Nice heath.
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.
'83 K10 SB "L1TSBFIBBC" build
- Thread starter folkenheath
- Start date
That tool is a carrier bearing puller, for removing and installing carrier and pinion bearings off of differentials without damaging them.
nice solution on the tool case.. notated... hopefully I'll be splurging for the tool soon...
So I ordered some ballistic joints, tube adaptors, jam nuts, etc. 1.25 thread with a 5/8" bolt, all 8 ends of the 4 links. Getting ready for linking the rear of my truck.
I have been taking a lot of measurements, doing a lot more research, more reading, etc. Also crunching a few numbers in the 4 link calculators. I would like some opinions on what I should shoot for with the numbers.
Just for comparison, I tricked the 3 link calculator (with panhard bar) into thinking I had a 3 link so I could just see what my antidive and roll center heights are for my front radius arm setup. I knew when I designed and built it, that the longer and lower I could make the arms, the less roll axis and anti-dive I would have, because I knew it wouldn't be too low or the arms would be in an impracticle position. Anyway, the front is working great so far, here is what the numbers turned out to be just for reference. Keep in mind it's all backwards. And since the CG is more toward the front, I feel like the antidive is less effective than the antisquat in the rear.
Now, that was just for information purposes, here is the rear 4 link I am considering. Please let me know what you you think I should shoot for. This is just the beginning, I haven't even tore the rear leaves out yet, I am just trying to look where I could put them, and I did take a bunch of measurements, but haven't even confirmed if they will fit there. The lower links are kind of long, but that doens't bother me to much if they protect the driveshaft and are a smooth transition from the frame.
Also, I have read to keep the vertical seperation at the frame end half the axle seperation. But to me, if the lower links are longer than the upper links, and they both attach to the frame at different points, all they are going to try to do is stretch the frame, and good luck stretching steel. If I give them more vertical seperation, it will then try to stretch and bend the frame. So I am looking for more info there too. The forces will come from the axle, so it won't really change the forces much at the frame end, it just has to be able to take the abuse. I haven't decided on my travel yet. I can only fit 12" shocks under the bed, and I haven't decided if I am going to cut two holes in the floor to fit 14s - 18s in there.
I have been taking a lot of measurements, doing a lot more research, more reading, etc. Also crunching a few numbers in the 4 link calculators. I would like some opinions on what I should shoot for with the numbers.
Just for comparison, I tricked the 3 link calculator (with panhard bar) into thinking I had a 3 link so I could just see what my antidive and roll center heights are for my front radius arm setup. I knew when I designed and built it, that the longer and lower I could make the arms, the less roll axis and anti-dive I would have, because I knew it wouldn't be too low or the arms would be in an impracticle position. Anyway, the front is working great so far, here is what the numbers turned out to be just for reference. Keep in mind it's all backwards. And since the CG is more toward the front, I feel like the antidive is less effective than the antisquat in the rear.
Now, that was just for information purposes, here is the rear 4 link I am considering. Please let me know what you you think I should shoot for. This is just the beginning, I haven't even tore the rear leaves out yet, I am just trying to look where I could put them, and I did take a bunch of measurements, but haven't even confirmed if they will fit there. The lower links are kind of long, but that doens't bother me to much if they protect the driveshaft and are a smooth transition from the frame.
Also, I have read to keep the vertical seperation at the frame end half the axle seperation. But to me, if the lower links are longer than the upper links, and they both attach to the frame at different points, all they are going to try to do is stretch the frame, and good luck stretching steel. If I give them more vertical seperation, it will then try to stretch and bend the frame. So I am looking for more info there too. The forces will come from the axle, so it won't really change the forces much at the frame end, it just has to be able to take the abuse. I haven't decided on my travel yet. I can only fit 12" shocks under the bed, and I haven't decided if I am going to cut two holes in the floor to fit 14s - 18s in there.
Last edited:
I am of the mode that your rear should be able to handle exactly what your front does. If it can handle less, you can end up with some crazy rear end dancing over some whoops and stuff.
So I think you should try and fit the longer coilovers in somehow.
Have you thought about mounting them on the arms? Somewhere forward so you can still use a shorter one. Which probably wouldn't work very well if you still have the side saddle tanks.
You going to air bump the rear?
