What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

7/12 update, coils pretty much done!

muddybuddy

muddybuddy

1 ton status
 Premium
GMOTM Winner
Joined
Jan 29, 2004
Posts
11,679
Reaction score
3,986
Location
Northern, VA
well the rear 4link is finally almost done, we just need to add more bracing and decide where to locate the shocks. its not double triangulated, but if i feel the need to later down the road, it should be hard to change. the coils are super soft, i cant wait to see what they can do. here are some pics i shot today.

DSCN0845.JPG

DSCN0844.JPG

DSCN0846.JPG

DSCN0847.JPG

DSCN0848.JPG
 
Link material and length? Joint type? Numbers off of suspension (antisquat, roll center etc)? Spring rate and free length measurements?

Maybe it's just me, but the lower links look like they angle in, which would make it double triangulated correct?
 
The lower links do look angled in to me too. Man those coils look looong. What are they origonally intended for? Looks good.
 
thanks guys. the lowers are slightly angled in, so i guess it is double triangluated. off the top of my head the uppers are 48" and the lowers are 60". i dont remember the #'s right now, they are written down back at his house, but i can get them in the next couple days. we used 2" johnny joints, 1.5x.25 chromoly for the uppers and 2.25x.375 for the lowers. the coils are ment for a bronco. they measured 27" relaxed and without the weight of the bed, measure 22" on the truck. they are super soft, their spring rate is 300lbs. just pushing down on the rear bumper makes them move with ease. im likely going to have to come up with some kind of swaybar setup for the street with quick disconnects for the trails.

ill get some pics of the welds for you guys haha. my buddy whose doing the welding has been taking classes and been welding for about 5 years now. hes gotten pretty good. some of them arent show quality (lower mount by the gas tank, due to lack of space), but they are strong, function over form right?:p: :haha:
 
I'm kind of disappointed that you don't have any numbers off of the suspension. It would be some good tech if you posted up what your anitsquat, roll center etc was and how you came to decide where to mount the links on the axle and frame. But instead, I fear that little or no planning was put in this, just welded the links up where they would fit. I.e. the fact that you were unsure if the lower links were angled or not. I was hoping you were past the building a truck with the "coolest" parts phase, but I guess not.

Feel free to prove me wrong. The suspension will probably work fine, and you'll be a hero and me an ass, but on the other hand, it could end up being the most ill handling turd on the road/trail.
 
ryan22re said:
I'm kind of disappointed that you don't have any numbers off of the suspension. It would be some good tech if you posted up what your anitsquat, roll center etc was and how you came to decide where to mount the links on the axle and frame. But instead, I fear that little or no planning was put in this, just welded the links up where they would fit. I.e. the fact that you were unsure if the lower links were angled or not. I was hoping you were past the building a truck with the "coolest" parts phase, but I guess not.

Feel free to prove me wrong. The suspension will probably work fine, and you'll be a hero and me an ass, but on the other hand, it could end up being the most ill handling turd on the road/trail.
Click to expand...

ryan, me and my buddy used several of the online calculators and ran the numbers. hes a jeep guy and has done a couple 4-link setups, and we made sure we planned everything out and tac welded stuff in place after measuring countless times. only once we were sure everything was in the proper place did we weld everything up. i have the numbers and i said in my post above that they were written down at his house, where the truck still is...i wouldnt have jumped into this w/o doing the numbers. as i said i do have the numbers and will post them up once i get a chance to get back over to his house.

as for me being unsure of it being double trianglated, i was refering to more triangulation as in the lowers being much closer to the center, not on the frame rails. as it is now, the lowers are only pointed in about 3-4".

again im sorry i dont have the suspension number with me, but ill post them up when i get back over to his house
 
looks like the upper links are at a higher angle the nthe lowers, what did the suspension calculator factor your antisquat at?
 
balterbuilt said:
looks like the upper links are at a higher angle the nthe lowers, what did the suspension calculator factor your antisquat at?
Click to expand...

*i believe* it was 100%, but i dont remember off the top of my head. as i said, ill post up all the numbers once i get a chance to get over there. :)

ryan, no sweat dude, i asked for feedback, you were just expressing concern. and i address it.:D
 
everything should be done tomorrow if everything goes as planned.

here are some more number:

wheelbase ~133" (front forward ~3.5", rear 1" forward)
lowers: 2.25x.375 60"
uppers: 1 5/8x 3/16 48"
7% roll (not the best, but the best we could get with the amount of lift im running without an ugly drop mount member )
85% anti-squat.

the brackets for the uppers have 3 different holes for adjustments. ill snap more pics of the final project once its done.
 
Last edited:
This is Scott, using a friends name. The Uppers are actually 1 5/8"x3/16" wall, 1.5x.25 didnt give enough ID to run a weld in insert.

I played with the numbers forever to try to figure out the best combo of numbers versus clearance. The uppers and lowers are as close to parallel as I could get them, which should help prevent axle hop off-road. With a 133" wheelbase, I figured it wasnt as huge a deal for the rear end to squat going uphill.

I definitely left room for tweaking, which will probably be done later as I am going to 4-link my jeep, running very different numbers. The vehicles definitely have different purposes, but we should be able to get the best for both vehicles after some use.
 
Are you thinking of axle wrap? Hop comes from the suspension really pushing hard against the ground because the anti-squat is high, and then breaking traction and so on. Look at videos of buggies set up with lots of anti-squat. You dont get the same amount of weight transfer with low anti-squat but you do get more predictable manners, although they might not be the ideal manners for climbing.
 
protechk5 said:
Are you thinking of axle wrap? Hop comes from the suspension really pushing hard against the ground because the anti-squat is high, and then breaking traction and so on. Look at videos of buggies set up with lots of anti-squat. You dont get the same amount of weight transfer with low anti-squat but you do get more predictable manners, although they might not be the ideal manners for climbing.
Click to expand...

Additionally, everyone seems to forget that the A.S. value that you calculate on level ground gets a lot larger when you actually start climbing a hill...less weight over the rear springs, means the suspension is unloading and changing all the link positions....I'd venture a guess that a vehicle with 100% AS on level ground would see more like 150% AS when it's actually climbing a steep hill..... :thinking:

IMHO....there is probably nothing wrong with a 50% AS value on level ground for that very reason.... maybe even lower would work??


:usaflag:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom