Gotta start planning mine.... got any pics of yours? I have seen them spread out on here before in different places, but I would like to have one thread I can save to my HD to keep it all in one place :D

And besides wanting pics, any comments on how yours could be improved, etc. are appreciated as well :)

here ya go

more

i will get some current ones now that it is done tonight when i get home.

things i am gonna change on mine:

switching from 13/16x3/4 heims to 1.25 x 1 heims.

i don't like the position of my coilovers. (you will see in the new pics.)


FYI
desertoys has less rear steer than mine.

Thats is nice camo! I just got done doing my 4 link in the rear yesterday and I am a little worried about something. My upper links might not be angled out enough. They angle at about 15-16 degrees. They are about 25 inches apart at the frame and neck down to about 5-6 inches apart on top of the axle. Does this sound alright?

DRM, one thing I will say is try to mount the links on top of the axle.

Thanks Camo... anyone else? :D:D:D

Digging some more out of other threads... This is Desertoy's

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachment.php?s=&postid=199197

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachment.php?s=&postid=199207

The triangulated 4 link gets less rear steer than the standard 4 link people do. If I were you DRM, I would look into triangulating them.

Dimitri

Originally posted by camo

1.25 x 1 heims.




.

Buy the biggest badest heim you can find DRM I have broken Heims Before and I am going big as well!! I ordered the same size As camo!! If they arive today I will take some pics

Adam,

DRM, I know how you feel about this, but I still swear by my tractor heims. I say go BIG or go HOME!!!!

Dmitri

Looks like 1 3/4 tubing camo? What wall thickness?

Thanks guys.. I may use large rod ends, but probably a better quality than the tractor ones ;)

Im looking seriously into johnny joints. I can get 2 for less than 1 quality heim. I dont think heims have much of a specific advantage in terms of misalignment. Am I wrong?

Big hiems joints are a must I broke my 3/4 hiems on my old 4runner a couple times and it was always in a great place to be breaking stuff. go at least 1". By the way Mine didn't break at the threads they broke on the thin side that holds the ball in.
I'm building the new rigs setup like desertoys but going to use ford radius arm end bushings on the fram end and big hiems on the diff or maybe just use large leaf spring bushings. My hiems didn't last long on a street truck. 6 months tops and they started clunking. I don't think I'll miss the little bit of flex it'll lose if anything it'll help control it by giving it some resistance.

My intentions were originally to use poly busings on some of the links... just to reduce the clanking from having all metal/metal contact on the joints...

I guess I will see when I get into it :p

Originally posted by mike
Looks like 1 3/4 tubing camo? What wall thickness?

camo used 2" tubing ...


what kind of front suspension do camo and desertoy have ?

- jack

Originally posted by DRM
Thanks guys.. I may use large rod ends, but probably a better quality than the tractor ones ;)

I PMed You !

Adam,

Yeah, that's D-Toy's rig.....
They both use leaf up front......:skull:

Are there any advantages to using a 4 link over a 3 link?I am wanting to do either a 1/4 elip. or coil.Blazin:rasta: :usa:

Originally posted by mike
Looks like 1 3/4 tubing camo? What wall thickness?

.250 dom mild steel

Cool, thats what I was thinkin. Thanks :D

So where's the best place (for best prices) to get heim joints (or johnny joints) on-line/ mail order??? Thanks...

in a 3 link the axle can move side to side a little easier so you can kind of crab walk around stuff.

These are of Damian's Scout, he goes by Snoopy here on POR.

<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day8upperd.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day8pumpkinb.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day8uppera.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day9smountc.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day10overc.jpg">

I am wanting to avoid mounting the links below the axle - as I just don't see why people put them there...

Originally posted by DRM
I am wanting to avoid mounting the links below the axle - as I just don't see why people put them there...

Look at how Camo's uppers and lowers are ontop of the axle tube. It's the only way to go. Doing this can help to create a flater roll axis and gets the links up and out of the way of rocks.

Originally posted by DRM
Digging some more out of other threads... This is Desertoy's

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachment.php?s=&postid=199197

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/attachment.php?s=&postid=199207

From what I can see, desertoy did his homework. The geometry looks almost perfect.

I have 4 link with a track bar(basically 5 link I guess!) front and rear with radius arm bushings on the frame side and spring eye bushings on the axle side. I need to replace some or all of the bushings on the rear with poly to eliminate some of the axle wrap i get.

also I get alot of rear steer It is OK once you get used to it but it feels kinda wierd on corners on the street! I would like to go triangulated 4 link in the back at some point.