The numbers look pretty good, I might try to get the roll center a bit higher because you tow with this
So I think you should try and fit the longer coilovers in somehow.
Have you thought about mounting them on the arms? Somewhere forward so you can still use a shorter one. Which probably wouldn't work very well if you still have the side saddle tanks.
You going to air bump the rear?
The numbers look pretty good, I might try to get the roll center a bit higher because you tow with this
kdoske
1/2 ton status
It helps to do a lot of research and reading to understand it. I had already done a lot for the drag racing suspension setup before I even looked at it for my truck. I've read many articles, books, messed around with my factory 4 link on my regal, etc. The most important things to look at are the antisquat, and the roll axis. The roll center is important too for determining how easy it will lean over.
When the vehicle accelerates, the pinion wants to ride up the ring gear, and twist the axle up. This pulls on the upper links, and pushes on the lower links, attempting to pull a wheelie really. So, where the links are attached to the axle and the frame determine how much this will affect the vehicle. If you look at the imaginary lines where they "extend" the control arms forward until they meet, that's the "instant center". How far forward and up this is, determines how much leverage it has on the rig. If it's real long or low, it won't do much, the rig will squat. But if it's real short or high, it has a lot of leverage to push the tires down and raise the vehicle. Too much can make the axle want to walk under the rig though, since many four links have so much travel available on our rigs.
I can't explain it all, I can't type that long, but if you want more reading look at this....(the only thing is, this is for drag racing, so it doesn't go into roll axis because they don't have enough travel and they don't turn much, so they don't worry about the axle steering the vehicle as it articulates).
http://www.baselinesuspensions.com/info/Launching_A_Drag_Car.htm
The roll axis is measure how much the axle will turn the vehicle, or rotate front to back as it articulates. You don't want the vehicle to turn left just because it started to lean around a corner.
Also, think of my front radius arms as just a backwards ladder bar setup, that's what it is. With those types, the instant center is exacly where the mounting point on the frame is, and it does NOT move as the suspension travels like the instant center of a 4 link does.
Last edited:
Also, what do you think about the vertical seperation of the link mounts at the frame? I don't have much right now, but does that really matter if the numbers are doing what I want them too? I don't think so, but sometimes you can't think of reasons why something matters on your own.
By the way, BOTH of my front FOA coilovers are seaping oil out of the the tops or reserviors right now, not big leaks, probably would take months to leak all the oil out. But they probably only have 400 miles on them, if that, including only ~5 hours of mild wheeling. I think I might fix the leaks and sell them, not happy with them, but the air bumps seem great. I am looking at upgrading to Sway-a-ways. They seem to have close enough length dimensions I can just swap them out. I just don't know about the mounting bolt and width yet. The Fox and Kings all seem to have longer lengths for the same travel, which would mean modifications. All of them seem to be the same price.
Anybody else have experience with the different shock brands that would be relavent for me? I don't think coilovers should be seaping oil all the time, they are too expensive to not work perfectly.
Does anyone know if the sway aways have a 1/2" bolt x 1.5" mounting width?
As far as the lower arms go I don't think its very hard to build them strong enough to support the weight of the truck. I tend to go way overkill on lower arms anyway. The weak spot becomes the mounting positions. Those have to be beefed up compared to mounting just on the axle tube.
You might want to call FOA I know at least 5 guys running their coilovers and no leakage problems so far.
As far as the roll centers go, I tend to use the whole theory that both suspensions should work very similar to each other. It has served me well in the past. I know I said you might want to shoot for a higher roll center but after looking at it I would say you are just fine.
The only reason I said higher was I remember you said you tow with this. Then I looked back at the pics, its a small boat so I don't really think this needs to have a ton of consideration. If you get enough weight on the back end for it to become an issue you will probably be squatting the rear enough it will be the least of your worries
Now get to building!
I so want to do pretty much what you have done (suspension wise) to my Jimmy, still full bodied but with a killer suspension. I will probably just do coils in the rear but hopefully coilovers in the front.
When you get your final numbers post em
As far as the lower arms go I don't think its very hard to build them strong enough to support the weight of the truck. I tend to go way overkill on lower arms anyway. The weak spot becomes the mounting positions. Those have to be beefed up compared to mounting just on the axle tube.
