392 XR springs on an XR?

[At Risk Ute]

Upgrading to Clayton springs on my 392 XR. Thinking about swapping the takeoff 392 XR springs onto my XR which already has 392 XR takeoff shocks.

Thoughts? I like how the stiffer 392 XR float better when wheeling.

Sponsored

 

[Fast-n-Furious]

I was under the impression that the non-392 XR front springs have lower spring rate especially the ones with plastic front bumper. Even the ones with steel bumper, they may still have lower rate compared to the 392 front springs due to lighter engine weight. So installing the 392 front springs to the non-392 XR would yield a slight height gain in front. If your non-392 XR front is a bit lower, the 392 front springs should be perfect to level it or even make it a bit taller than rear.

I’ve been considering The Clayton performance coils for 392 since last year. Are you liking it so far? Any regrets? And have you measured the before/after height gain? Other members who installed the Clayton coils mention 1/2 to 3/4” taller but most of them also had Fox shocks installed.

 

[At Risk Ute]

I was under the impression that the non-392 XR front springs have lower spring rate especially the ones with plastic front bumper. Even the ones with steel bumper, they may still have lower rate compared to the 392 front springs due to lighter engine weight. So installing the 392 front springs to the non-392 XR would yield a slight height gain in front. If your non-392 XR front is a bit lower, the 392 front springs should be perfect to level it or even make it a bit taller than rear.

I’ve been considering The Clayton performance coils for 392 since last year. Are you liking it so far? Any regrets? And have you measured the before/after height gain? Other members who installed the Clayton coils mention 1/2 to 3/4” taller but most of them also had Fox shocks installed.

I think I’m going to make the swap. 392 XR springs feel firmer on pavement and float better on the trails (hard to describe in words) than the regular XR springs.

Just ordered the Clayton’s after the 392 forum boys recommended them. Main impetus is adding a winch and don‘t want to be riding on the bump stops.

Also adding 1” pucks up front and a Hellwig rear sway bar. Balancing between moderate wheeling and a daily driver pavement Princess.

 

[Zandcwhite]

I think the 392 springs will definitely feel firmer on road, but I think the floaty feeling off road is more a function of the weight of the 392 itself. It's an easy enough swap is worth a shot, but I'm not sure it will change the off road feeling much.

 

[Fast-n-Furious]

I think I’m going to make the swap. 392 XR springs feel firmer on pavement and float better on the trails (hard to describe in words) than the regular XR springs.

Just ordered the Clayton’s after the 392 forum boys recommended them. Main impetus is adding a winch and don‘t want to be riding on the bump stops.

Also adding 1” pucks up front and a Hellwig rear sway bar. Balancing between moderate wheeling and a daily driver pavement Princess.

I considered the Hellwig anti sway bar earlier, a member on this JL forum tested off road and it restricted the articulation. Definitely good for on-road.

 

[At Risk Ute]

I considered the Hellwig anti sway bar earlier, a member on this JL forum tested off road and it restricted the articulation. Definitely good for on-road.

I’m going to be 90/10 pavement vs wheeling for this one. Won’t mind disconnecting it if I notice too much restriction.

Sponsored