Leveling Kit vs Spacer Lift vs Full Suspension Upgrade — What Actually Makes Sense on the LC250

[DubDub]

I don't really want to go larger than the 275/70r18s that I have now unless I go with a pizza cutter 34" (if it fits in spare tire location) because of the spare tire location fitment.
I've had KO2s for years and the KO3s definitely ride a bit rougher. Right now I'm trying to figure out the right psi to run for the best balance of comfort and MPGs. I filled up the tank today after 6 days and almost 200 miles running 37 psi for my daily driving and Fuelio said 16.86 mpg. I'm not happy with that, so I increased to 40 psi and will see what happens. I had previously gotten 20 mpg at 37 psi on an overnight trip to Badwater Basin and Tecopa and back to Vegas.

Sorry if you mentioned already, but are your KO3s E load?

Edit: I’m a dummy, of course they are, I was thinking ATIIIs. I don’t personally subscribe to the “unsprung weight” narrative in the way these youtube and paper experts do. It’s a thing, but I’m an engineer and their interpretation of the effect doesn’t compute. However… Those stiff feet are going to definitely impact mpg and ride by the nature of their composition.

 

[CerberusSasha]

Sorry if you mentioned already, but are your KO3s E load?

Edit: I’m a dummy, of course they are, I was thinking ATIIIs. I don’t personally subscribe to the “unsprung weight” narrative in the way these youtube and paper experts do. It’s a thing, but I’m an engineer and their interpretation of the effect doesn’t compute. However… Those stiff feet are going to definitely impact mpg and ride by the nature of their composition.

I knew MPG would be impacted some, but didn't expect this much since I was getting 20 mpg on the stock Michelins. I'm hoping it was just a bad week or the pump shut off sooner than normal the last time I filled up.
I'm also only at 2100 miles on the engine and I've heard that the MPGs might go up a little after 5000 miles on the truck. I also read somewhere that they are supposed to be coming out with D load, but I haven't looked into that since I just bought these.

Edit: Just looked on BFGs website and they offer D load in 265/70r18, but not 275 unfortunately.

 

[DubDub]

I knew MPG would be impacted some, but didn't expect this much since I was getting 20 mpg on the stock Michelins. I'm hoping it was just a bad week or the pump shut off sooner than normal the last time I filled up.
I'm also only at 2100 miles on the engine and I've heard that the MPGs might go up a little after 5000 miles on the truck. I also read somewhere that they are supposed to be coming out with D load, but I haven't looked into that since I just bought these.

Edit: Just looked on BFGs website and they offer D load in 265/70r18, but not 275 unfortunately.

I gotcha, hoping for the best for you. I’m going with the Terra Graps in 275 SLs. Just trying to find the right wheel, I really want to run at least an 8” wide.

 

[WeCruising]

While everyone on IG loves flexing their huge setup with 37's, I think what you're wanting is really the sweet spot and where most of us would like to be.

If you like the way the truck rides from the factory, the key is figuring out whether you truly need “a few inches” of lift, or just enough clearance to run the tire size you’re after.

A couple things to consider:

• Larger tires alone will give you real ground clearance at the diff.
• A lift with a gentle damper or even just a leveling kit will improve wheel clearance and stance dramatically without giving the rig a whole new personality.
• Switching to a full-blown off-road damper changes the personality fast and often leaves you thinking "Oh shoot. I went too far".

The sweet spot for most people who want to keep OEM feel is:
– No more lift than you need
– No more spring rate than you need
– Carefully chosen tire size and load range

What tire size are you hoping to run?

Lots of conversation about how lift kits decrease articulation. So, how do you increase articulation? How do you lift and increase articulation (if that's possible)?

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

I knew MPG would be impacted some, but didn't expect this much since I was getting 20 mpg on the stock Michelins. I'm hoping it was just a bad week or the pump shut off sooner than normal the last time I filled up.
I'm also only at 2100 miles on the engine and I've heard that the MPGs might go up a little after 5000 miles on the truck. I also read somewhere that they are supposed to be coming out with D load, but I haven't looked into that since I just bought these.

