a slightly firmer spring….i think the ones on there are like 225-230ish.

I spoke with King today. Apparently the SPR1003 spring are progressive 250 lb springs. Because of the "tinder" section of the top of the spring, it does sag more than usual. He recommended upgrading to a 400-450 lb linear spring for my specific application (SPR3-18-400) for the rear. They have a trade program so if they dont work out I can send them back for a different spring rate at that point. I think that's the direction I'll go.

 

[Mdsuits]

Man that sounds really high for the rear…but they would know better than me….

 

[87-Z28]

Are you loaded up with weight, overlanding stuff? 400 lbs/in on the rear seems real high.

Accutune has some king spring specs on their web site. Not sure if that is still good info. They rear seems to be progressive caping out at 225 but starting lowish at 167. That is probably what is affecting your ride height. Especially if you have fixed excess weight.

 

[DrillRX]

Are you loaded up with weight, overlanding stuff? 400 lbs/in on the rear seems real high.

Accutune has some king spring specs on their web site. Not sure if that is still good info. They rear seems to be progressive caping out at 225 but starting lowish at 167. That is probably what is affecting your ride height. Especially if you have fixed excess weight.

Yeah. 250-270 lbs on the roof.

 

[Mdsuits]

Well that would definitely make them squat.

Yeah. 250-270 lbs on the roof.

 

[ScLeCo]

Jesus Christ how big is that tent? Or is it the made out lead version?

 

[DrillRX]

Well that would definitely make them squat.

It actually didnt squat that bad at all until I put the Kings on. The factory springs supported the weight rather well.

This picture is before the Kings went on. Only 1/2" to 3/4" tops. Now its like 2 1/2"+

 

[F-Spot]

I think part of the perception is due to the Bronco having a rake with the factory shocks. So, with the factory suspension, when you add weight, the rear sags enough to make it look level because the front was lower to start with. When you swapped to the Kings, it leveled the baseline stance by raising the front more than the rear. When you start level as the baseline and then add weight, the rear will sag, making it look lower than the front. Heavier springs in the rear could help, but if you like the ride quality, I'd consider lowering the front a little.

 

[Mdsuits]

It actually didnt squat that bad at all until I put the Kings on. The factory springs supported the weight rather well.

This picture is before the Kings went on. Only 1/2" to 3/4" tops. Now its like 2 1/2"+

I’m not sure what the rate of the stock springs are but the Kings are definitely softer. Just the kid sitting in the back makes a noticeable difference on mine.

 

[87-Z28]

OEM 4 door is in the 225 lbs/in range. The standard kings max out at about 225. They start at about 170 so reaching static equilibrium at ride height results in significant spring displacement. They are initially very soft.

the fact that you didn’t get too much squat when fully loaded with the oem 225 rate springs would be somewhat concerning for me if going up to 400 rate springs.

Of course spring free length maters since it dictates the amount of preload on a given shock extended length. But it seems they are all 18” length springs so that is a wash. Very curious how the 400 rate has determined. Do you have other fixed weight over rear axle besides that beast of a tent?

 

[DrillRX]

I think part of the perception is due to the Bronco having a rake with the factory shocks. So, with the factory suspension, when you add weight, the rear sags enough to make it look level because the front was lower to start with. When you swapped to the Kings, it leveled the baseline stance by raising the front more than the rear. When you start level as the baseline and then add weight, the rear will sag, making it look lower than the front. Heavier springs in the rear could help, but if you like the ride quality, I'd consider lowering the front a little.

You're partially correct, except, I have actual measurements of the factory springs and the squat the weight added as well as with the Kings. The added weight on the factory suspension only dropped the height 1/4" in the front and 1/2" in the rear. The King suspension dropped right around 3" in the rear. Its only 1 1/2" lower at the moment due to the extra preload that's been put in. Its basically the max preload in the back without changing springs. King is actually recommending heavier 300 lb linear springs in the back to compensate. Luckily, they have an exchange program, if they dont work out I can change the springs to a different rate at no additional charge.

 

[DrillRX]

OEM 4 door is in the 225 lbs/in range. The standard kings max out at about 225. They start at about 170 so reaching static equilibrium at ride height results in significant spring displacement. They are initially very soft.

the fact that you didn’t get too much squat when fully loaded with the oem 225 rate springs would be somewhat concerning for me if going up to 400 rate springs.

Of course spring free length maters since it dictates the amount of preload on a given shock extended length. But it seems they are all 18” length springs so that is a wash. Very curious how the 400 rate has determined. Do you have other fixed weight over rear axle besides that beast of a tent?

After more in depth discussions with King on my setup, we've landed on 300lb linear springs in the back as a best case scenario. I'm going to give that a try. They'll change them out at no cost if they're not right.

You're correct about the factory springs rates, it seems the King progressives are a bit softer on the tinder portion of the springs than the factory ones. Thats how they get their "better ride quality" unloaded. I think (and they pretty much confirmed) the Kings are not spec'd to provide a lot of weight offset. They tuned more for a soft ride on a stock unloaded vehicle.

Even so, the King don't feel as "wallowy" as the factory springs, but i think that has more to do with the valving/dampening than the spring rates. That being said. I have no complaints about the ride quality of the Kings even though the ride height needs some tuning. The ride and handling is phenomenal (as good as a Bronco can be anyway)

Sponsored