So you are talking about air suspension like in a Range Rover or Disco which can be raised or lowered.

If that is the case then that make a little more sense.

Personally for getting in and out of my Yeti, the seat is at the perfect height, so why would I want to lower it, apart from on a motorway to improve fuel consumption?

Mike

If air suspension is done well it can actually enhance the offroad capabilities of the vehicle.

More ground clearance to match the Yeti's capability?

Another 50-75mm????? :rofl:

Never really understood this. Why spend all that time and money on changing a regular car? If you want adaptive air for off roading, buy a Range Rover. If you want a lower car for cornering, buy a Boxster. Or if you really want fun, buy a Ducati....

Some of us like to tinker.

Richard, that I have no problem with.

My "complaint" would be that "air ride" in the title of this thread means absolutely nothing to me, or most others here I suspect, and by looking at the first picture all I see is a slammed Tiggywinkle that wouldn't even get down my road in Llani! Now if someone had explained EXACTLY what was being proposed then it might have got a better reception.

To be honest I very much doubt if the Yeti drive system would allow much more than a 50mm increase in ride height. Going that far I suspect would be the limit of the drive shafts. And to be honest, having spent 7 years driving Freelanders it generally isn't needed. Many Freelander owners tried a 2" lift and many had problems, and to be honest didn't find in generally made much difference. What I found and taught was that by reading the ground and being thoughtful over route picking often got around the "problem" just as easily and often more comfortably both for the passenger and the mechanics. It was only in really rocky situastions that the lift made that much difference.

I think adding " air suspension " could be classed more than " tinkering "

So you are talking about air suspension like in a Range Rover or Disco which can be raised or lowered.

If that is the case then that make a little more sense.

What would be the point in putting air on it without being able to raise or lower it? Do people do that?

I think adding " air suspension " could be classed more than " tinkering "

Several years ago I fitted an American Air Ride system to a Land Rover 90.

The idea was to be able to make the vehicle "walk" over logs and obstructions a standard or lifted one can't.

Great system and being able to alter the pressure in each of the four Firestone airbags (from a kneeling bus if memory is correct) gave an amazing amount of control.

Ultimately though it didn't prove to be durable for heavy duty offroad use, so I went to portal axles off a light truck from the Swiss army, a Volvo C303.

Believe me, it's tinkering.

All you are doing is replacing the springs with airbags along with a tank, compressor and the associated pressure sensors and valves.

It's not actually THAT difficult.

The promblem is geometry.

On a Land Rover with beam axles the wheels are always at the right angle to the road, irrespective of how high it is.

On a Yeti and just about all cars with modern suspension you end up with the situation that you are running the tyres are the wrong angles when lowered or jacked up too high. So you'll wear the tyres out quite quickly if you drive about like that unless you make more complicated changes.

So it's mainly a posing thing.

Better systems add level sensors, digital control etc so a little more than tinkering then.

My "complaint" would be that "air ride" in the title of this thread means absolutely nothing to me,

I suppose you could have asked what it was rather than just slagging it off?

So it's mainly a posing thing.

My thoughts exactly ...

Time to fit some Citroen suspension to it

I suppose you could have asked what it was rather than just slagging it off?

Or, people could actually write a title to a thread that makes sense and is understandable to ALL.

And yes Techie, some systems might be more sophisticated, but no system can defeat the suspension geometry, as the Land Rover world found out many years ago, and ended up having to design special suspension arms, mountings and extended yokes on prop shafts to allow for extended lifts, be they air systems or not.

Or, people could actually write a title to a thread that makes sense and is understandable to ALL.

And yes Techie, some systems might be more sophisticated, but no system can defeat the suspension geometry, as the Land Rover world found out many years ago, and ended up having to design special suspension arms, mountings and extended yokes on prop shafts to allow for extended lifts, be they air systems or not.

The title wasn't in all the 6-7000 language in the world either, but you don't see them complaining.

(I suppose they could be, we just can't read it...)

Better systems add level sensors, digital control etc so a little more than tinkering then.

I wasn't going too into depth as I didn't think people would be interested.

The system I used had a very good digital control panel which allowed you to move any of the wheels up and down as you liked.

You could even programme functions in so you could cross link opposite back and front corners to get the walking effect over logs etc...

Not the same as, but similar to the air suspension on the later Range Rover which acts like a beam axle rather than traditional independant suspension. So when a wheel was pushed up it would push the other side down to maintain clearence under the vehicle during offroading.

What a fatuous reply by Babs.

As far as I, and obviously a few others are concerned, it could have been in a foreign language. In fact if it had been it might have helped as then it would have been translatable.

Unfortunately I find it is a common problem on a multi-user forum such as this. People use terms that only a minority understand but expect everyone to know what they mean. I could do the same and raise a thread about, say, "Using a ORPA", but I guess only 2 people on here would understand I was talking about a Right of Way, so instead I would use a term that was understandable to all.

And I've seen examples of Richard's system, and it would put to shame most of these road based systems!

Or, rather than bitch and moan, you could just Google "air ride"?

I agree. I didn't mean to offend anybody. Having not posted in the Yeti forum, I just could never have predicted such an unpleasant response.

Welcome to the Yeti forum Nick.

I agree. I didn't mean to offend anybody. Having not posted in the Yeti forum, I just could never have predicted such an unpleasant response.

Bloody stirred up a hornets nest ain't ya.

But for what it's worth, yes I would like to see a Yeti on air suspension just for something different

I think the (lowered) SuperSkoda project car in my profile picture looks the Biz (sorry but can't find the original full size pic to post), so it's a thumbs up from me on air ride. Go for it I say, 30 years ago I would have joined you - "you pays your money and you take your choice"

I used to have a citrus BX, which had a suspension that was half air half oil. Fantastic ride quality.

You could pimp (pump?) up the ride to go over bumps, but it was as if you only had rubber blocks for suspension in that mode, decidedly jiggly!

If you left it parked for any time it deflated into low rider mode, but when you started the engine it rose as if by magic back to its predetermined ride height, used to make the kids laugh.

I think I might have buggered it on a booze cruise once. I had the rear seats down and loaded 44 cases of beer and wine at the hypo market.

When it was time to come off the ferry, it struggled like crazy to pump itself up.

Sometime later I discovered that I had popped a number of the sphere's.

Having said that and despite the quirkiness of french engineering I loved that car and it was truly excellent on long journeys.

My son's C3 has the Citreon system, and yes it is amazing, BUT, boy is it expensive to repair.

And that is part of the "rub" of this thread; that is a standard system designed to do a specific job, just as Richard's system on his Land Rover was designed for a specific and quite technical reason. As far as I can see the idea the OP has is for "bling" and nothing more. Fine, if that is the way people want to meddle then let them carry on, but I see no point in it. I suppose it is a bit like the way the "Fat Boy" Suzuki Vitara owners were derided by the 4x4 world.

I agree. I didn't mean to offend anybody. Having not posted in the Yeti forum, I just could never have predicted such an unpleasant response.

Nick - Most of us Yeti drivers are reasonable people, please keep posting here and don't be put off by the odd exception.