Yeah, I agree, the week spots are the mounting points anyway. I have done some yeild strength calculations on the metal, and shear stength calcs on the different bolt sizes, even a little FEA in there to confirm, and if you only use 9/16" bolts, using 1/4" plate to make the brackets, the 9/16" bolt in double shear is much stronger than the two 1/4" thick mounting tabs around the bolt holes. 5/8" and 3/4" bolts just make the difference much more. The weak point always seems to be the brackets, excpet for bending the link, that could definitely happen easier if a lot of weight was put right in the center of the link.
I'll look into a little more and see if there is room behind the tanks, but if I go that route I will probably step up to the 3" ballistic joints for the lower arms, because now they will be in bending too, and also, the larger joints should last longer with the extra bushing material to spread the load. I could possibly use a 10" coilover 1/3 of the way up the link, and get 15" of travel, if it will still fit behind the tanks and outside the frame. I may have to spread the links out more at the frame end and increase the roll axis a small amount though. I'll have to think about different lower arms and consider that.
You might want to call FOA I know at least 5 guys running their coilovers and no leakage problems so far.
I'll call them after it's apart, but this isn't the first time this has happened, and before it wasn't leaking from the same spot. They always stand behind it and take care of me, but I am getting kind of tired of it yanking the shocks off already.
As far as the roll centers go, I tend to use the whole theory that both suspensions should work very similar to each other. It has served me well in the past. I know I said you might want to shoot for a higher roll center but after looking at it I would say you are just fine.
The only reason I said higher was I remember you said you tow with this. Then I looked back at the pics, its a small boat so I don't really think this needs to have a ton of consideration. If you get enough weight on the back end for it to become an issue you will probably be squatting the rear enough it will be the least of your worries
That boat only has about 150 lbs tongue weight, it isn't much. And I think I might of killed any extended towing capability with this latest converter. It's looser than I expected, it should be a blast offroad, but definitely slips more than I thought it would just driving around. I have other 10" converters that seem tigher, but that is also in a lighter vehicle with less power. I can hold the brakes and bring the engine to 2500 RPM before it will start to push through the brakes, looser than I expected. I know I am not bothering to take it back out anytime soon, I can live with it.
Now get to building!
I so want to do pretty much what you have done (suspension wise) to my Jimmy, still full bodied but with a killer suspension. I will probably just do coils in the rear but hopefully coilovers in the front.
What are you waiting for?
...
What am I waiting for?
Money, looks, fame, you know the basic stuff.
I have got to get my dually built in the next couple months and thats going to suck up most of the modifying money this year.
Of course I do have a JK coming in to build up in a couple weeks, then hopefully a couple cages
That keeps going everything I own is getting linked. Horton on coilovers, Jimmy on coilovers and the dually on bags
When I have thought about mounting the spring (whatever it may be) on the link I have planned on gussets top and bottom and very large overall brackets for the most surface area as possible.
It will be cool to see what you come up with looking forward to it.
Money, looks, fame, you know the basic stuff.
I have got to get my dually built in the next couple months and thats going to suck up most of the modifying money this year.
Of course I do have a JK coming in to build up in a couple weeks, then hopefully a couple cages
That keeps going everything I own is getting linked. Horton on coilovers, Jimmy on coilovers and the dually on bags
When I have thought about mounting the spring (whatever it may be) on the link I have planned on gussets top and bottom and very large overall brackets for the most surface area as possible.
It will be cool to see what you come up with looking forward to it.
That's a LOT of links to build, 3 vehicles, 4 links per end, 2 ends per vehicle! That could be up to 24 links, plus maybe even 3 track bars, although I am guessing only 2 plus full hydraulic. You are going to be busy.
As for mine, I will do some more thinking about longer shocks through the bed, or shorter shocks on the lower arm. I probably won't make a decision until after I tear it all apart and mockup some PVC links or something at this point.
I'll probably tear it apart in a week or two.
As for mine, I will do some more thinking about longer shocks through the bed, or shorter shocks on the lower arm. I probably won't make a decision until after I tear it all apart and mockup some PVC links or something at this point.
I'll probably tear it apart in a week or two.