I guess I will wait for Camo's new pictures but I was wondering where you mounted the coil overs?

Originally posted by Pig Penn


From what I can see, desertoy did his homework. The geometry looks almost perfect.

So how do you decide on link mounting positions, lengths, etc?

I try reading the other threads getting into this, and just get lost :(

I figure I can butcher it enough to work ok on the trail - not like mine sees any road time anyway :p

Drm just look at desertoys and try and copy it his looks really good. use cheap tube ( i used some crappy 1" pipe and some cheap joints ) and just tacked it all together cycled it and watched what happen. took a little while.never saw anyone elses.
but it worked out good after a couple hours and some :beer:

couple more

:D

hope this helps

Thanks Camo.... that is your "old" setup, right? Your "new" one is not using a Toyota axle, correct? :)

So how do these setup's that's DON'T have a tracbar feel? Is there any movement side to side? Streetable or trail only setup? I am liking desertoys. Might just have to hack apart the rear and put some coils on. :D

Originally posted by MattS
So how do these setup's that's DON'T have a tracbar feel? Is there any movement side to side? Streetable or trail only setup? I am liking desertoys. Might just have to hack apart the rear and put some coils on. :D

Done right it should be VERY streetable. Triangulated 4 links have been used in race cars for a while, along with other link setups

Originally posted by DRM


So how do you decide on link mounting positions, lengths, etc?

I try reading the other threads getting into this, and just get lost :(

I figure I can butcher it enough to work ok on the trail - not like mine sees any road time anyway :p

Here DRM. A picture is worth a thousand words. http://www.pirate4x4.com/ubb/uploads/test1.gif The angle of the links in the side view determine anti-squat. The two points of intersection determine roll axis. If you look at Desertoy's you can see that the two points of intersection are almost at the exact same height from the ground. These two points show a nearly flat roll axis. Next, if you look at the the side views of camos and desertoys you can see that they are close to parallel to the ground. This would give a realativly low anti-squat value which IMO is good in Rock Crawling.

Matt S, with enough trianglulation a panhard bar in not needed, in the rear that is.

Originally posted by Pig Penn

The angle of the links in the side view determine anti-squat. The two points of intersection determine roll axis.

How do you determine roll axis if the lower links are parallel to each other?

Thank you!!! Maybe this won't be so hard after all. Does anyone have CAD files that they would share? I want to learn how to use it and a done drawing would really help me get started. :D

Originally posted by Pig Penn

Here DRM. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Originally posted by Pig Penn


Here DRM. A picture is worth a thousand words. http://www.pirate4x4.com/ubb/uploads/test1.gif The angle of the links in the side view determine anti-squat. The two points of intersection determine roll axis. If you look at Desertoy's you can see that the two points of intersection are almost at the exact same height from the ground. These two points show a nearly flat roll axis. Next, if you look at the the side views of camos and desertoys you can see that they are close to parallel to the ground. This would give a realativly low anti-squat value which IMO is good in Rock Crawling.

Matt S, with enough trianglulation a panhard bar in not needed, in the rear that is.

How is it determined that point "A" in the lower (side view) pic is the roll axis for the front? It seems to me that it would exist a bit higher?? I'm not an engineer so if you can explain it with basic ideas that would be great. BTW great diagram!! :beer:

HOLY SH!T here we go again...

The 4-link frenzy :flipoff2:

Originally posted by Ben W


How do you determine roll axis if the lower links are parallel to each other?

Ok, lets see if I can put this into words. If the lowers are parallel then their intersection point is infinate. So the roll axis then becomes parallel to the lowers but exsits in the plane where the uppers intersect. This is also true if the lowers are triangulated and the uppers are parallel, like Camo's for instance. It isn't neccessarily bad to have either the uppers or lowers parallel but if you can design it that way it would be better IMO. My 4 link uses lowers that don't have alot of triangulation. I had to because of space constraints. It comes down to the point where you could sit there and say I need to hack off the whole rear of the frame, to get the proper geometry, or just build it the best you can with the space that you have.

Originally posted by WideJ
HOLY SH!T here we go again...