Edit: Just looked on BFGs website and they offer D load in 265/70r18, but not 275 unfortunately.

Damn! The BFG's are iconic but the E load only in many good sizes has always steered me away for Toyotas. They can't be beaten for heavy trucks! Fingers crossed your MPG's improve after the winter blend fuel + engine break in are through!

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

I gotcha, hoping for the best for you. I’m going with the Terra Graps in 275 SLs. Just trying to find the right wheel, I really want to run at least an 8” wide.

Let me know if we can help with either the wheel, tire, or both for your build!

 

[CerberusSasha]

We have done so much without a lift and 265/70R18 AT tires. We are planning on doing the White Rim trail out at Moab this year, which is around 90-100mi off road and a multi-day trip.

The LC has excellent articulation from the factory, and MOST lift kits will reduce that in the front (Including those from ARB). Yes, you can do a 5/10 trail, but all trails aren't created equal. I would start with every piece of armor that Toyota sells, along with rock rails. Then, invest in a lot of recovery equipment. Figure out the limits of the base LC (which are VERY high) and yourself. My limit is a 5/10 on well know routes, and a 4/10 otherwise. The issue is, especially here out West, that 4/10 can become literally impassible in the rain / snow / or depending on season. 5/10 trails may have some very steep ledges or drop-offs that you would feel comfortable doing in a beater, but not a $70,000 brand-new Toyota.

My first trip to Moab, it was bone-stock, including the OEM 245's. We did some very fun and scenic trails (which the most scenic trail in Moab you can basically do in a Subaru) - so not all trails are created equal. I want to say we did 40-50mi off-road the first day.

Worst thing that'll happen (for me anyways), is you need to track build or choose an easier line. Not every obstacle on the trail needs to be tackled, and this isn't really a rock crawler by any stretch. I've had to get out and build a lot of track, it takes a little time, but that's the fun aspect of it.

The articul

Damn! The BFG's are iconic but the E load only in many good sizes has always steered me away for Toyotas. They can't be beaten for heavy trucks! Fingers crossed your MPG's improve after the winter blend fuel + engine break in are through!

I'm not even sure that I have winter blend fuel since I live in the desert. Lol. I'd never even heard of it until a couple months ago.
I'll be okay if I get 18 mpg for my average tank of combined driving, not happy, but okay.

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

Lots of conversation about how lift kits decrease articulation. So, how do you increase articulation? How do you lift and increase articulation (if that's possible)?

Excellent question. There is a ton of misinformation out there but it's actually not too terribly bad.

On a double wishbone (IFS) front suspension like these trucks use, lift height and articulation aren’t automatically tied together. What really determines articulation is usable suspension travel — meaning how much bump and droop the shock allows before something binds or tops out.

With a true top-mount spacer (not a preload/collar spacer), you’re not changing spring rate or total shock stroke. So you’re not adding articulation — but you’re also not magically gaining travel either. Because ride height increases but the shock remains at its same position at ride height, articulation is essentially unchanged.

With a preload/collar spacer, the spring is now much more preloaded with the same strut length, so you're now sitting closer to topping out, significantly reducing down travel. On the street, this is likely not a big deal, but you'll absolutely notice it off road.

That’s why height-focused solutions and travel-focused solutions aren’t the same thing.

Well designed kits include dampers and springs that are matched to one another, putting the vehicle in the sweet spot of up- and down travel so that articulation remains similar to stock or improved from stock.

If the goal is maintaining or improving usable articulation, the important factors are:

• Shock length
• Spring rate
• Stroke (where the truck sits within the travel at ride height)
• Geometry (ball joints / CV angles)

This is why @CerberusSasha experienced a decrease in ride quality when raising the spring via the perch in his Bilstein shock.

