PDA

View Full Version : TOTM: Coilovers



rstrucks
11-01-2010, 10:40 AM
Post what you know!

For you guys that are running them - can you post up the specs of your COs and the corner weights of your rig.

SirFuego
11-01-2010, 12:33 PM
Any chance we could extend this to a coilovers vs. air shocks debate?

Also, excluding any additional bracketery needing for mounting, what is the "true cost" of going to coilovers? I know most of them are nitrogen charged, so how much extra does that add to the cost since they need to be charged?

Very interested on how folks have "tuned" their coilovers (via valving, swapping coils, etc.). I know most folks tune them to where they are "good enough" and others go on a never-ending mission for a perfect setup, so I'm curious how the methods differ.

ATL ZJ
11-01-2010, 12:50 PM
There are a lot of ways to set up coilovers. Many right and a few wrong. A lot of it is personal preference, especially when it comes to the softness or firmness of the ride.

Before you start you'll need to make some decisions:

1. Amount of travel desired (i.e. 14" total)
2. Split of travel up/down, and ride height (i.e. 6 up, 8 down)
3. Approximation of corner sprung weight (although not critical- this can be measured)
4. General idea of mounting locations, rake (angle) etc.
5. What kind of wheeling you plan to do

I'm gonna do this in a story format so it's not all about me, but everything here is based on my experiences... it's all fictional and forgive me if it's too lame and basic. With that disclaimer, here goes...

Let's take Ryan's ZJ (rstrucks). I have no idea what his CSW (corner sprung weight) is, but let's focus on the front and say sprung weight is 900 lb on each front corner. Again this is just a guess. Let's say Ryan wants to keep his existing ride height. He wants as much travel as he can realistically get. He doesn't really want to cut his hood for shock hoops to poke through, and when he droops out his suspension he measures that he only has about 9" of droop (from his desired ride height) before his driveshaft yoke (or trackbar, longarm, etc. etc.) starts to bind. He has measured his uptravel (from his existing ride height) and it's about 5" or so.

So although he was hoping for 16" coilovers, he realizes that he can't use all that uptravel or droop, without doing surgery on his pretty 5.9 hood, and decides that 14" would be a better fit. He knows that he will be running about 35% uptravel (5/14) and about 65% droop travel (9/14) on a 14" shock. He wants his ride to be a little firmer than it is with regular coils he has now. They seemed to have gotten soft after adding a front bumper and winch. Let's also assume that Ryan plans to mount these coilovers more or less straight up and down, rather than raking them inboard or toward the front or back of the rig.

Now that Ryan has determined how long of a shock he needs, he is ready to do some calculating. He's done some reading and has read that it's customary to run two springs with lengths equal to the total shock travel. So he is expecting to run two 14" springs. Has read that a 250% step up, or increase in rate from the primary rate to the secondary rate is pretty normal. So he uses an online calculator from his favorite shock manufacturer, and determines that for his front shocks, his rates need to be somewhere around 160 over 240. The closest he can find in 14" springs is 150 and 250, so he orders up his springs and shocks with the valving recommendations of his favorite shock builder.

He gets all his parts in, and builds his shock mounts. He decides to tack it all up at ride height, using the shocks without springs on them for mockup. He measures to have about 5" of shock shaft showing, although he could have easily taken the rig to full bump and mounted the shocks at full compression to maximize his total travel. Then Ryan pulls the shocks off his rig, and charges them with nitrogen while they are fully extended. He installs his springs, and runs the upper adjuster all the way down until it preloads the springs slightly. He notes the position of the dual rate slider in between the springs, and adjusts the dual rate stopper all the way up and out of the way. He installs the shocks with springs on them, and lets the rig down off the jack to rest on the springs. It's about perfect. The ride height is almost exactly what he wanted. He adjusts the dual rate stopper to be a few inches above the dual rate slider, about half his total uptravel, as a starting point for his step up. Ryan tightens his bolts and packs up to go wheeling the next weekend.

Ryan wheels it and loves it. It seems smoother, etc blah blah. The biggest improvement is in rock gardens, but on gravel roads in between trails it bottoms out on waterbars. Ryan thinks that maybe his dual rate stopper is too low, so he adjusts it down an inch and keeps wheeling. It seems better, but the suspension still feels really soft at first. He adjusts the dual rate stopper down even more, so that the dual rate slider is almost riding on the stopper all the time. Something doesn't seem right. He wonders if his rates are correct even though the calculator said they would be.

