One of these days, the rear was a much higher priority.
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.
How to link the rear of a K5
- Thread starter Hogback Fabrication
- Start date
One of these days, the rear was a much higher priority.
agreed
fjsomething
Newbie
subscribed
four_by_ken
1/2 ton status
There is a button up top... Thread Tools
That allows you to subscribe without making useless posts.
Where's the fun in that? 
pad
pad
desertrat67
Hawk Driver
Yah.
big blaze 18
Registered Member
nice write up man. i love your k5.
opinions on a 1 link in the front?
Isn't that what you hold when you pee?
Who bothers to hold it???
four_by_ken
1/2 ton status
I have seen pictures some where of a couple rigs with on links front and rear. I think there is a thread here on CK5 on one links.
ive been looking at it seriously
Thanks
Why?
I've been thinking more along the lines of either a 3 or 4 link for the front. 3 link fronts are pretty common because you can fit them around just about any oilpan/driveshaft clearance issues you may have.
seems super simple but i dont know about how stable it would be
But so is a 3 link: 2 lower links, one upper and a track bar. Keep the links parallel with the frame, keep the track bar at the same angle as the draglink. Set the anti-squat (which is usually called anti-dive on the front) based on how the links are setup when looking from the side (there is a 3 link calculator on pirate, makes this part much easier). Just make sure the upper link mount is stout, its taking twice as much force as the lower mounts.
A one link is really the same thing, it just incorporates those 3 links into one gigantic piece of steel. The one link still needs a track bar. Much harder to fit in the front, heavier, harder to set anti-dive, etc.
Just my .02
odin
1/2 ton status
Its always been my understanding that the opposite was true in a front 3 link.
That the lowers handle more load than the upper.
At least thats what all the naysayers tell me about my 3 link with 2 uppers.
Its always been my understanding that the opposite was true in a front 3 link.
That the lowers handle more load than the upper.
At least thats what all the naysayers tell me about my 3 link with 2 uppers.
The way most 3 links are setup, there are two lowers and one upper. The two lowers split the load between them, the single upper has to take all of the torsion by itself.
IIRC your setup is the opposite, two uppers and one lower. Hence, in your case, the lower link mount would need to be extra stout.
That's how I see it anyway. There usually is a difference in the forces that the uppers and lowers will see too but that depends on how the links are setup (you can see this in the vector calculations part of the 3 and 4 link calculators).
I think I'm going to try this with tractor links and then if all goes well I'll getr some heims, since I can't find any leaf springs and this is better anyways
The calculator won't for me because I don't have excel.
It seems like I need one a little to the outside and one on the inside and up a little.
Is it that important to run the numbers? I can always make the mounts adjustable up and down
The calculator won't for me because I don't have excel.
It seems like I need one a little to the outside and one on the inside and up a little.
Is it that important to run the numbers? I can always make the mounts adjustable up and down