TL;DR: On IFS trucks, the goal for most is to maintain stock-like articulation in both directions even after a ride height change. Well-engineered kits do this by default, but I would avoid kits like preload collars, lift springs on OEM shocks, and kits that use stiffer/taller springs on stock-length dampers.

I hope this helps!

 

[cruiser_ss396]

Excellent question. There is a ton of misinformation out there but it's actually not too terribly bad.

On a double wishbone (IFS) front suspension like these trucks use, lift height and articulation aren’t automatically tied together. What really determines articulation is usable suspension travel — meaning how much bump and droop the shock allows before something binds or tops out.

With a true top-mount spacer (not a preload/collar spacer), you’re not changing spring rate or total shock stroke. So you’re not adding articulation — but you’re also not magically gaining travel either. Because ride height increases but the shock remains at its same position at ride height, articulation is essentially unchanged.

With a preload/collar spacer, the spring is now much more preloaded with the same strut length, so you're now sitting closer to topping out, significantly reducing down travel. On the street, this is likely not a big deal, but you'll absolutely notice it off road.

That’s why height-focused solutions and travel-focused solutions aren’t the same thing.

Well designed kits include dampers and springs that are matched to one another, putting the vehicle in the sweet spot of up- and down travel so that articulation remains similar to stock or improved from stock.

If the goal is maintaining or improving usable articulation, the important factors are:

• Shock length
• Spring rate
• Stroke (where the truck sits within the travel at ride height)
• Geometry (ball joints / CV angles)

This is why @CerberusSasha experienced a decrease in ride quality when raising the spring via the perch in his Bilstein shock.

TL;DR: On IFS trucks, the goal for most is to maintain stock-like articulation in both directions even after a ride height change. Well-engineered kits do this by default, but I would avoid kits like preload collars, lift springs on OEM shocks, and kits that use stiffer/taller springs on stock-length dampers.

I hope this helps!

What is the recommended method to use if you want to have a little increased lift in the front for ground clearance in the front and also have the “leveled look” for that little better look.
I currently have 285-70-17 KO3s and could use a slight bump in hight for off road. The rear at this time is fine. Of course I want it to look good as well, and not loose the functionality it has or the ride qualities it currently has. Not a heavy off roader but in Arizona some of the trails have some serious rocks poking out of the ground. Even when picking the right approach sometimes I think after looking it’s one of those damn it man all I need is an extra inch and all would be good. The rail I visit the most has a a lot of areas that require some good articulation….the wife is much more happy when the rig is not tipping and stays planted. Happy wife happy life. Picture shows we are not out there getting crazy by any measure.

I am averaging a respectable 19MPG now, and I think any raised amount in the front is going to affect that but I am not expecting amazing MPG from something that’s about as aerodynamic as a shoe box anyway.

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

What is the recommended method to use if you want to have a little increased lift in the front for ground clearance in the front and also have the “leveled look” for that little better look.
I currently have 285-70-17 KO3s and could use a slight bump in hight for off road. The rear at this time is fine. Of course I want it to look good as well, and not loose the functionality it has or the ride qualities it currently has. Not a heavy off roader but in Arizona some of the trails have some serious rocks poking out of the ground. Even when picking the right approach sometimes I think after looking it’s one of those damn it man all I need is an extra inch and all would be good. The rail I visit the most has a a lot of areas that require some good articulation….the wife is much more happy when the rig is not tipping and stays planted. Happy wife happy life. Picture shows we are not out there getting crazy by any measure.

I am averaging a respectable 19MPG now, and I think any raised amount in the front is going to affect that but I am not expecting amazing MPG from something that’s about as aerodynamic as a shoe box anyway.

A true top spacer, like the Peak 1.25" Leveling Kit would be perfect for your needs. Since it doesn't preload the spring, you don't gain additional spring rate and you'll still sit right in the same stroke as OEM so your up and down travel remains untouched. It simply raises your front height and clearance ~1.25".