Ryan gets home and does a little more reading. He comes across a simple formula for combined spring rates. (Rate 1)(Rate 2) / (Rate 1 + Rate 2). In his case (150)(250)/400 or 37,500/450= 93.75. So his initial rate is 93.75, and when the dual rate slider hits the stopper, and the rig is riding only on the bottom/main spring, the spring rate jumps up to 250. That works out to be a 266% stepup, because of the variation in springs available vs. what the calculator said he needed for a 250% stepup. Ryan decides he wants a stiffer initial rate (before the slider hits the stopper) and starts looking at springs again. He thinks about buying a stiffer top spring, like a 200 or even a 250, that is also shorter, to let him maintain the same ride height. He starts to run the calculations and then realizes that with a shorter spring, he would have to lower the upper adjuster down past where it currently is, to avoid having slack and having the springs bounce around (and on certain shocks, have the lower coil seat fall off). So he just orders up some stiffer springs (let's say 250 lb springs) of the same length. He realizes he will only now have a 200% stepup because his upper and lower springs are the same rate.

Ryan gets the new springs on and the upper adjuster back where it has to be, lets the rig down, and it's taller. He expected that, and decides to live with it, and try it out again. He ends up liking the ride, but he wishes his rig was not quite as tall. So he starts reading up on triple rates, which he'd decided not to buy with his shocks, and realizes that with a triple rate, he could run shorter stiffer springs as he had wanted. Unfortunately, to install triple rate sliders and springs, the dual rate stopper is in the way. He has to either take his shocks apart and bleed and reassemble them, or send them back to the manufacturer.

So after a crash course in shock rebuilding, he ends up running a 12" long 250lb spring over a 14" 250 lb spring with a flat triple rate coil. He ends up liking the overall firmness of ride and the ride height is finally correct. He wished he did it all that way in the first place but he learned a lot in the process.

Ryan thanks for being our guinea pig in this story. ;) I'm sure you would figure it out faster than this. (edit to make the calcs work out for 900 lbs CSW.)

ATL ZJ
11-01-2010, 12:58 PM
Air shocks suck. They fade embarrassingly fast, require a lot of patience in tuning, are oversensitive to temperature and make otherwise stable rigs flop or roll over. They also can't be adjusted to step up in rate at a specific point like coilovers can. With air shocks you are going to get a continually more progressive rate and jacking on a corner that has less weight on it, whether you like it or not.

Coilovers are definitely worth the extra expense.

CrawlerReady
11-01-2010, 01:09 PM
Definitely a great topic! I'm going to learn all I can here. Those are definitely in my future, whether it be for the ZJ or a new buggy.

FortCollinsZJ
11-01-2010, 02:57 PM
Perfect timing for this thread! UPS JUST dropped of my 14" FOA's. :cheer: I'm not sure where the springs are though.

First question, What PSI is a good starting point to charge the shocks to?

ATL ZJ
11-01-2010, 03:04 PM
I run about 150 or 175 psi. Damping is not that dependent on nitrogen pressure as much as oil weight and valving...

rstrucks
11-02-2010, 10:53 AM
Ryan thanks for being our guinea pig in this story. ;) I'm sure you would figure it out faster than this.

That is pretty close to how it would go. Good story. :)



What do you guys think about running COs and no sway bar? You would need to live with the extra body roll or run stiffer springs but is there a happy medium?

Any brand preferences? Why? I know one manufacturer has a reputation of less than stellar quality control.

How long does it take or difficult is it to take apart a CO to rebuild or change the valving? I have never taken one apart and I assume it is pretty straight forward.

SirFuego
11-02-2010, 11:17 AM
Anyone have thoughts/experiences on ORI Struts?

They look to be a great solution for rock crawling since they supposedly don't require a sway bar, bumpstops, or limit straps. I've run the numbers and they really aren't any more expensive than a good set of coilovers with bumps, sway bars, etc. They also look to be really easy to tune.

CrawlerReady
11-02-2010, 11:52 AM
Anyone have thoughts/experiences on ORI Struts?

