Attempt # 1! Above Tested on 1993 S-10 with modified Trailmaster lift and 1990 C/K1500 with a modified
Dick Cepek lift
We tried many variations of this design in 1999, the torsion bar cross member remained in the exact factory
location! The first drawback was having to limit wheel travel in terms of bottoming/upward travel in order to
retain lift kit strength and integrity. As it turned out we unfortunately had problems during the first 4 hrs of
testing logged in a 2 week period that were totally unforeseen. Mud, rocks and debris managed to make their
way between the non torsion drop bracket, and subframe. During suspension cycling this debris packed into
this bucket like area ultimately stopping the drivers and/or passengers up ward wheel travels. (Think of this
design much like an aluminum can crusher that never gets rid of the last crushed can, 1 can, 2 cans, 3 cans no
more). In an attempt to solve this problem we did however manage ways to help prevent foreign material from
entering this area, but it was hokey in our opinion and would have required a different design for each lift kit
and put the entire idea in an unreasonable price range.
When this first occurred the test vehicle was parked for a few days, after mud play. The drivers side began to
get very harsh until static ride height actually increased. What we saw was a mix of dried mud and foreign
debris, that was packed in this area like a block of concrete. Let us tell you; it was a real chore to clean this
area out when this happened too! Upon disassembly we found that we had destroyed the lower control arm
bushings, since it put tremendous side loading on the a-arm bushing. With the wheels fully drooped/extended
we saw the potential for 2.5"-3" rocks getting into this area. We felt the potential for this to happen on or
off-road was simply to risky for the safety of customers, and fellow off-road enthusiasts!
Please do not attempt to recreate or use any design similar to the above for the safety of yourself and
others. Realift does not condone or recommend the use of this style non torsion bar drop design.
All testing in 1998 and 1999 was done here: www.mammothmotocross.net and various AZ. Off highway area's
|Historical development and testing that led to
REALIFT torsion bar relocators!
Realift Prototype # 1 Testing Nov. 1998 - March 1999
"THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY"
It was a hard tough road to get here, and that's why it has taken nearly 20 years for IFS to be considered for
severe off road use. In 1982 GM released the first IFS 4x4. It took almost 10 years before a good IFS lift kit
was released, and another 10 years before any of them had the ability to have decent ground clearance with
the introduction of our Realift Torsion bar relocation system. These kits were designed to be universal and
work in conjunction with all 4"-12" suspension lift kits. The idea enabled all of these types of suspension
systems to have increases in ground clearance 4-6"s between the front and rear wheels.
In late 1998 after getting high centered and stranded a few times my family, friends and myself began to get
tired of suspension systems that lower the torsion bars, so we all started brainstorming ideas to keep the
torsion bars in the factory location. Anything we could think of required extensive modifications to the
Suspension lift kits. So we planned that it would be best to start trying our ideas by modifying existing lift kits,
and learn what we did and didn't like about each, then possibly make our own suspension system! Anyways
below are some of our pics of our historical testing and findings that led us to where we are today!
Realift Prototype #2 Tested Oct. 1999 Apr. 2000
Designed and Tested as inferior By Jeremiah Schnurpel and Josh Schnurpel
Attempt #2 Above! Tested on a 1992 C/K 1500 with an RCD kit and 1994 C/K 2500 with a Fabtech lift
We were stoked when my friend and I though of this design, even though it limited itself to Knuckle style lifts.
The design was awesome in many aspects. It would work on kits from 4"-?"s and enable the full ground
clearance up to ?"s!! The only concerns we had was what was going to hold up to the forces of this design,
heim joints, poly bushings etc. We called it the semi-arm torsion design! It also kept the torsion bars in the
After getting our test vehicle's retrofitted we were ready to go. Initially everything was holding up to normal use,
but the ride was not as plush, we assume because there were 3 new points of friction created, the arm mount
and the 2 end links. After some high speed running and just mild jumping the poly bushing we used grenaded.
We were not really all that surprised that rubber or poly bushing were not up to the task of this design, so we
upgraded to steel heims/rod ends. The ride was noticeably rougher vs. the poly or rubber end link design,
every little crack in the road was more noticeable, but did hold up to all the punishing we could dish out! After a
few weeks of testing we did noticed that our test subjects started creaking and squeaking havoc. In a short
period of time the heims wore and made unbelievable noises. We started trying multiple combinations of heim
joints, greasable were the best, but had to be greased too frequently!! Ultimately our rod end/heim joint
manufacturer told us that it was not really a good application for rod ends or heims because they never get
unloaded the torsional force wears one side, and pushes the grease to the unloaded side, wearing the loaded
side. We were beginning to lose hope, although we thought of some ideas to help the problem. Limiting straps
on the semi arm rather than the upper a-arm rebound stop, this would occasionally unload the heims and push
the grease to the loaded side again. After trying this on our super creaky 1994 we installed the limiting strap
and presto, the creaks were gone, unfortunately in the real world this only worked if the truck was essentially
high centered or air born! This design is acceptable for non torsion drop design, but since it was a wearing
design, and we did not set out to alter the ride for safety concerns and especially if it was going to be harsher!
Please do not attempt to recreate this design unless you are an metallurgist and engineer! Realift does
not condone the use of this design!
All testing in 1999 and 2000 was done here: www.mammothmotocross.net and various AZ. Off highway area's
Finally the solution: During the 2 years of testing we noticed that all 1988-2000 trucks had over 4 "s of space to
move the torsion bar cross member back toward the rear wheels, this is why we came up with the idea shown
below. So why not use that additional space and use a design that is 100%trouble free and 100% maintainance
free with no moving parts or safety concerns!!!
Attempt #3 Above REALIFT Torsion bar relocators! Tested on 2257 vehicles to date, and still counting!!
Needless to say this design is what we ended up with and successfully patenting #6,767,021 for obvious
reasons! This design got rid of all of our past problems with our earlier hokey design attemps, and we still
have yet to find a drawback in the design and function. The safety,reliability and no affect on ride or
handling under all conditions is what makes it the winning design. When Realift relocators were patented
every domestic IFS suspended 4x4 vehicle that was lifted had a home for our torsion bar relocators. Since
then some vehicle have required shorter 50" torsion bars!
For the first 3.5 yrs of business, not 1 torsion bar relocator failed or had any damage of any kind reported.
On Realift's third round of ordering steel, a person that I considered a good friend, messed up or cheated
Realift out of tens of thousands of dollars by supplying us with insufficient grade steel for our application.
After 188 relocators went out on this order a customer claimed he was loosing ride height, which was news
to us! A few days later he claimed that it broke! Immediately testing was done and we found out the steel
grade was incorrect. We made an attempt to have our steel supplier cover the great expense and supply
us with the correct steel spec., but since the ordering was done over the phone, there was no proof what we
specified for steel grade, so we had to eat the cost of the bad steel, the new steel and definitely replace the
188 relocators. Didn't stop us from doing the right thing, not one person can claim we don't have the best
warranty in the industry! Even people that purchased the relocators second hand were given free
replacements under our warranty.
There hasn't been one warranty claim on realift relocators built after the recall! The 3 people in our history
that had warranty issues all fell under the recall but we are proud to say all 3 still run Realift Relocators
All testing in 2000-2001 was done here: www.mammothmotocross.net and various AZ. Off highway area's
Realift Prototype Tested March 2000- Jan. 2001
Designed and Patented By Jeremiah Schnurpel and Josh Schnurpel