Last edited:
Well, I did some more number crunching and then tore the truck partially apart a couple weekends ago. I modified the famous Greg and Dan "4 link calculator" to add the front vehicle weight as an input, so it would automatically create a vertical line where the Cg of the vehicle is, to cross the horizontal one. The reason is because if the IC is in on that line, the antisquat will try to lift the entire vehicle. Also, the further back the IC, the more it will try and lift the back up, the further forward it is, the more it will try to lift the front up.
I believe, that even with the same anti-squat percentage, the further back you have the IC, the more likely you are to have the rearend jacking problem (the axle trying to walk under the vehicle, making it unstable) when climbing hills. This is because many times the rearend is lighter and easier to lift, and with a shorter effective swing arm, it's easier for the axle to want to walk under the vehicle. And with a vehicle like mine, with a 60/40 weight distribution, I would like to try and lift the front and put more weight on the back tires with the antisquat.
Also, after thinking about how much the SCORE guys squat under acceleration, I talked to my friend Jer, and he confirmed they run very little antisquat. Because it can make the ride stiffer on whoops and stuff as the antisquat gains traction and trys to fight the suspension compressing in a cyclic rate. Basically, the more the suspension wants to compress, the more force the tires see, which gives you more traction and therefore, more antisquat, which fights that compression. So I decided to shoot for slightly less at around 80%, and probably make it adjustable so I can get over 100 if I want, or down to 60 if I want.
Here is the spreadsheet modification....and where I have my IC pushed further forward.
I believe, that even with the same anti-squat percentage, the further back you have the IC, the more likely you are to have the rearend jacking problem (the axle trying to walk under the vehicle, making it unstable) when climbing hills. This is because many times the rearend is lighter and easier to lift, and with a shorter effective swing arm, it's easier for the axle to want to walk under the vehicle. And with a vehicle like mine, with a 60/40 weight distribution, I would like to try and lift the front and put more weight on the back tires with the antisquat.
Also, after thinking about how much the SCORE guys squat under acceleration, I talked to my friend Jer, and he confirmed they run very little antisquat. Because it can make the ride stiffer on whoops and stuff as the antisquat gains traction and trys to fight the suspension compressing in a cyclic rate. Basically, the more the suspension wants to compress, the more force the tires see, which gives you more traction and therefore, more antisquat, which fights that compression. So I decided to shoot for slightly less at around 80%, and probably make it adjustable so I can get over 100 if I want, or down to 60 if I want.
Here is the spreadsheet modification....and where I have my IC pushed further forward.
Last edited:
Then I took the bed off, and removed the exhaust and rear shocks and started mocking up links with tape to come up with a plan for how to mount the link ends to the frame. Had to hang it from the ceilnig since I don't have room or help to lift it off. If you ever do this, make triple sure your loops are strong enough, your ceiling is strong enough, and you have the loops all the way through the beams with nuts and washers on top to spread the load. (Sorry for the crappy cell pics)
And that's when I changed my mind. I am going to wait on the 4 link for another year or so. I had a plan to mount a 10" shock about 1/3 the way up the lower arm and have over 15" of travel and still fit the shocks under the bed. However, I was also realizing I don't want to put my truck out of commision for most of the summer, because this is going to be more involved than I think again. Also, my main goal was to get the rear suspension to work better, and I realized when I took them off, my 4 year old Rancho 9000s were junk, no compression dampening at all! If I can get a good quality shock on there, it should be a lot better already.
Also, I called FOA about my front shocks seaping oil, they would fix them for free even though warranty is up, but I opted for them to send me the seal kits so I could do it myself, it's quicker. I also ordered some 2.0 x 12" travel remote rezi shocks with 2.5 rezis (more oil, for less fade) for the back. I am going to custom mount those for now and wheel it this summer. I can still fit them under the bed.
Also, Mon night I did a test before I ordered the shocks which made me realize I need to change my shackle angle if I keep the leaf springs for now. I only have 2.5" of droop, holy crappy droop batman! (And that was after adding an inch because of the weight of the bed would change my ride height. With no bed, it only drooped 1.5 inches. I tried removing the cross bolt to let the main leaf hang, only changed a 1/4". It's the shackle angle, it's almost inline with the spring at that whopping droop measurement.
I will probably move my rear ORD shackle flip forward from where it's been for the last 8 years, and maybe even get some DIY4X shackles in a slightly longer length to make up for the angle height change, and because my stock ones aren't exactly straight anymore. They still work, but are a little tweaked.