They look to be a great solution for rock crawling since they supposedly don't require a sway bar, bumpstops, or limit straps. I've run the numbers and they really aren't any more expensive than a good set of coilovers with bumps, sway bars, etc. They also look to be really easy to tune.

Just quickly looking at them, they look to me like they are similar to an air shock. Being that if you blew a seal on one of them, then there goes your suspension. With coilovers, you still have a coil that is the suspension....correct?

ATL ZJ
11-02-2010, 12:26 PM
Yeah that story is basically what I went through, just adapted more for a ZJ...

The moral of that story might seem like "run triple rate or else", but in reality, double rate is fine especially with less corner weight. The need for triple rates just becomes more prominent the larger % droop travel is of your total travel (i.e. on rigs with minimal uptravel). That's because with a double rate you'll generally need to run springs double the length of travel and compress the springs to reach ride height. The more a spring has to compress to reach ride height, the lower its frequency is going to be, and the softer the ride will be. Triple rates are just a way to stiffen the ride without jacking up the ride height.

I thought I wanted to run a plush initial rate with a huge step up, and found out that I liked a firmer initial rate instead. I don't run any swaybars on my rig but I set the suspension up with higher roll centers and it's fine. Setting your step up a few inches into your travel prevents excessive body roll too.

I like FOA and SAW's misalignment spacers because they snap into the rod end that is built into shock eye. It makes them way easier to install than Fox shocks that just have loose spacers. Fox has a nice lower spring seat however, that is captured by an o-ring and snapring instead of being notched to slider off the shaft when there is no preload. So they all have their pros and cons.

Disassembly and reassembly is not really that tough. You just need a clean work area, a bunch of patience, and an ability to carefully follow instructions. You also need access to a nitrogen charging setup too.

Kraqa
11-03-2010, 10:51 PM
Cam prtty much hit the nail on the head. there is much to be considered before you go out and buy a set of CO's.

the benefits of airshocks can only really be seen on a rig that is lightweight and running very little up travel 2-3" max. so basically your limited to a comp buggy.

at that amoutn of up travel your running so little nitrogen maybe 60 PSI that unloading doesn;t happen that fast due to the valving and can be controlled with a suckdown winch. think about it. if you run 6" of uptravel and one side starts to unload in an offcamber situation. you will suck down the one side all 6" untill it hits the bump stop then it will start to pull the unloading side back level.

I agree that fox has the best lower spring cut design. Radflow is very close behind however they do not run a oring and the cup can come loose. Radflo also has the same style of heim spacer on the rod ends. One thing i have noticed is that Radflo's billet aluminum ends ont he lower side of the shock is much longer then the fox's. Pic attached.

Also if your interested in the diference between remove resevoir and non remote resevoir:

Coil overs that DO NOT have a remote resevoir are charged with notrogen just like an air shock. the notrogen and oil mix. some of the notrogen gets absorbed into the oil hence the name (emulsion shocks). when the shock compresses the internal volume of the shock body (the phisical space inside the shock) gets reduced by the amount of volume the shock shaft itself. This imcreases the pressure inside of the shock and creates a similar spring affect like an airshock.

Coil overs with the remote resevoir operate the same with a few exceptions. the resevoirs you see attached to the side or on a hose have a piston in them. on the hoze side of the piston it is all shock oil. on the other side (where you find the shrader valve for filling the shocks) there is an open air cavity and a spring). the notrogen charge filles the empty cavity of the resevoir. as the shock shaft travels up into the shock body (reducing the internal volume of the shock body) the shock oil displaces into the resevoir. This pushed on the piston and then compresses the nitrogen gas. It is the same principal as an airshock or an emulsion shock except the shock oil and the nitrogen as seperated. THis is a much more predictable shock because there is no emulsion, and they deal with heat better because of the increased oil capacity having a resevoir.

i hope this helps.

SirFuego
11-04-2010, 02:21 PM
Coil overs that DO NOT have a remote resevoir ...
This imcreases the pressure inside of the shock and creates a similar spring affect like an airshock.
So since they can create a "spring" effect, does that mean that the valving can be tweaked to "change" the spring rate of the entire coilover system?

For example, if you start with 150/250 spring rates and it feels too soft, is it possible that you can make the valving stiffer so that the entire coilover operates "like" a 175/275 spring combo (so you change the valving instead of swapping springs)? Of course I'm assuming that there is a limit to how far you can deviate from the physical spring rates.