The 4-link frenzy :flipoff2:

Why, haven't you studied up dude???:flipoff2:

Originally posted by DRM
Thanks Camo.... that is your "old" setup, right? Your "new" one is not using a Toyota axle, correct? :)

new axles are still under construction...soon very soon. :D

One reason I triangulated both upper and lower links is because standard 4 link setups on stock toyota frames tend to rip the mounts loose on the inside of the frame. This is because the inside of toyota frames are kinda thin. I figured that if I triangulated both the upper and the lower links, that would spread out the forces that would cause that to happen. I also welded patches (doublers) on the inside of the frame where the mounts weld on. If you look real close at the picture you can see them.
Also, I came up with the length of the arms by setting the wheelbase, centering the rear link mounts on the centerline of the axle housing, and aligning the front link mounts with the u-joint on the transfer case (or as close as I could get it). This keeps the rear driveling the same length through out the suspension travel.

Originally posted by camo


new axles are still under construction...soon very soon. :D

Camo, you got an ETA on those bad boys???

What is every one using for rod ends in the link bars? Are you just threading the bar or are you welding a threaded end in them? (like M.O.R.E. sales)

Originally posted by syko
What is every one using for rod ends in the link bars? Are you just threading the bar or are you welding a threaded end in them? (like M.O.R.E. sales)
I bought some 1 1/4"x250 wall DOM and had a michinest cut them into 2" pieces and thread them for me. I then "fish mouthed" the end of my link bars for more weldable area, and tig welded the inserts in.

Originally posted by desertoy

I bought some 1 1/4"x250 wall DOM and had a michinest cut them into 2" pieces and thread them for me. I then "fish mouthed" the end of my link bars for more weldable area, and tig welded the inserts in.

Why did you choose this method instead of just buying the inserts and welding them in?

I just bought some 13/8x1/4 inch dom tube, some 3/4 inch inserts and welded them together. WOrks perfectly. Only downside to buying the inserts is that when they cost about $6.50 a piece the $ adds up really fast!!!! Especially when you need about 16 for front and rear! 16x6.50= $104 . Much priceier than desertoys method, but for me more convenient!

Originally posted by nuttzack
I just bought some 13/8x1/4 inch dom tube, some 3/4 inch inserts and welded them together. WOrks perfectly. Only downside to buying the inserts is that when they cost about $6.50 a piece the $ adds up really fast!!!! Especially when you need about 16 for front and rear! 16x6.50= $104 . Much priceier than desertoys method, but for me more convenient!

IMO having a CNC machined insert TIG welded into the link just looks less HACK. Also, it would be a real pain in the ass to tap 16 3/4 inch holes.

You can purchase John Deer top links (of the point hitch) for cheap money.

P/N's JSA1000R and JSA1024R
29"to 39" adjustable, and 20"to 29" as well. $28 and $20 respectively.

<img src="http://mainejeepah.homestead.com/files/traction2.JPG">

rod ends are 1" thread
3/4 ID holes
The tubes taper up to slightly less than 2" round
1/8 thick tube

Hey, is that were Skyjacker gets thier links from...?

yeah, it was well worth the $

I am gonna weld the inserts into the tube with my Mig welder, but was wordering if you guys think they should be Tig welded for the proper strength weld? I ask because alot of people have mentionioned that they weld the inserts in with TIg, just wondering!

Originally posted by nuttzack
yeah, it was well worth the $

I am gonna weld the inserts into the tube with my Mig welder, but was wordering if you guys think they should be Tig welded for the proper strength weld? I ask because alot of people have mentionioned that they weld the inserts in with TIg, just wondering!

It just looks cleaner. MIG will do the job. I suppose you could clean it up after MIGing it and it would look coo, whatever though.

just drill the tube your slipping the insert into and do a couple of plug welds as well as welding around the end and it'll never come out.

One thing nice about the links being the same length as the drive shaft (hiems lined up with ujoints ect) you can build it so the links take the abuse of dragging the belly over a ledge instead of the d shaft

Desert Toy- what's the wheel base on your rig 103"? And also what is the distance (side view) between you upper and lower links 1. at the axle , 2. at the crossmember?

Originally posted by 84xtracab
You can purchase John Deer top links (of the point hitch) for cheap money...

Where can I get more info on them? Where can I buy them? What are they rated to? Do you use them yourself? Thanks, mate...

Why does everyone use two separate bars to make there triangles? I want to make a dual wishbone setup with one big heim per triangle. I would use poly bushings to attach to the frame and a 1.25" heim on the axle on the top triangle, and two poly bushing to attach to the axle and one 1.25" heim to the frame on the bottom triangle.
Both triangles would be constructed with 1 3/4"x3/8" wall DOM tube.
Will one heim give in the center give me enough misalignment to use 16 inch travel coilovers. The Heims are Avalanche and are 17 degrees of misalignment.

