Ah, good old CAD.
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.
Rear traction bar discussion.
- Thread starter 82355
- Start date
-
- Tags
- traction bar
I’m sure you could do it with math, but I’m more of a visual person.
That is geometry which is part of math
I was in special ed math, so that explains it. Ironically I use math everyday at work being in construction.
Autofab and the rest of the go fast crowd have been using bars like @Babaganoosh for a long time.
I ran the ruffstuff radius arm style on my k5 with good results.
I ran the ruffstuff radius arm style on my k5 with good results.
Yup, it’s definitely more desert racing than crawling. It works extremely well, and I would rather have two points then 1
I called ORD and just flat out asked Stephen if he had my truck what would he put on it. Then I researched it and talked to my fab buddy and did it.
Yeah I knew that, was just pointing out if someone was smarter than me they could do it with math.Uhhmm..
I believe that Blue means
Cardboard Aided Design.
Yes we all know that.Uhhmm..
I believe that Blue means
Cardboard Aided Design.
@Greg72 made it famous in his 72 build
Well, it didn't seem like it when I read that, so I figured that the sun in AZ had cooked your brain, more..
So I figured that I would help ya!
If only you knew, these past few months have tested me wayyyyy to much.Well, it didn't seem like it when I read that, so I figured that the sun in AZ had cooked your brain, more..
So I figured that I would help ya!
Old thread CPR....
Anyone have a traction bar with the forward end attached to a factory tcase type of crossmember? I'm curious about how that type of crossmember would hold up.
Anyone have a traction bar with the forward end attached to a factory tcase type of crossmember? I'm curious about how that type of crossmember would hold up.
It wouldn't be my first choice but I would do it if it was the best location.
The way it works will put all the force horizontal which is where that crossmember is the strongest.
I would make the mount attach to the 3 sides of the hat, reinforcing the attachment point.
If that wasn't clear I could draw up a picture
That depends on how it attaches, if it was one of those dual traction bars with just a single bar on each side and a rod end on both ends, then it would be mostly horizontal, the exact angle would be parallel to the bar.
If it was one of those traction bars with a shackle at the frame end for more articulation, then the force would be mostly vertical, or parallel to the shackle.
Keep in mind the traction bar can have enough force under acceleration to raise the vehicle up, so it needs to be strong enough for that.
I think it depends on what type of traction bar you will be using.
One traction bar, in the middle, with a shackle, I don't think I would use the stock crossmember.
If you are putting two single bars, each under the frame, up at a shallow angle, then most of the parallel force will go right to the frame so you are probably ok.
Last edited:
@imiceman44 @folkenheath
I've had this pic from @Larry build thread floating around my head for a while now, I love how clean looking the matching crossmember is. I would be using a homemade version of ORD's single traction bar set up with a shackle attached to the crossmember. I also have some 1/4" plate I would probably use to make a skid plate between the crossmembers (which would add some level of strength).
I've had this pic from @Larry build thread floating around my head for a while now, I love how clean looking the matching crossmember is. I would be using a homemade version of ORD's single traction bar set up with a shackle attached to the crossmember. I also have some 1/4" plate I would probably use to make a skid plate between the crossmembers (which would add some level of strength).
I wouldn't use a
Unless you put a brace from the attachment point to a strong point on the frame triangulating the section.
Some years had that brace stock.
I have a couple of those laying around, they went from the crossmember about 10" from the lower frame to the top of the frame
System that uses a shackle on the crossmember because the pull will be vertical which is where the crossmember is at it's weakest.
Unless you put a brace from the attachment point to a strong point on the frame triangulating the section.
Some years had that brace stock.
I have a couple of those laying around, they went from the crossmember about 10" from the lower frame to the top of the frame
A few thoughts:
- The stock crossmember is mostly there to support the weight of the drivetrain, i.e. vertical. Forces can go side-to-side, but almost none fore-aft unless your driveshafts are binding or bottomed.
- Formed sheet steel can quickly become more rigid than something like a piece of 1.75" square tube
- The traction bar doesn't lift the vehicle, it just transfers some of the weight off of the springs (semantics maybe, but we're talking like 100's of lbs, not 1000's)
- Many of us have lifted a vehicle from a crossmember, so...
I think you're not referring to which direction the crossmember has stiffness, but rather the location of the connection. So yes, if the shackle mount is at the rear-most edge of the flat steel, it could bend, but it could probably mount in the (fore/aft) center of the crossmember, where it's designed for strength (depending on the geometry of the bar and amount of space above).
I think if you are using the braces like that front crossmember has and you are near the braces or further out it would probably be OK. Without those braces, I would add bracing if you are using a single traction bar with shackle.
My thoughts / hopes are that the combo of the additional factory braces plus a large skid plate bolted to each crossmember (the full width of the flat run of the crossmember) it would be strong enough. 
As far as the position of the shackle on the crossmember, I'm guessing it would be 1/3 of the way in from the frame rail because the single traction bar needs to be as close to center as possible so I doubt it would be real close to the extra braces.
Fyi, I'm trying to avoid a square tube crossmember / cradle set up because it looks like it would have to be lower than the stock crossmember to fit between the 4spd / 203 (tall adapter).
As far as the position of the shackle on the crossmember, I'm guessing it would be 1/3 of the way in from the frame rail because the single traction bar needs to be as close to center as possible so I doubt it would be real close to the extra braces.
Fyi, I'm trying to avoid a square tube crossmember / cradle set up because it looks like it would have to be lower than the stock crossmember to fit between the 4spd / 203 (tall adapter).