So in other words -- if you get your spring rates "close enough", can you just tweak the valving get it closer to the "ideal" spring rates?

SirFuego
11-04-2010, 02:34 PM
Damping is not that dependent on nitrogen pressure as much as oil weight and valving...

So what effect does nitrogen pressure have? FOA has a recommended charge of 100-150psi for non-res coilovers. What sort of difference in performance can I expect from charging them to 100psi vs. 150 psi?

zjeepin
11-04-2010, 04:07 PM
Nice posts Cam and Kris... I'm learning, i just dont know enough to ask questions yet. I'm a trial and error kindaguy

SirFuego
11-04-2010, 04:27 PM
I'm learning, i just dont know enough to ask questions yet.

Haha. I have no idea how "stupid" my questions actually are, but I'm just posting up whatever comes to my head (remember my incessant questioning and PMs about the full hydro stuff?) I know it will ultimately come down to trial and error and the final result will be based on personal preference, but I'm just trying to understand what variables can be tweaked and (at least qualitatively) what to expect.

Kraqa
11-04-2010, 09:05 PM
So since they can create a "spring" effect, does that mean that the valving can be tweaked to "change" the spring rate of the entire coilover system?

For example, if you start with 150/250 spring rates and it feels too soft, is it possible that you can make the valving stiffer so that the entire coilover operates "like" a 175/275 spring combo (so you change the valving instead of swapping springs)? Of course I'm assuming that there is a limit to how far you can deviate from the physical spring rates.

So in other words -- if you get your spring rates "close enough", can you just tweak the valving get it closer to the "ideal" spring rates?

Hmmm, Not exactly.

The spring effect that you get if from the shock shaft displacing the internal volume of the shock body. Then the volume gets smaller it compresses its contents in less the contents have a place to go.
Since oil is very difficult to compress and energy follows the path of least resistance it will compress the nitrogen gas. The valving inside of a Coil over is a piston on the end of the shock shaft. This piston has holes through it and covering the holes are a combination of very thing metal disks (shims). As the shock travels in a direction the piston pushes into the oil and forces it to move through the metal holes. The holes are blocked by the thin metal disks and in order for the oil to make it past the piston it needs to “bend” the metal disks. The firmer the disk the more difficult it is for the oil to pass through and the stiffer the shock. Also, the holes size in the piston also dictates the speed in which the oil can pass through. Most valve shims are similar and each shock manufacture has different piston and hole sizes and combinations.

So to answer your question……valving will not affect spring rate. How ever you can play with it and by stiffening it up you can make the shock feel tighter. Effectively slowing down the shocks movement. Spring rates hold the vehicle weight and to some degree affect how the shock reacts. A soft pring rate can be hidden by stiff valving. What this does is it makes it so quick sudden movements will not compress the shock. But long periods of force will eventually make the shock collapse. You can have a coil over setup with very stiff valving and very soft springs it might feel good driving in a straight like but off camber the vehicle can become sloppy. In turn a soft valve with a stiff spring will be good in off camber but drive like a pogo stick at speed.

Remember this is a very simplistic way of lookgin at this.

The weight of the oil will affect the valving. A thicker oil will make your valving seam stiffer.
Nitrogen charge will keep the oil from cavitating (lots of bubbles) cavitation causing the oil to thin out and you will lose your dampening ability. It will also introduce heat into the oil much faster. It will also but you some spring rate and will help the shocks have an air bump feel at damn near full compression, this helps for jumping but not so much for rock crawling,

downtowncb
11-04-2010, 10:39 PM
So what effect does nitrogen pressure have? FOA has a recommended charge of 100-150psi for non-res coilovers. What sort of difference in performance can I expect from charging them to 100psi vs. 150 psi?

I felt very little difference between 100 and 150 psi in my coil overs. Kraqa covered most of the effects. The only other thing I can think of is the higher the pressure, the lower your effective corner weight will be. I.E. the cross sectional area of your shock shaft times the pressure in the shock will give you a force in pounds that subtracts from your sprung weight. This effectively increases your natural frequency a small bit.

