OME on Jimny, what's the point?

If the Old man Emu suspention does not increase suspension travel (as evidenced by there being no requirement to extend the brake hoses) and the JB74 Jimny doesnt do well with 235/75 tyres without altering the gearing, then whats the point?

I aknowledge that it probably improves of the ride, but having transitioned from a SJ413 its already a huge improvment for me.
 

Both  Buzz Special Vehicles  and  Storm Jeeps  who both supply only or supply and fit to the Jimny recomend fitting extended brake lines, and I'm sure I heard that was based on information from OME themselves.

Soeley wrote: Both  Buzz Special Vehicles  and  Storm Jeeps  who both supply only or supply and fit to the Jimny recomend fitting extended brake lines, and I'm sure I heard that was based on information from OME themselves.

I watched a vid on the OME or ARB YouTube channel were they explain that they designed the kit for use with standard brake lines. The OME site makes no mentioned of longer ones being required. So I suspect any UK places selling them are just doing so as extra sales money as the primary reason, plus maybe attempting some ass covering should something happen with a kit they sold.

Lambert wrote: The 40mm ome kit does increase articulation of the wheels but it does that within the limit of the factory brake flexible lines. Other kits may have a similar headline lift but may have even longer dampers which allows undue stress on the standard lines. Also old man emu is a vehicle specific solution designed for the actual car rather than an assembly of parts that happen to fit a Jimny but were designed for something entirely different.

What other kits don't include or recommend longer brake lines when they have longer shocks? Also to be fair, OME also just assemble the kit from their own parts catalog. I don't believe the shocks are bespokely designed or built just for the JB74.

stuart wrote: If the Old man Emu suspention does not increase suspension travel (as evidenced by there being no requirement to extend the brake hoses) and the JB74 Jimny doesnt do well with 235/75 tyres without altering the gearing, then whats the point?

I aknowledge that it probably improves of the ride, but having transitioned from a SJ413 its already a huge improvment for me.


 

It's a good question.

I have to say, I'm personally a little torn on the choice of suspension kits.

From what I can tell, OME as a rule offer a well developed kit that will ride better than stock and still be nice on road for some spirited driving.

But the amount of additional travel they offer is limited compared to other kits of similar money/market segment. It is a shame they don't offer a kit with longer shocks.

I have emailed them, only last week on this. They got back to me super quick wanting to know which Oz State I was in, so they could pass me onto a local retailer. I emailed back explaining I was in the UK and again restated what I was after and if they could help. Since then complete and utter silence.

Such a shame they seem a poor company to deal with. I originally wanted to buy their winch bumper and rock rails, but hit the same issue. So went off and bought items from other companies in the end.

I have avoided joining the conversations regarding articulation on the Gen 4 but would like to add one thing to the subject.

For those following these threads, discussing shocks and springs is obviously appropriate but there is one other thing that is often omitted. While shock and spring length are factors, another piece that should be considered is the limiting travel of the radius arms. For the Gen 3, measurements between top and bottom shock mounts have been taken by a member on another forum. These measurements were taken with springs and shocks removed and one side completely compressed (hard on bumpstops) and the other side fully extended. While this was a Gen 3 (and why I have avoided joining Gen 4 discussions), the dimensions should be similar. Even with some difference, consideration of the radius arm travel should still exist.

For the front shocks, with the sway bar removed, the fully compressed dimension for the mounts was 312mm . Fully extended, the dimension was 455mm. For the rear, those dimensions were 350mm and 455mm. In the case of a stock Gen 3, using a shock with compression and extension figures much beyond those numbers provides little benefit.

Edit: 300bhpton: While I avoid giving any public opinions about manufacturers, multiply your experience with ARB several times, and that is why I no longer do business with them.



 

zukebob wrote: I have avoided joining the conversations regarding articulation on the Gen 4 but would like to add one thing to the subject.

For those following these threads, discussing shocks and springs is obviously appropriate but there is one other thing that is often omitted. While shock and spring length are factors, another piece that should be considered is the limiting travel of the radius arms. For the Gen 3, measurements between top and bottom shock mounts have been taken by a member on another forum. These measurements were taken with springs and shocks removed and one side completely compressed (hard on bumpstops) and the other side fully extended. While this was a Gen 3 (and why I have avoided joining Gen 4 discussions), the dimensions should be similar. Even with some difference, consideration of the radius arm travel should still exist.

For the front shocks, with the sway bar removed, the fully compressed dimension for the mounts was 312mm . Fully extended, the dimension was 455mm. For the rear, those dimensions were 350mm and 455mm. In the case of a stock Gen 3, using a shock with compression and extension figures much beyond those numbers provides little benefit.

Edit: 300bhpton: While I avoid giving any public opinions about manufacturers, multiply your experience with ARB several times, and that is why I no longer do business with them.




 

Seeing as the radius arms are the same part numbers, the travel should be pretty close.  My Gen 3 (deceased) scored the same as my Gen 4 on a 20 degree ramp. Both lifted and had their anti-roll bar removed.

zukebob wrote: I have avoided joining the conversations regarding articulation on the Gen 4 but would like to add one thing to the subject.

For those following these threads, discussing shocks and springs is obviously appropriate but there is one other thing that is often omitted. While shock and spring length are factors, another piece that should be considered is the limiting travel of the radius arms. For the Gen 3, measurements between top and bottom shock mounts have been taken by a member on another forum. These measurements were taken with springs and shocks removed and one side completely compressed (hard on bumpstops) and the other side fully extended. While this was a Gen 3 (and why I have avoided joining Gen 4 discussions), the dimensions should be similar. Even with some difference, consideration of the radius arm travel should still exist.

For the front shocks, with the sway bar removed, the fully compressed dimension for the mounts was 312mm . Fully extended, the dimension was 455mm. For the rear, those dimensions were 350mm and 455mm. In the case of a stock Gen 3, using a shock with compression and extension figures much beyond those numbers provides little benefit.

Edit: 300bhpton: While I avoid giving any public opinions about manufacturers, multiply your experience with ARB several times, and that is why I no longer do business with them.




 

Thanks for the useful information. Finding measurements on the shocks/springs seems challenging also.

Ironman4x4 offer some kit and I'd love to know how much potential flex they have. As they do include the cross member drop bracket and longer brake lines. I'd also like to know how they ride by comparison.

Jimnybits has been more helpful and claim that their front shocks are +2" over standard, while the Trail Master and OME are only +1" for the front. But I don't know any official closed/extended shock lengths.

The Trailmaster kit only supplies replacement hoses for the rear. The front hoses hang approx. vertical whereas the rears are more like 45Deg and that created the need for the longer hoses. Once fitted, the ride height increased by 46 and 47mm at the front and 55mm for both at the back.

An increase in articulation requires a number of factors that need to work together. Space within the wheel wells for the tyres to move, availability of movement within the design of the shocks and ditto the suspension design. On the Jimny this later point is controlled by the void bushes on the leading and trailing arms binding and the restriction on anti roll bar. These restrictions will not improve articulation because, as long as the original design allowed articulation to the max. ie void bush binding, you cannot go any further without modifications to the mountings. A suspension lift increases clearance by raising the bodywork. It does not increase clearance under the axles.

Roger

That just proves my point. Your articulation, based on measurements taken from the photo, indicate 7" front to back which is similar to the extended/compressed length Trailmaster series 2 shocks for the Gen.4. Once the leading/trailing arms bind on the mountings, any further articulation ceases.

Roger