Regarding mileage: you're absolutely right--having the front slightly higher likely will increase drag slightly, but these aren't aerodynamic to begin with so it won't be drastic!

 

[Sugarloafer80]

The rake angle is there for a reason and typically a very important part of the suspension geometry. I know full well when I ran lower OD rears on my Evora track car, the handling suffered.... a lot!

 

[Bad1975]

A true top spacer, like the Peak 1.25" Leveling Kit would be perfect for your needs. Since it doesn't preload the spring, you don't gain additional spring rate and you'll still sit right in the same stroke as OEM so your up and down travel remains untouched. It simply raises your front height and clearance ~1.25".

Regarding mileage: you're absolutely right--having the front slightly higher likely will increase drag slightly, but these aren't aerodynamic to begin with so it won't be drastic!

Partially true. however when you space the shock down the bump stop (attached to the frame) which is now some distance higher, up to a mox of 1.25" higher in this case from the control arm. So you run the risk off the shock bottoming out on compression before the bump stop is engaged since the shock is still the same length and at the same point in travel at ride height.

If the shock doesn't have the additional compression travel available due to the top hat spacer and the shock bottoms out prior to bump stop engagement it will destroy the shock quite quickly.

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

The rake angle is there for a reason and typically a very important part of the suspension geometry. I know full well when I ran lower OD rears on my Evora track car, the handling suffered.... a lot!

That’s 100% valid.

I've experienced negative handling effects on both trucks and performance cars when things are pushed outside of their tolerance window, and on a sports car, it's crucial that the control arms are near level at ride height (the panhard on trucks is also particular).

On a truck platform like this, the factory rake is primarily there to account for load carrying and to maintain a nose-down attitude when towing or adding rear weight — not because the control arms are operating in a perfectly level ideal geometry from the factory. On Toyota trucks, even stock the arms aren’t anywhere near flat.

A mild leveling adjustment doesn’t fundamentally redesign the suspension geometry — but extreme lifts absolutely can push things outside their intended range.

The key (in my opinion) is moderation and maintaining proper shock length and alignment correction rather than simply chasing height for its own sake.

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

Partially true. however when you space the shock down the bump stop (attached to the frame) which is now some distance higher, up to a mox of 1.25" higher in this case from the control arm. So you run the risk off the shock bottoming out on compression before the bump stop is engaged since the shock is still the same length and at the same point in travel at ride height.

If the shock doesn't have the additional compression travel available due to the top hat spacer and the shock bottoms out prior to bump stop engagement it will destroy the shock quite quickly.

I agree!

When you add a top-mount spacer, the chassis moves relative to the shock, which does change the bump stop-to-control arm relationship. If the spacer height is excessive and the shock doesn’t have sufficient compression travel available, then yes — the shock could bottom before the bump stop engages, which would be very bad.

That’s exactly why spacer height needs to stay within a reasonable range. Mild leveling spacers like the Peak kit are designed around this so you still retain adequate compression travel margin before the shock reaches its mechanical stop. Once you start stacking height or going more aggressive, that safety margin shrinks quickly. The motion ratio on these trucks save you some margin here, since the spacer lifts the truck by 1.25" but is only about half an inch thick since it's inboard of the tire.

So I completely agree that situation is very possible and must be engineered around — moderation is the key.

 

[Stage7]

When I was younger I would have already had a lift kit on the vehicle as soon as the one I want became available. I think I'm just going to put 285/70R18s on the rig with the stock suspension and call it a day this time around. If the mileage is to much of a hit for me I'll go back to my 34/10.5R17 setup. I really like the look of the 285/70R18 and I just purchased 4 new Toyo Open Country A/T III in the 285/70R18 size and I'm going to run the 34/10.5R17 in the spare as it is only .2" smaller in diameter and won't hang down to low. I'll post pictures when I've done the deed but I'm waiting for the snow season to end before I do it.