Will this setup hold up to 6500 lb truck? the rear will be fairly light though.

Is there any disadvantages to this system?

Don

where do you guys get the big joints at?

Originally posted by jeepruler
where do you guys get the big joints at?

From my cousin's friend over in south sac...but I'm not supposed to tell...why you wanna smoke out?:smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :D

AAAAHHHH YOU VERY FUNNY!!:grinpimp:

Originally posted by jeepruler
AAAAHHHH YOU VERY FUNNY!!:grinpimp:
But seriously...go here: Rod ends (http://www.qa-1.com/start.html) ...and good luck!

Originally posted by ToyFamily
Desert Toy- what's the wheel base on your rig 103"? And also what is the distance (side view) between you upper and lower links 1. at the axle , 2. at the crossmember?

I think it's about 104".
The distance in the front is 4" and the distance in the rear is7.5". I would reccomend that you make them as far apart as you can. I didn't realize how much twisting force is generated by the rear axle, so I had to go back and spread the upper and lower pionts in the rear further apart (they were 4").

taradon,
they get 17deg misalign at each end of the control arm rather then just at one end.

Thanks Scout:beer: :beer:

I'm running a 4 link front end and over New Years I busted one of my tractor joints, 5/8 hole with a 3/4 treaded sleeve I believe. Thank goodness I had a spare, but I was barely wheeling it when it broke which doesn't leave me with a good feeling when it come to rockcrawling. I am considering panhard and removing the V links and running just the panhard and 3 other links. Also looking into other heim joints. Aurora XM-10t (rated 16,565 static load) and the XAM-10t (rated 40,572 static load). Anyone used these in their 4 link front end and how are they holding up? I am running 180:1 with 39.5's and cross over steering setup on my fullwidth 44 coiled front end. Are these joints gunna hold any better? or should I just go with the other linkage setup?

Reading up on all this and I have a question, specifically about Pig Penn's roll center diagram.
I've been working on this for a while and am ripping the stock suspension out of my CJ right now. What I've been able to gather from all the POR posts from those in the know is I want links as flat to the ground as possible without much convergence to keep the instant center out beyond the front of the vehicle. If I'm doing the figuring right I'll have almost no anti-squat but the roll axis would hit the ground right about at the front tires.
What exactly is the correlation between roll center and anti-squat? Or are roll center and roll axis different and I'm just confused?
It's going to be a double triangulated rear 4-link that goes down the highway once in a while.
If this is covered in the archives I missed it. I've read so many old posts my head spins but still couldn't figure this out. Yes, including the God of Sus thread. :eek:

Originally posted by desertoy


I think it's about 104".
The distance in the front is 4" and the distance in the rear is7.5". I would reccomend that you make them as far apart as you can. I didn't realize how much twisting force is generated by the rear axle, so I had to go back and spread the upper and lower pionts in the rear further apart (they were 4").

yeahh if i remember what i read.... at least 8 inches or more due to twisting forces.....

Originally posted by badassjeepguy


yeahh if i remember what i read.... at least 8 inches or more due to twisting forces.....

So with a crossover tube on top of a Dana 60, and keping the lowe bars as close to the top of the axle tube as possible, it should put the upper and lower arm joints far enough apart, right?

Originally posted by DRM


So with a crossover tube on top of a Dana 60, and keping the lowe bars as close to the top of the axle tube as possible, it should put the upper and lower arm joints far enough apart, right?


id say youd be close depends on how high above the pig your crossover tube is..... i was goin on top for the lowers but im slowly changing my mind to center tube....

Originally posted by taradon
Why does everyone use two separate bars to make there triangles? I want to make a dual wishbone setup with one big heim per triangle. I would use poly bushings to attach to the frame and a 1.25" heim on the axle on the top triangle, and two poly bushing to attach to the axle and one 1.25" heim to the frame on the bottom triangle.
Both triangles would be constructed with 1 3/4"x3/8" wall DOM tube.
Will one heim give in the center give me enough misalignment to use 16 inch travel coilovers. The Heims are Avalanche and are 17 degrees of misalignment.

Will this setup hold up to 6500 lb truck? the rear will be fairly light though.

