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.

'72 K5 - Greg's @MightAsWellK5 Build

This is the build description. I will improve this later. (GB)
Overview Gallery Discussion
Greg72 said:
AJ,

I think the worst case scenario is both sides fully stuffed, then let the PS start to droop while holding the DS all the way up. That should be the most severe angle against the frame.

Definitely going to have some interferences to deal with.

-G
Click to expand...

It's hard to say by just pictures until you get your track bar in place, but I think you'll have more issues the other way. Because when you leave the passenger side up, and start swinging the drivers side down, then the angle of that link bracket will change by quite a bit, while remaining stuffed. Now whatever point you attach the track bar won't move, but the rest will. I think that is when you could have issues. And depending on the height of your track bar on the axle will change which way it will move more.
 
Yes, this next step will be interesting.

Something I still can't wrap my head around is the suggestion to "make the trackbar the same length as the draglink". Presumably, you want the pivots to be in identical positions (y-axis) at regular ride height so that as the suspension cycles either up or down in those first few inches there is no bumpsteer. What I don't get is how you can steer (and move the pitman arm) without immediately disturbing the relationship of the trackbar and draglink endpoints relative to each other??? :dunno:

Is the objective to locate the trackbar pivot at the exact centerline of the knuckle kingpin on the passenger side?

It's hard to describe, and maybe it will make more sense when I actually start putting the parts into place on the frame and axle.


-G
 
Greg72 said:
Yes, this next step will be interesting.

Something I still can't wrap my head around is the suggestion to "make the trackbar the same length as the draglink". Presumably, you want the pivots to be in identical positions (y-axis) at regular ride height so that as the suspension cycles either up or down in those first few inches there is no bumpsteer. What I don't get is how you can steer (and move the pitman arm) without immediately disturbing the relationship of the trackbar and draglink endpoints relative to each other??? :dunno:

Is the objective to locate the trackbar pivot at the exact centerline of the knuckle kingpin on the passenger side?

It's hard to describe, and maybe it will make more sense when I actually start putting the parts into place on the frame and axle.


-G
Click to expand...

Just take a step back and draw two parallel lines on paper that are the same length. It doesn't matter how far apart those two lines are, where they start and end or anything, they are always parallel and the same length right?

No fix one end, (the frame end) and rotate both lines together, they always stay the same length and parallel AND travel in the same arc. Right?

So what is really happening as you steer is that you move the point of rotation of the drag link left and right at the frame but all things being equal you do the same at the axle. SO all you did was move the line on the paper, not materially change the length (you might change the angle a very tiny bit as the steering knuckle end can have some vertical movement due to camber) OR the angle.

It's about the ARC they swing, swing the same arc and there isn't any bump steer as the axle moves the same as the steering knuckle. (Look at them as two separate parts for this discussion.

Clear as mud?
 
Don't overcomplicate the trac bar drag link relationship.

Like Brandon said just 2 lines on a paper being fixed on one end and traveling through the same arc. If they are the same length they travel through the exact same arc.

Doesn't matter where they move as long as they are the same length ( which can't change during driving) they for through the same arc
 
OK I'll mull it over (but not TOO much) and see if it makes more sense when I actually start building it in 3D.

I've been over on Pirate grabbing images from the "Go Fast Steering" thread to look at...

Any opinions about trying for a simple front-to-back steering linkage (parallel to the lower link arm with an idler at the frame mount) vs. the more conventional crossover steering setup across to the PS knuckle? :thinking:


-G
 
Greg72 said:
OK I'll mull it over (but not TOO much) and see if it makes more sense when I actually start building it in 3D.

I've been over on Pirate grabbing images from the "Go Fast Steering" thread to look at...

Any opinions about trying for a simple front-to-back steering linkage (parallel to the lower link arm with an idler at the frame mount) vs. the more conventional crossover steering setup across to the PS knuckle? :thinking:


-G
Click to expand...

I think that's a good way to get absolutely perfect steering, however it's not easy nor is it simple like a crossover steering setup. This is the same system that you would use for the 4 link steering as well.

You can get pretty damn good steering through 14" of vertical wheel travel with crossover and track bar.
 
Greg, technically you are correct, the moment you turn the pitman arm they are no longer parallel, particularly on the 3rd plane. Especially if the pitman arm pivots rearward and the steering knuckle pivots forward like most crossover setups. (if both the pitman arm and knuckle steering arm pivoted the same direction and same radius that would be ideal, but then your steering ratio would be F'd up so thats not going to happen).