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

When I was younger I would have already had a lift kit on the vehicle as soon as the one I want became available. I think I'm just going to put 285/70R18s on the rig with the stock suspension and call it a day this time around. If the mileage is to much of a hit for me I'll go back to my 34/10.5R17 setup. I really like the look of the 285/70R18 and I just purchased 4 new Toyo Open Country A/T III in the 285/70R18 size and I'm going to run the 34/10.5R17 in the spare as it is only .2" smaller in diameter and won't hang down to low. I'll post pictures when I've done the deed but I'm waiting for the snow season to end before I do it.

That's gonna be a great setup too! Definitely post pictures, I'd love to see how it turns out!

 

[Pavman2473]

It depends largely on the tires you run. The lift itself will not have a huge effect because while the truck will be higher up, it's not particularly aerodynamic to begin with. But heavy tires = added sprung weight and that kills MPG.

The above case of -4mpg sounds about right in my experience for a reasonable bump in tire size and ride height.

Smiles per gallon are up by at least +4 so he's net 0!

Thank you for the feedback.

 

[b407driver]

I agree!

When you add a top-mount spacer, the chassis moves relative to the shock, which does change the bump stop-to-control arm relationship. If the spacer height is excessive and the shock doesn’t have sufficient compression travel available, then yes — the shock could bottom before the bump stop engages, which would be very bad.

That’s exactly why spacer height needs to stay within a reasonable range. Mild leveling spacers like the Peak kit are designed around this so you still retain adequate compression travel margin before the shock reaches its mechanical stop. Once you start stacking height or going more aggressive, that safety margin shrinks quickly. The motion ratio on these trucks save you some margin here, since the spacer lifts the truck by 1.25" but is only about half an inch thick since it's inboard of the tire.

So I completely agree that situation is very possible and must be engineered around — moderation is the key.

So you are suggesting this specific top-mount spacer for the LC250, are you absolutely certain that the issue @Bad1975 pointed out will not occur on a stock LC250? For this specific kit, has it been 'engineered around', and implemented with moderation?

Secondly, if someone were to implement this 1.25" height increase to the front, is there a similarly-simple solution for the rear, if one wanted to maintain the rake for towing, etc.? Perhaps adding an inch or so to the rear, but keeping factory suspension articulation and ride quality?

 

[Matthew@LC250Mods]

So you are suggesting this specific top-mount spacer for the LC250, are you absolutely certain that the issue @Bad1975 pointed out will not occur on a stock LC250? For this specific kit, has it been 'engineered around', and implemented with moderation?

Secondly, if someone were to implement this 1.25" height increase to the front, is there a similarly-simple solution for the rear, if one wanted to maintain the rake for towing, etc.? Perhaps adding an inch or so to the rear, but keeping factory suspension articulation and ride quality?

Yes, the Peak kit is 100% designed to avoid this issue and is made with enough moderation that the bump stops engage very similarly to stock. It's also thin enough that the OEM studs on the top hats are still long enough. I would not run a spacer much thicker.

Regarding the rear: yes--Peak also makes a Rear Spring Spacer kit designed to accomplish the exact same goal. If you want to maintain factory-ish rake but gain a little height all around, this will do the trick!

 

[agjake01]

Just ordered the OME MT64 lift and Toyo AT3 285/70 18s (E Load) for the stock wheels. I’ll be installing in the next week or two.

I considered the Westcott, but I don’t want to lose any down travel as I plan to further explore the Washington Backcountry Discovery Route (already completed three sections of the WABDR stock height on 265 Toyos). The truck is pretty capable stock, but I did hit the skids a couple of times due to the mediocre ground clearance.

I think the MT64 will balance out the E load 285s, and then I’ll probably add the 12Gal FK saddle tank to offset MPG loss. I don’t mind dropping MPGs as long as long as I can maintain decent MTE range.

Oh, and I’m not planning on getting rid of this truck for many years - so hoping the lift is worth the investment.