Is there any disadvantages to this system?
Don

Sorry if it's bad to revive an old thread, but this is the exact question that I have been losing sleep over for the past week. I'm looking to do the same thing but it's going on a 2,500lb Suzuki Sami type hybrid thing. Anyone got an answer, please?
btw, Camo, D-Toy, nice work, keep the pics coming, they really help alot.
Chris

Originally posted by MattS
So how do these setup's that's DON'T have a tracbar feel? Is there any movement side to side? Streetable or trail only setup? I am liking desertoys. Might just have to hack apart the rear and put some coils on. :D

Rover has been using three link rears for YEARS. As PIG said, done right they are very streetable. For streetable/trail combo, I would do a vertically (sp?) mounted ball joint or rod end on top of the axle centered. Another key is to have NO lateral movement on the triangle where it meets the frame. If this is accomplished then there is no need for any lateral stabilizing linkage. On a front axle this is extremely critical.

j

Originally posted by 84xtracab
These are of Damian's Scout, he goes by Snoopy here on POR.

<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day8upperd.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day8pumpkinb.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day8uppera.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day9smountc.jpg">
<img src="http://www.dandcextreme.com/buildup/pro2/image/day10overc.jpg">

my new site went up since those links...you can find it those pictures at www.dandcextreme.com/old/buildup/pro2 Check out day 8, 9 and 10

Originally posted by SamuraiChris


Sorry if it's bad to revive an old thread, but this is the exact question that I have been losing sleep over for the past week. I'm looking to do the same thing but it's going on a 2,500lb Suzuki Sami type hybrid thing. Anyone got an answer, please?
btw, Camo, D-Toy, nice work, keep the pics coming, they really help alot.
Chris

You don't have to. Find a rover and look at the rear. This is bolted together, but you get the idea.

Originally posted by SamuraiChris


Sorry if it's bad to revive an old thread,
Chris

when we say search this exactly what we expect people to do. i would rather add tech to an old thread than keep answering the same fawking question everyday. i wish more people would revive old threads and add tech to them. good job :)

snoopy.

damn dude that is a sweet scout. makes me wanna build another one myself. i love those thing. make sure to post some action pics when ya have them.

Originally posted by SamuraiChris


Sorry if it's bad to revive an old thread, but this is the exact question that I have been losing sleep over for the past week. I'm looking to do the same thing but it's going on a 2,500lb Suzuki Sami type hybrid thing. Anyone got an answer, please?
btw, Camo, D-Toy, nice work, keep the pics coming, they really help alot.
Chris

If that single heim breaks it can be game over quickly. I guess that would be one reason.

Originally posted by TDW


If that single heim breaks it can be game over quickly. I guess that would be one reason.

that and a assempled Y link is a pain in the ass to carry a spare.

Originally posted by TDW
If that single heim breaks it can be game over quickly. I guess that would be one reason.
that and a assempled Y link is a pain in the ass to carry a spare.

Both very good points. My interest is in the fact that it can be run with two less heims then a setup that uses 4 individual links. Plus it seems to me that the heims on the top of the V would be unnecessary because they won't move side to side anyway, so a cheaper bushing style could be used there, so then I would be looking at 4 bushings, and 2 heims, which I could just buy massive ones that should hold up.

Main question would be the handling characteristics, would this setup actually have less bind? ( I think so, but I'm not sure, having trouble modeling it in my head) And would it definitely support things laterally? Has anyone done this? I've seen plenty of upper IVI but no XX with one heim at the points.
Thanks for all the help.
Chris

I have been doing some reserch for the past couple of weeks on a 4link set-up for the front of a toyota. I have answered all my questions cept two.

I plan on running a 4 link set up with a panhard parelle to the axle. I'm modeling the 4 links after Supersized truck a 4 door red Tacoma from Florida. Only problem is his runs 13in of coil lift and I only want to run 6in maxium (lower is better)..

Here is the problem I want to run 14in Coil overs to get the most out of the front end. I already plan to go 4in into the fender well and under the hood but that will only get me down too 9in of lift still too much.


I know you can run shorter coil overs and still get great articulation and flex. But it seems to me if I go with a shorter coil over I would be limiteing the front end. I guess my thinking comes from knowing a rs9012 (most comon used leaf spring shock) is a 14in travel shock. So If I go with a 12in or 10in coil over I would have less travel length than a well set up leaf sprung truck?

Does this all make sence?