And that's when I changed my mind. I am going to wait on the 4 link for another year or so. I had a plan to mount a 10" shock about 1/3 the way up the lower arm and have over 15" of travel and still fit the shocks under the bed. However, I was also realizing I don't want to put my truck out of commision for most of the summer, because this is going to be more involved than I think again. Also, my main goal was to get the rear suspension to work better, and I realized when I took them off, my 4 year old Rancho 9000s were junk, no compression dampening at all! If I can get a good quality shock on there, it should be a lot better already.
Also, I called FOA about my front shocks seaping oil, they would fix them for free even though warranty is up, but I opted for them to send me the seal kits so I could do it myself, it's quicker. I also ordered some 2.0 x 12" travel remote rezi shocks with 2.5 rezis (more oil, for less fade) for the back. I am going to custom mount those for now and wheel it this summer. I can still fit them under the bed.
Also, Mon night I did a test before I ordered the shocks which made me realize I need to change my shackle angle if I keep the leaf springs for now. I only have 2.5" of droop, holy crappy droop batman! (And that was after adding an inch because of the weight of the bed would change my ride height. With no bed, it only drooped 1.5 inches. I tried removing the cross bolt to let the main leaf hang, only changed a 1/4". It's the shackle angle, it's almost inline with the spring at that whopping droop measurement.
I will probably move my rear ORD shackle flip forward from where it's been for the last 8 years, and maybe even get some DIY4X shackles in a slightly longer length to make up for the angle height change, and because my stock ones aren't exactly straight anymore. They still work, but are a little tweaked.
Last edited:
Now for the good news, since I am not doing the 4 link yet, I bought this!
1000 CFM!
It's FAST EZ-EFI! I am pretty excited, no more engine stalls on steep hills at idle! It's self learning, will support 650 hp with a higher pressure pump, (600 with the included one), has a built in fan control, and a high idle for my OBA system. Saweet! It's already half installed, but I need to plumb the fuel system and route all the wiring yet.
Also, I am putting a dual 3" flowmaster exhaust on it while I am at it. Yesterday I ordered some offsets and bends that I drew up, mandrel bent 3" pipes. This big block wants them.
1000 CFM!
It's FAST EZ-EFI! I am pretty excited, no more engine stalls on steep hills at idle! It's self learning, will support 650 hp with a higher pressure pump, (600 with the included one), has a built in fan control, and a high idle for my OBA system. Saweet! It's already half installed, but I need to plumb the fuel system and route all the wiring yet.
Also, I am putting a dual 3" flowmaster exhaust on it while I am at it. Yesterday I ordered some offsets and bends that I drew up, mandrel bent 3" pipes. This big block wants them.
Last edited:
Alright, THIS is the part I've been waiting on! 
Looking forward to your review of this FI system and maybe a video. 
Looking forward to your review of this FI system and maybe a video.
Heath that EFI is SEXY
Yeah I have been wanting this since it came out a few years ago! The parts are very good quality. Bearings on all the throttle shafts, nicely machined cast aluminum housing. All billet anodized fuel pressure regulator. It also came with all the fuel plumbing, quality fuel pump, wire harnesses, and hand held controller/setup/adjustment/error code module. The ECM is all water tight too, with weatherproof connectors. I can't wait to try it out. I willl probably have hte EFI all done this weekend, but I won't be able to start it yet because I am waiting for the exahust pipes to come so I can weld the 02 bung in there for the sensor it needs. I already put the water temp sensor in the intake, I replaced my thermal switch for the fans with it since it does that too.
If I had to find a gripe, I would say it is how the MAP sensor is mounted, it's a factory style sensor that us supposed to snap in, and the just kind of held it down with a screw head overlapping it. Although the seal is so large I don't expect it to ever cause a problem. It just looks a little crooked. Definitely impressed overall. If it works as good as it looks I'll be happy!
If I had to find a gripe, I would say it is how the MAP sensor is mounted, it's a factory style sensor that us supposed to snap in, and the just kind of held it down with a screw head overlapping it. Although the seal is so large I don't expect it to ever cause a problem. It just looks a little crooked. Definitely impressed overall. If it works as good as it looks I'll be happy!
y5mgisi
1 ton status
Dude! Your living the dream! That EFI should kill out in the sand!