SirFuego
11-10-2010, 11:04 AM
Bringing this back up. I posted this on another board trying to get a better understanding how how shocks affect off-road performance, so I figured I'd cross-post here to get some other opinions or flaming:

OK, so revalvable shocks allow you to adjust the valving of the compression and rebound ends. "Light" valving means that it uses thinner shims (creating less "resistance") and "Firm" valving means that it uses thicker shims (creating more "resistance"). Of course there are varying levels in between, too.

So how does that translate into shock performance? Short of contacting shock companies, has anyone found a good resource for understanding how shocks affect off-road performance? Shock tuning seems to be relatively "new" to the John Doe crawling crowd and also seems to be a valued secret for the hi-speed crowd. But I'm just looking for some very general concepts to better understand how I would even think about trying to tune shocks/coilovers. I understand that a lot of it is just trial and error, but having a basic understanding of what to expect when revalving a shock in a particular way seems like it would help the process.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in these statements:

On the compression side:
Light -- provides for a cushier ride, but the shock is less effecting at damping.
Firm -- provides for a stiffer ride, but the shock is more effective at damping.

On the rebound side:
Light -- the shock "unloads" much faster
Firm -- the shock "unloads" much slower

Reading that thread that Eric posted, it looks like the compression valving for a leaf sprung rig is about the same as a coil spring rig, but you want to run lighter rebound valving in a leaf sprung rig since leaf springs "unload" slower than coil springs.

Now from my understanding, for high speed stuff, you want the shock to unload fast to keep the tires on the ground (light rebound). However, for crawling, you don't want the shock to rebound as quickly because that can make the suspension unload too quickly on steeper obstacles.

What about the compression valving? Is it also a tradeoff between speed vs. crawling? Do you want to run a ligher compression for crawling and a firmer for high speed?
OK, so revalvable shocks allow you to adjust the valving of the compression and rebound ends. "Light" valving means that it uses thinner shims (creating less "resistance") and "Firm" valving means that it uses thicker shims (creating more "resistance"). Of course there are varying levels in between, too.

So how does that translate into shock performance? Short of contacting shock companies, has anyone found a good resource for understanding how shocks affect off-road performance? Shock tuning seems to be relatively "new" to the John Doe crawling crowd and also seems to be a valued secret for the hi-speed crowd. But I'm just looking for some very general concepts to better understand how I would even think about trying to tune shocks/coilovers. I understand that a lot of it is just trial and error, but having a basic understanding of what to expect when revalving a shock in a particular way seems like it would help the process.

Please correct me if I'm wrong in these statements:

On the compression side:
Light -- provides for a cushier ride, but the shock is less effecting at damping.
Firm -- provides for a stiffer ride, but the shock is more effective at damping.

On the rebound side:
Light -- the shock "unloads" much faster
Firm -- the shock "unloads" much slower

Reading that thread that Eric posted, it looks like the compression valving for a leaf sprung rig is about the same as a coil spring rig, but you want to run lighter rebound valving in a leaf sprung rig since leaf springs "unload" slower than coil springs.

Now from my understanding, for high speed stuff, you want the shock to unload fast to keep the tires on the ground (light rebound). However, for crawling, you don't want the shock to rebound as quickly because that can make the suspension unload too quickly on steeper obstacles.

What about the compression valving? Is it also a tradeoff between speed vs. crawling? Do you want to run a ligher compression for crawling and a firmer for high speed?

ATL ZJ
11-10-2010, 11:37 AM
IMO the purpose of valving is to keep your tires in contact with the ground as much as possible. Your valving is just slowing down motion by making oil pass through a stack of shims. Firmer valving= more shims= slower pass-through= slower motion.

The notion of calling shocks shock absorbers is an age-old misnomer. They are really spring slowers. Yes they can affect ride quality but the majority of a suspension's stiffness comes from its frequency. Frequency is determined by spring selection. Think of spring selection as the coarse adjustment and valving as a more fine adjustment. To make matters more complicated, the two are co-dependent.

Personally I'm still running the shim stacks that were manufacturer recommended to me, based on my measured corner weights, travel split, and usage. There are some good trial and error threads on pirate (esp in the desert section) where guys have put up test videos and asked for valving advice to make adjustments. But a lot of it is kept pretty hush, or just trial and error. Some guys even drill a hole in some of their shims to simulate a bypass shock... Just like anything else, there are different schools of thought.

