One of the photos I posted above has raised an observation I hope will get some comments in this thread before a new possibly get started as suggested. I will repeat the photo (a 2005 4X4 EX) here and follow with my observation (not the point in this post but, yes, I know the bump stop is missing).




In the front suspension, the lower end of the shock absorber is attached to the bracket that together with the two U-bolts holds down the springs on the axle. In the OE design, the lower shock attachment point is for all intents and purpose as if the bottom shock was attached to the front axle (same height) since the bracket curves downward from the top of the springs.

Now here is my pondering ... to raise my front suspension, blocks are (or were) added which while increasing the hub to fender spacing do nothing to increase the spacing from the upper shock attachment point to the lower one. In other words, the shock that 'worked' prior to the lift is the same as after the lift (no?). Conversely, assuming that the shock I presently have as shown in the photo with the lift is adequate (per the discussion above, it is not but assume it is), why won't it also work after the lift is removed? Same length... So why are shocks for a front end lift sold for different heights when the same shock length is what is needed? In fact, if the shock length when adding a lift is increased from stock you are risking bottoming.

For raising the front end, are there curved springs to accomplish the lift while not using blocks at the axle (as are needed for a lift with the flat OE springs)? If there are, this is when you would need different shocks since the axle to upper shock attachment point changes.

For the rear shocks it is a different story. There the bottom attachment of the shock is to the axle itself so you do need different shocks when lifting the chassis by using blocks.

Am I missing something? I am new to this so I do not mind being told I am wrong. This is how one learns.

 

correct, your front was lifted with a block so it would use a stock length shock, i suspect whom ever did this did not understand what they were doing and used the longer shock that would be required when a spring with a taller arc is used.

your front springs have the stock amount of travel, longer springs with a taller arc have more suspension travel.

your setup only increases ride height and raises the center of gravity ( reducing handling ) with no real benefit while the taller arc springs increase suspension travel allowing for a better suspension setup able to offer a better ride and handling ( when done correctly)

 

Tried it as suggested and had to backtrack. The Nitto tires I have (LT255/65/R20 G2) have a 34.6 inch diameter and there was significant rub on the outside edge of fender metal, not just the liner. I do not want to trim the fender as you have done in yours and changing the tires is not an option since they are brand new (a hefty investment).

In fact, now that I've had the EX for a couple months I have gotten to like the 2 inch lift and would be fine with it (but no higher). So here is my next question ... If I want to keep the 2 inch lift, which works well with my tires and do the lift right (not raised with the blocks as it currently is), which spring/shock replacement would be recommended?

In another thread you recommended, in part, the following which I assume would work for me (??) ...

Finally, would I need the adjustable track bar if I am going to take out the bottom leaf to get just a 2 inch lift?

Thanks