Thanks all for your help! I have answered a ton of questions so far but have not been able to find very many coil over front end rigs?

Here's a pic for you DRM. Its someone's rig here but I forget their name.
http://www.darksiderz.co.uk/albums/suspension/crosslink.jpg

TPIJeep did some CAD stuff on his suspension setup:
Suspension CAD (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110558)

Originally posted by SniperFire
Here's a pic for you DRM. Its someone's rig here but I forget their name.
http://www.darksiderz.co.uk/albums/suspension/crosslink.jpg

TPIJeep did some CAD stuff on his suspension setup:
Suspension CAD (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110558)

is that on 42s? damn it looks HUGE

Originally posted by BJ On Roids


is that on 42s? damn it looks HUGE

Be foodees...... :D

Jay

I'm currently in the midst of reading all of the suspension info, and absorbing what I can. But I have one question.

Snoopy, on your Scout what's the weight. I'm seriously thinking of this idea on a 78 Jimmy (go figure) and wondering if weight will be a problem. Would a guy just increase the size and number of leafs.?

Wow, I'm only a few months late on this post--but I'm still gonna chime in anyway. DRM, did you ever link up your junk?

Here's a pic from back in the day, when the bug was under construction. (January-ish)

http://www.rocklogic4x4.com/Images/LinkShot.jpg

Originally posted by I Lean
Wow, I'm only a few months late on this post--but I'm still gonna chime in anyway. DRM, did you ever link up your junk?


I would have to decide what junk to build before I could even think of linking something :p

I think this post was just one of my ways to get the info up on the board for all to see... seems to have worked, and I will definately reference it if I ever get around to being brave enough to dive into a link suspension :)

This thread has a lot of great pics. I have learned a lot about 4 links by reading all of this and I have gathered a few ideas of my own. Do u guys bother to try and actualy model a system or do u build as u go. I am thinking I would like to build a model with all sorts of adjustment in it. I am thinking maybe life size or scaled down. What would u sugest for materials? I think it could be very informative to be able to see what the cause and effect of one thing to another would be.

ok, i have a dumbass newbie question but owell :D

it seems like almost everyone runs heims on a 4-link setup. To me, that seems that after awhile,they would start to wear out and start to make alot of noise.is this true? also, what about just using johnny joints on all your ends. yeah it might be a little more to do, but it seems like they would be a bit more reliable than a heim joint. or do the johnny joints not allow full articulation like a Heim?

i was just wondering,cuz back in my lowrider days :rolleyes: i used to have hydros and i would always seem to break the shaft on a heim ( yeah they were not big heims) but i still wouldn't want to snap one in the middle of nowhere.just seemed like even if a JJ was wearing out, it would still hold together to get you out of the trail?

Just wondering before i start hacking
TIA



Desertoy- did i read somewhere that the distance between your top and your lower links were 8"? also, how long are your links,uppers? lowers?




Jeremy

Originally posted by I Lean
Wow, I'm only a few months late on this post--but I'm still gonna chime in anyway. DRM, did you ever link up your junk?

Here's a pic from back in the day, when the bug was under construction. (January-ish)

http://www.rocklogic4x4.com/Images/LinkShot.jpg

looks nice, have any twisted up shots? are the inner links just poly bushings?

Originally posted by Toyotafourwheeln
it seems like almost everyone runs heims on a 4-link setup. To me, that seems that after awhile,they would start to wear out and start to make alot of noise.is this true? also, what about just using johnny joints on all your ends. yeah it might be a little more to do, but it seems like they would be a bit more reliable than a heim joint. or do the johnny joints not allow full articulation like a Heim?

Jeremy

Im running poly bushings on each end of my rear links. Yes they bind, but not enough to matter. I get plenty of articulation from them, and I have never split one, or broken a mount. Notice both ends of the springs are retained, so when I un-retain them, the rear suspension will droop even more before bushing bind becomes an issue.

http://www.akfabshop.com/images/MandG/Freak_Flex_01.jpg

from the front

Originally posted by I Lean
Wow, I'm only a few months late on this post--but I'm still gonna chime in anyway. DRM, did you ever link up your junk?

Here's a pic from back in the day, when the bug was under construction. (January-ish)

http://www.rocklogic4x4.com/Images/LinkShot.jpg

Are you happy with the link configuration and (since it's an older pic) did you end up changing anything? Looks really nice.

Sean

Originally posted by Toyotafourwheeln

Desertoy- did i read somewhere that the distance between your top and your lower links were 8"? also, how long are your links,uppers? lowers?




Jeremy

if what i've read from my searching is still correct.

desertoys links are all the same length and are approx. 42" long

lower links are approx. 2.5" above axle CL and upper links are approx. 9.5" above axle CL, giving him 7 inches between his upper and lower links.

sorry desertoy, if im wrong about your 4link stats.

looks nice, have any twisted up shots? are the inner links just poly bushings?

I tried to find some, the two below are the best I can find. I didn't build it for max flex, but it does OK. Both uppers and lowers use poly bushings at one end of the link, and rod ends at the other. 3/4"-5/8" at the uppers, 1" at the lowers with high misalignment spacers.

Are you happy with the link configuration and (since it's an older pic) did you end up changing anything? Looks really nice.

Thanks! I didn't change a thing since then, I'm totally happy with how it works.

Edit: I have changed coil springs a couple of times, and I'm still playing with them to get it just right. That's pretty minor though, really.

http://www.rocklogic4x4.com/Images/DSCF0262.JPG

http://www.rocklogic4x4.com/Images/DSCF0281.JPG

Originally posted by Toyotafourwheeln
what about just using johnny joints on all your ends. yeah it might be a little more to do, but it seems like they would be a bit more reliable than a heim joint. or do the johnny joints not allow full articulation like a Heim?



When we linked my friend's Scrambler we used Johnny Joint's all around. He's only had one joint blow out and we think we didn't get the snap ring completely seated. He repacked the joint and made damn sure the snap ring was completely seated and no problems since. I hear that the RE joints with the screw in cartridges are a little better in this aspect, the currie joints are like trying to pack 10lbs of crap in a 5lb bag.

http://www.msg4x4club.com/members/member_pics/indy/rti_3.jpg

http://www.msg4x4club.com/events/event_pics/mounds_11_2k2/mounds_6.jpg

Basic link setup idea was shamelessly copied from DesertToy's rig. The next rig will likely use poly on one end and Johnny's on the other to see if the cost reduction is worth any potential binding, should hopefully be done with that by end of June.

Okay, please excuse the stupid questions (This thread brought up some more points I have questions on even after reading God of Susp. and several other link threads).

The first one I have is I notice camo, desertoy and I Lean all have the lower links mounted above the centerline of the axle housing. I've always thought that the reason for mounting the lower links just below the CL of the housing is to keep the pinion angle relatively stable throughout the suspension's range of motion. I LOVE your designs, but does it keep the pinion angle from changing too much?

Second, I notice most folks say that you should attempt to make your links the same length (less spares to carry and ?maybe? so that they all travel in close to the same arc?). My question is this: It appears that camo, desertoy and I Lean all run the uppers farther into the frame to make the links lengths close to the same. I read that desertoy said he was trying to get the heims to be mounted close to the same area/axis (can't remember the wording he used in this thread) so that the links would follow the same arc as the ujoint/driveline. Would it be best to do it this way, where the uppers are slightly forward of the tcase ujoint? Or would it be better to mount all the frame mount link ends (uppers and lowers) at the tcase ujoint and angle the upper's towers back at the housing end to make their length the same as the lowers?

Sorry for the complicated questions. I admit I really don't understand a lot of the stuff in the GoS thread and others. I'm just trying to learn. This is pretty interesting stuff.

Thanks,
Sean

Originally posted by Sean
Okay, please excuse the stupid questions (This thread brought up some more points I have questions on even after reading God of Susp. and several other link threads).

The first one I have is I notice camo, desertoy and I Lean all have the lower links mounted above the centerline of the axle housing. I've always thought that the reason for mounting the lower links just below the CL of the housing is to keep the pinion angle relatively stable throughout the suspension's range of motion. I LOVE your designs, but does it keep the pinion angle from changing too much?

The pinion angle isn't determined by the position of the lower links, rather the relationship between the lower and upper links, regardless of their positioning on the axle.

The reasons for mounting the LCA's above the centerline are ground clearance, and helping keep the angles as flat as possible. It's "bad" from an engineering standpoint, since it puts much greater stress on the links and their mounts, but that can be compensated for by extra beef in those components.

Second, I notice most folks say that you should attempt to make your links the same length (less spares to carry and ?maybe? so that they all travel in close to the same arc?). My question is this: It appears that camo, desertoy and I Lean all run the uppers farther into the frame to make the links lengths close to the same. I read that desertoy said he was trying to get the heims to be mounted close to the same area/axis (can't remember the wording he used in this thread) so that the links would follow the same arc as the ujoint/driveline. Would it be best to do it this way, where the uppers are slightly forward of the tcase ujoint? Or would it be better to mount all the frame mount link ends (uppers and lowers) at the tcase ujoint and angle the upper's towers back at the housing end to make their length the same as the lowers?

Sorry for the complicated questions. I admit I really don't understand a lot of the stuff in the GoS thread and others. I'm just trying to learn. This is pretty interesting stuff.

Thanks,
Sean

My uppers are actually a bit longer than my lowers. I like it best this way to keep my pinion angle where I want it---however, I think this is one of those things you can overthink, since most of us aren't getting the insane amounts of travel that, say, a desert racer might.

I hope I answered some of your questions....keep me going if I haven't. :)

Originally posted by I Lean


The pinion angle isn't determined by the position of the lower links, rather the relationship between the lower and upper links, regardless of their positioning on the axle.

The reasons for mounting the LCA's above the centerline are ground clearance, and helping keep the angles as flat as possible. It's "bad" from an engineering standpoint, since it puts much greater stress on the links and their mounts, but that can be compensated for by extra beef in those components.



My uppers are actually a bit longer than my lowers. I like it best this way to keep my pinion angle where I want it---however, I think this is one of those things you can overthink, since most of us aren't getting the insane amounts of travel that, say, a desert racer might.

I hope I answered some of your questions....keep me going if I haven't. :)

I Lean,
I misworded my first question I think. Let me retry. Pinion angle on a leaf sprung truck is determined basically by welding the spring pads at the correct angle to line the pinion up (usually about a degree or so under the tcase output if you have a cv joint style driveline). On a 4 link, I was under the assumption that where you mount the links doesn't matter as much as the relationship between the two (as you mentioned) and that you can adjust the angle by simply twisting the link (assuming left and right hand threads) to make them longer and shorter.

My first question was more about pinion angle as the suspension cyles. If the lower links are above the center line of the housing, does the pinion angle change drastically as the suspension travels? If I'm understanding the first part of what you said correctly, it sounds like the only real reason to mount your lower links just below the centerline of the housing is to lessen the stress on the mounts themselves (which as you mentioned, you could beef to withstand the stress anyway).

I'm really interested in the way your links are mounted. It seems like the best possible solution. The links stay flatter, they are up out of the way and if they still control the pinion angle as the suspension cyles, I don't see any reason not to do it that way b/c you can always just go extra strong on the mounts and links/hiems.

I guess I have another question: I wheel with several RCCA guys and their links are all just below centerline. Are they missing the boat here, cause this sounds like a significant advantage to me.

Thanks so much for the help.

Sean

Originally posted by Sean


My first question was more about pinion angle as the suspension cyles. If the lower links are above the center line of the housing, does the pinion angle change drastically as the suspension travels? If I'm understanding the first part of what you said correctly, it sounds like the only real reason to mount your lower links just below the centerline of the housing is to lessen the stress on the mounts themselves (which as you mentioned, you could beef to withstand the stress anyway).

OK, lessee if I can describe this well enough for you to envision it: Picture a linked rear suspension, side view. You have some amount of vertical separation at the axle, and the links converge at a single point. The pinion is pointing directly at that point as well. On compression and extension, the pinion will continue to point directly at the convergent point of the links. Make sense?

Now picture a similar suspension (still side view), but the upper and lower links are parallel--same vert separation at the front as at the axle end. The pinion is horizontal at rest--under compression and extension, the pinion will remain horizontal.

The same rules apply no matter where the axle mounts are, whether they're equally spaced above and below the tube, or mounted a foot above it. So yes, the only real reason (IMO) to mount the lowers down low, is to reduce the forces on the control arm and it's mounts.


I guess I have another question: I wheel with several RCCA guys and their links are all just below centerline. Are they missing the boat here, cause this sounds like a significant advantage to me.

Thanks so much for the help.

Sean

I think there are a few different arguments about that...some say they can use the LCA as a "slider", and smoothly scrape down a rock until it's past the axle, while a design like mine would hang up on the axle tube. I haven't run into that ever, but you never know.

Some of the comp rigs are so freaking low that they might not need to mount the control arms any higher, since they're basically level at rest.

Makes perfect sense with your explanation. Thanks again.

Sean