Come on guy! While it's very cool that you brought a new thingy to market, don't BS people. The "technical programming" is less taxing than learning to use a new cell phone and it takes WAY less time, effort, and potential for screwing things up than fiddling around up under and behind the wheels.

If a person is not willing to spend the money on a tool that can actually save your *** out in the boonies, then they have no business lifting the vehicle for bigger tires in order to get into places where they will be more screwed only having short rods on the vehicle! This is a simple logic problem and rods are the illogical answer.

They are COOL as part of a well planned system approach, but they are entirely inappropriate as the first step.

 

Im not sure I buy the argument that tires not ridding flat. I would think just the opposite; that running rods full-time would be harder on the CVs and other suspension components. I always used my rods as a temp offroad solution. I now have adjustable length rods and IIDTools - I find its best solutions. I shortened the rods 5mm (not 10mm) and had an alignment to calibrate ride height. Now when I use the IIDTool to raise, I can get higher without getting the "out of range" errors.

 

jwest, you have totally articulated my point. Thank you. I have a difficult time with mis-information being spread on this board or others. Johnson came on these message boards pimping his product shamelessly years ago. If they work and they are cheap then fine...just say that and be done with it. The IIDTool is super-simple and it's got a TON of value for the price. Don't try to fleece anyone. That's horse$hit.

@morris: I don't understand why anyone would need both the rods and the IIDTool. The GAP tool has 3 settings plus the original setting. Seems like that's plenty to get all the variety you want. To wit, I also can use the IIDTool at the trailhead to raise and I don't get out-of-range faults.

The "belt and suspenders" approach has never made any sense to me. Doesn't mean I can't be convinced that there's a value there, I just don't see it at this point.

 

...or at least slight-of-hand. You are saying that this is an advantage of JRs vs. IIDTool. HOWEVER, anyone that wants to can also just raise the vehicle with the IIDTool, get it aligned at that height, and keep it there. Thus accomplishing exactly what you describe.

It's not a differentiating characteristic of the two products, it's fleece. This is the reason why Black Forest Ham took such issue with you on the other message board. Shameless plugging and misleading people.

 

...as for your technical description of the tire/stress:

1. What happens when you articulate?
2. What does airing-down do to the model you describe?

(Those are rhetorical questions)

Agree with morris that I'd rather run the lift part time, at trail head only than full-time. Aligned or not, it's got potential to put added stress on the drivetrain components. I'd rather do that at slow speeds on a trail for 5-10 miles than on the highway all the time.

 

@houm_wa My understanding of of the LR alignment process would reset any IIDTool software height increases back to factory heights (unless you had a side conversation with the technician). I have also heard that due to LR manufacturing variation in sensor placement not all LR3's have the same IIDTool max increase.

I had used the rods part time for years and "upgraded" to the IIDTool - planned to resell the rods. I found that the IDDTool to be a more costly and superior solution (as already discussed reasons), but my LR3 would not go quite as high as my adjustable rods. I would get out-of-range errors . Setting my adjustable rods at 5mm (rather than typical 10mm) and resetting the physical ride height to OEM gives my sensors more room to go up without errors. My only concern was now out-of-range in access height now, but has not been an issue.

I guess with the variations in height sensor build placement and LR3's can only go as high as the travel of the most restrictive sensor. My IDDTool/LR3 will now run +50mm (and offroad setting as needed) with no problems. YMMV

 

morris, if your LR3 would get out-of-range errors with the IIDTool, wouldn't they get them with the adjustable rods, too? If the LR3 can only go as high as the most restrictive sensor, then that is the limiting factor as you suggest, not the IIDTool nor the modified rods. It seems to me that you can simply create different settings with the IIDTool that represent everything you are doing now with both the 5 MM shortened rods AND the tool. You said: "my LR3 would not go quite as high as my adjustable rods." How is that possible? If you were not getting out-of-range errors without the rods but you were with the IIDTool that means that the rods were giving you less lift, and you could accomplish that with the IIDTool by requesting a bit less.

What you've done with the 5 mm-rods can be accomplished as well by setting that height as your new baseline in the IIDTool, then adjusting your settings as you wish. I'm sorry I just don't see what you're doing as buying you anything that you cannot do with the IIDTool only.

As for your point about the alignment wiping out previous settings from the IIDTool....I didn't know that. Thanks for the info; that does change things a bit.

 

No, morris is doing exactly what I did. I tried to search for my post, but haven't been able to find it, but we went back and forth over this same thing before. The IID tool is effectively giving you control over the part of the sensor range that is between the calibration point and the highest setting (250). By using the adjustable height rods, you are effectively lowering that calibration point, thus giving you wider range to raise the truck with just the IID tool. Ideally, you would be able make your height rods the exact length to calibrate each sensor at 150 (the lowest setting), which having the correct standard height. Then, you would be able to raise the truck a full 100mm with just the IID tool whenever you want to go offroad. Of course, this will never happen, but it would be nice.

 

I remember going back-n-forth with you, too!

So, the calibration point thing makes some sense to me....but isn't the upper limit the upper limit regardless of where you start? If we can agree on that, and your goal is adjustability more so than getting to the upper set-point and being done, then we can all agree and move on.

If you are asserting that by lowering the calibration point you can then get more lift, I'd have to question how since 250 will always be the highest setting.

Good discussion, please don't take it as me being argumentative, I'm really trying to better my understanding here.

 

Definitely not taking you as being argumentative! No worries there.

250 is the upper limit no matter what, but remember, this is an upper limit of the sensor (or technically of the EAS ECU I think), not of the height of the car. If you were to move the sensor up or down on the car frame, you would have still have the 150-250 limit in the calibration range of the sensor, but you would have different heights of the vehicle. Basically, what it means is that you have less adjustibility in the downwards direction, but more in the upwards direction.

So... first let's define the term "calibration point" - this is the position of the sensor arm at which the wheel arch of the car sits the proper distance from the center of the wheel center (466mm for front wheels, 485mm for rear wheels)

Now, let's assume your standard height rods are on the car, and the calibration point of a front sensor is 210. Not taking into account any of the other wheels for the sake of simplicity, this means that you have 40 units of travel left before you hit the upper limit. One "unit of travel" for the sensor arm is approximately a mm of distance between the wheel arch and the center of the wheel... so you have approximately 40mm that you can raise the car with the IID tool.

Now, let's assume you put on shortened height rods. If you don't do anything at this point, you will have raised the height of the car. The shortened rods, will move the sensor arm, which will in turn, raise the car. Now, let's assume you recalibrate the car, because you want it to be at normal ride height. After calibration, you are at 466mm of ride height again, but your sensor is now at position 180 let's say. Now, you are back to normal ride height, but instead of 40 units (mm) to play with, you have 70 units (mm) of upward travel to play with.