AgitatedPancake
11-10-2010, 12:39 PM
I have been getting a better and better feel for how important Frequency is over the past year. It realllllly comes into play as you start to pick up the pace of your driivng overall. I've discovered I LOVE doing "hot laps", faster sections of the trail at a higher pace. On trails like the rubicon, due to the length there are alot of cruising sections that aren't as difficult. In fact one of the fastest runs I've had was dropping in @ GSR to meet the guys. I did a section that normally takes 3-4 hours in 1.5, racing the daylight.

At high speeds, if your frequency is pretty well balanced for the vehicle and terrain your suspension does all its work cycling up and down without transmitting much force into the body, meaning a smooth consistent ride inside. I REALLY want to get a gopro camera to mount outside looking at my suspension work so I can really watch whats going on and tune things visually. Being able to see everything in that perspective alone would let you tune your suspension. Basically frequency is measured in Hz, and I feel like people like frequency's between like 1.3-1.9Hz (the pace the body wants to oscillate if just the spring is effecting it (no shocks)). So if your driving a terrain that is forcing your suspension to compress/decompress 1.3-1.9 times per second, almost none of the energy would be transferred into the body, as you're not fighting the frequency it WANTs to move in

CrawlerReady
11-22-2010, 12:52 AM
I'm sure most the info in this thread has already covered the info here http://www.mallcrawlin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22341

But I figured it would be worth posting in here as well.

zj-on-the-rocks
12-03-2010, 01:04 AM
Does anyone know how much effect the angle and or rake has on the CO?

FortCollinsZJ
12-03-2010, 04:49 AM
Does anyone know how much effect the angle and or rake has on the CO?

Angle of the coilovers from vertical will change the characteristics. There are many mathematical possibilities and equations that will determine how they perform.

Scroll down to "the angle factor" about 2/3" the way down this page

http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/coilovers/Part_1/

Another cool option for coilovers, is the cantilever setup, pretty ingenious idea, but seems like it would be a PITA to tune and setup.

http://image.automotive.com/f/techarticles/suspension/10688853+soriginal/131_0809_07_z+2007_jeep_wrangler_jk_evo_lever_coil over_suspension_kit+kit_installed_under_view.jpg
http://4wheeloffroad.automotive.com/85332/131-0809-jeep-wrangler-jk-evo-lever-coilover-suspension-kit/photos0-0.html

SirFuego
09-26-2012, 12:54 PM
For those that have run air shocks/coilovers -- what sort of orientation do you shoot for in your initial setup or have you found works best?

Based on my research these are the things I'll be shooting for:

1) Axle side mounts as far apart as possible without rubbing a tire when cycling the suspension.

2) When fully flexed, the shock on the "stuffed" side should be perpendicular to the axle tube.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/general-4x4-discussion/901313-airshock-coilover-angles-when-flexed.html

3) When viewed from the side, the shock should be as straight up and down as possible. Although a small rake forward or backward is acceptable.

4) Run the mounting bolts oriented front-back to minimize misalignment throughout travel. Although any mounting orientation is acceptable as long as things don't bind.

5) Mounting the shock on top, forward, or behind the axle tube doesn't matter provided that the mount is strong enough and of course everything is accessible. It looks like RuffStuff offers strong sidemount brackets if it's necessary.

Anything I'm missing or misunderstanding? I understand that I may not be able to achieve every single one given the chassis, but I'm looking for an "ideal" list and tweak things from there once I start playing around with things.

zjeepin
09-26-2012, 03:43 PM
sounds like you are on the right track jared...

AgitatedPancake
09-26-2012, 06:25 PM
I highly suggest checking out this newer spring rate theory thread on pirate...it's definately enough to make your head hurt but I've gathered a TON from it and have a whole new direction of concept for dialing in suspensions.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/general-4x4-discussion/1074029-spring-tech-thread.html

I'll come back and do some summarizing of what I've learned from it...it's cool stuff

4XFUNZJ
06-13-2014, 01:06 AM
I know this I an old thread but ATL ZJ, Do you have a build thread or detailed pictures because I would basically like to do the same thing.

ATL ZJ
06-13-2014, 11:18 AM
Yes. It's called the unibugly and it's under the build thread section

Kraqa
01-12-2015, 11:46 PM
cam do you still wheel it?

ATL ZJ
01-13-2015, 12:44 AM
cam do you still wheel it?

yeah man we still gotta go hit the trails sometime