However, for all practical purposes, you won't feel it. Just make them as close to equal length and parallel as you can (angle is more important than length), and call it good.

Also, to make front to back steering work without bumpsteer would not be "simple". I think you are moving in the right direction with what you are doing with the parallel draglink and trackbar. I agree with Brandon, it can work very well with 14" of travel.
 
2012.01.08 - UPDATE! - HAPPY 5TH ANNIVERSARY...

Well folks...... There it is. Another year has come and gone on this build thread, and this also marks a total of (gasp!) 12 years of 1st Gen ownership. :doah:

Another couple of years and a few dozen more G-notes, and it will all be over. :D



EDIT: ....and I just noticed I also crossed the 12,000 post mark as well.



-G
 
Greg, If I may add my .02, I like the idea of moving the engine up for more clearance, seems as though there is plenty of head space in these trucks!
Also some things I've ran into without planning ahead far enough was a skid plate for the trans pan, mounting, clearance, and shape.

Hows the knee's holding up?
 
I dont know how much clearance you have on the driver side, but the 99 up Jeep grand cherokee uses a box like the scout, but it mounts on the inside the frame rail..... Plus they are a little more common in junkyards.... Im gona run the jeep one on my S10 for more header clearance..
 
76zimmer said:
Greg, If I may add my .02, I like the idea of moving the engine up for more clearance, seems as though there is plenty of head space in these trucks!
Also some things I've ran into without planning ahead far enough was a skid plate for the trans pan, mounting, clearance, and shape.

Hows the knee's holding up?
Click to expand...

Zim,

I agree... There does seem to be plenty of space before I hit the underside of the hood. The challenges for me are the firewall clearance (bell housing interference) and valve cover to brake booster interference. I'm pretty sure that I'm converting to a Vanco hydro boost system (like the one reviewed on Pirate4x4). It should give me a stronger brake system and save a lot of space in the engine bay.

My knees don't hurt too much, but I'm always banging and cutting my head on this suspension work....and I don't have any hair to hide it! :D


bronc3buster842001 said:
I dont know how much clearance you have on the driver side, but the 99 up Jeep grand cherokee uses a box like the scout, but it mounts on the inside the frame rail..... Plus they are a little more common in junkyards.... Im gona run the jeep one on my S10 for more header clearance..
Click to expand...

I'm willing to look at unusual steering box solutions. My only concern is going with something that was designed for a substantially smaller or lighter-duty application than the original Saginaw box was...



-G
 
Greg72 said:
Zim,

I agree... There does seem to be plenty of space before I hit the underside of the hood. The challenges for me are the firewall clearance (bell housing interference) and valve cover to brake booster interference. I'm pretty sure that I'm converting to a Vanco hydro boost system (like the one reviewed on Pirate4x4). It should give me a stronger brake system and save a lot of space in the engine bay.

My knees don't hurt too much, but I'm always banging and cutting my head on this suspension work....and I don't have any hair to hide it! :D




I'm willing to look at unusual steering box solutions. My only concern is going with something that was designed for a substantially smaller or lighter-duty application than the original Saginaw box was...



-G
Click to expand...


My knees kill me if I crawl around the concrete much at all, I usually use a foam pad to help with that, (like a gardeners pad)
And agreed on the hydroboost, it bought me some space, just had to trim the brake booster reinforcement plate for v/c clearance!

Kind of hard to see with the stuff in the way, but if you look close there is no issue of clearance between the hydro and the v/c!

HPIM3667800x600.jpg



clearanced @ the green spot:

Ironmaiden247.jpg
 
Greg72 said:
I'm willing to look at unusual steering box solutions. My only concern is going with something that was designed for a substantially smaller or lighter-duty application than the original Saginaw box was...
Click to expand...

You could always run dual steering boxes. :haha:

Remember Bruce had them on his big rig. :D
 
Zim,

Maybe you need to roll out a nice fluffy carpet in the garage like me! :)

It's great for those moments when I just lay underneath my truck looking up at everything that still needs to be finished....

I'm pretty well set on the idea of hydroboost for the brakes now. There are plenty of stories about guys with low gearing who simply "drive through " their brakes when crawling even at idle type speeds. There just isn't enough holding power in a stock-type system once you add all the gear reduction. My rotors and calipers are off a big Ford SuperDuty, so it would make sense to research the sort of booster sizing that was used in that application to make sure I can move a similar amount of fluid and achieve a similar line pressure too. That BillaVista article on Pirate had a lot of good info on doing all the calcs right down to the pedal length and effort to get brakes that "feel" good too.


-G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom