Alright I've been asked a few times so here's what we did for the hydro on the truggy. The ram is an 8" stroke ram 1.75" bore with a 1" or 1.25." Jordan already had the ram and I forgot the measurements.

First off. Do these mods at your own risk. If it blows up, or you do it wrong, it's not my fault, these are just guidelines for the mod. If you don't understand what is going on in this thread, DO NOT ATTEMPT IT.

First drill and tap the box. We drilled and tapped it to 0.5" for the fittings we had.

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/1.JPG

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/2.JPG

Then remove the high-pressure line fitting from the pump. Drill it to 5/32" and replace the O-ring (that probably ripped off anyways when you removed it) with a higher pressure rated O-ring.

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/7.JPG

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/8.JPG

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/9.JPG

Now remove a shim from the flow piston. There are 5 shims of varying size. I chose to remove the thickest. I think I could have removed a thin shim as well, but this was a decent starting point. I still don't trust the rover box to handle any real pressure. And since the steering worked well at Tellico with 40" tires, I'll consider this a good limit. My personal plan is to see if I can't rework a J20 Saginaw box with the 3.5" piston to work on the rover frame.

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/3.JPG

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/6.JPG

Stretch the pump's piston spring from ~1.6" to 2.125"

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/5.JPG

And the most important step. Have a hippie perform these mods.

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/12.JPG

Interesting, this is what I did a while back based on KCs original post of this mod. My piston doesn't have any rings though...Larry does yours look like this one or the one in KCs post? I only get low end benefit if the RPMs are up a bit, how much power does yours have at crawl speeds Jordan?

Tis

That is a different valve than any I have seen in a rover. Probably an aftermarket pump!!

I only get low end benefit if the RPMs are up a bit, how much power does yours have at crawl speeds Jordan?

Tis

Smaller pulley?

Let's see some pics of the cylinder attachment to the frame and the cross tube.

That hippie doesn't look to have enough hair-there'd better be some patchouli around too!:flipoff2: And, most importantly, what music was being played at the time?

And, most importantly, what music was being played at the time?

Spice girls, for spiced up steering :flipoff2: ?

T

Smaller pulley?

Let's see some pics of the cylinder attachment to the frame and the cross tube.

That hippie doesn't look to have enough hair-there'd better be some patchouli around too!:flipoff2: And, most importantly, what music was being played at the time?

You want the hair.... YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE HAIR! :flipoff2:

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/4.JPG

:rasta:

You couldn't smell the patchouli, since I hadn't showered in 2 weeks at that particular point. :flipoff2:

That is a different valve than any I have seen in a rover. Probably an aftermarket pump!!

Interesting, this is the first time I've done a rover pump, so I wouldn't have known. I'll see what I can find out about it.

You want the hair.... YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE HAIR! :flipoff2:

http://www.cartertuned.com/hydro/4.JPG

:rasta:

You couldn't smell the patchouli, since I hadn't showered in 2 weeks at that particular point. :flipoff2:

I am in the presence of greatness:flipoff2:

Maybe my mother was right, I am just a wannabee hippie.

Now break out pics of the cylinder attachment:flipoff2:

I'll see if I can get some pics from Jordan. I don't have any of the cylinder mounting on my computer.

I should hopefully have some pics of Jordans cylinder mounted tommorrow before he leaves for 1.5 weeks.

Until then here's a lil'somethin' that just arrived for my Disco....

http://www.cartertuned.com/heims.JPG

Holy shit!

I'm more curious now.

Ok here are the cylinder mounting pics:

http://www.cartertuned.com/pb1.jpg

http://www.cartertuned.com/pb2.jpg

http://www.cartertuned.com/pb3.jpg

http://www.cartertuned.com/pb4.jpg

You do realize you should have a heim or bushing at the axle side mount. Or you should have mounted the ram 90 degrees from it current position. That joint moves front to back as you steer. Seeing as how the tie rod get closer to the axle at full lock. It will work fine, but you will get premature cylinder wear

I was just looking at that too. I didn't set up the cylinder mounting(I just did the pump and box), so this is the first time I've seen it.

Also, FWIW, he says that is the original pump off of the 94 Discovery. So it's exact origin is still kind of unknown.

No Panhard? I couldn't see one in the pics.

What are the advantages to the links mounted on the top of the axle?

Thanx for the cylinder pics.

No Panhard? I couldn't see one in the pics.

What are the advantages to the links mounted on the top of the axle?

Thanx for the cylinder pics.

Nope no panhard. The lower triangulated centerlink mounts slightly lower than the centerpoint of the axle tube. The uppers on top of the axle keep everything stable, and give about 7" of vertical seperation. Think of it as a giant SG 3-link. The triangulated lower center link allows for practically no lateral movement, so a panhard isn't a necessity for a low speed trail only rig, though it didn't handle too bad at 55mph when I got to take it out, and that's not something I would make a habit of. If I were to build one, that I still wanted to take on the street occasionally (my personal plan) I would utilize a panhard.

The lower two holes in the steering box, normaly fixed to the panhard bracket to take up sideways movement, are not used.

General opinions? Do the hydro assist make it redundant?

T

The lower triangulated centerlink mounts slightly lower than the centerpoint of the axle tube. The uppers on top of the axle keep everything stable, and give about 7" of vertical seperation.

Triangulated? Two points of attachment at the cross member?

Seven inches difference between attachment point of center link and the uppers?

Damn you, making me think again! Wannabee hippies don't like to think too hard:flipoff2:

Triangulated? Two points of attachment at the cross member?

Seven inches difference between attachment point of center link and the uppers?

Damn you, making me think again! Wannabee hippies don't like to think too hard:flipoff2:

A triangulated lower link is the only way to make a 3-link work without the panhard. Having a panhard is only for controlling the axle's lateral movement. In a normal non-triangulated 3-link (SG being a good example) will cause the axle to pull the axle to the driverside (or passenger, depending on which side of the pond your on) at full suspension articulation. A triangulated 3-link with panhard will experience some binding. This particular triangulated 3-link is actually mounted to the bottom of the frame, as opposed to the crossmember, under the radius arm mounts, to help kill some of the antisquat numbers, though it's still over 100%, hence the need for a limiting strap. To get sub 100% antisquat numbers with a rover frame would require some radical work, and compromise a little clearance. The vertical seperation at the axle is to aid in handling the torque load applied the axle itself.

I hope I didn't blow your mind... maaaan:smokin:

The lower two holes in the steering box, normaly fixed to the panhard bracket to take up sideways movement, are not used.

General opinions? Do the hydro assist make it redundant?

T


Hydro assist is never a substitute for a panhard. The need for a panhard is dependent upon the axle control linkage being used, not the steering setup.

For example take a rover with hydro-assist and radius arms or a SG style 3-link. Drives fine (all joking aside). Now add bad panhard bushings to the mix, deathwobble big time. No panhard whatsoever... nice knowing you, give my regards to Hendrix. The steering hasn't changed, the hydro assist was there too, but the panhard variable changed and you have gone from safe, to dead. So let this be a lesson, when going out on a hot date, and taking the rover, always bring protection... and make sure the panhard rod is installed and the bushings are fresh.

I'm not discussing the need for panhard or not, I'm discussing the need for bracing the steering box against steering imposed side loadings - or not.

If you look at the standars setup for how the steering box is mounted, it has four bolts sideways attaching it to the - boxed- frame.
This would in some manufacturers book be enough to keep the steering box attached to the frame without too much cracking of the same...

However, contrary to some parts of LR design, this area was considered needing more beef. So the panhard rod bracket, seeing a lot of sideways loading when turning wheels, is tied into the bottom of the steering box, which sees sideloadings in the other direction when turning, with two additional bolts. This makes this whole area much stronger in my view. However, when using a hydro cylinder for steering force assist a lot less steering forces are introduced into the steering box, so the need for sideways bracing is less. Is it this groups opinion that it is so much less that this additional brace can safely be omitted?
I think not, but tend to overbeef...
It would open up a lot of space in this cramped area, though.

Tobias

Hopefully the hippie-assist has been running for a while now.
Any problems in the integrity of the steering box attachement?

Tobias

Hopefully the hippie-assist has been running for a while now.
Any problems in the integrity of the steering box attachement?

Tobias

It ran flawlessly, but that rig has moved on. It's now going to full-hydro along with the Chevy 350, and Stak 3 speed Tcase.

However, there were never any problems with it. I have my truck setup just the same, and as soon as I have it running and wheeling, I'll have another rig to report on. I'll be running it with a 1.75" PSC ram.

Are you happy running all your lateral loads through a single heim joint with a threaded rod in bending and shear?

It seems a little scary to me, a balljoint like the rear suspension top joint would be stronger and wear much less with the sideloads.

Are you happy running all your lateral loads through a single heim joint with a threaded rod in bending and shear?

It seems a little scary to me, a balljoint like the rear suspension top joint would be stronger and wear much less with the sideloads.

X 2. I hesitated in bringing it up for all the shit I got in the other thread, but this is the front, so pretty serious if it goes.

Edit: I also think that the actual heim is 90 degrees off if you want it to hold up to side loads. It looks like the tiny snap rings holding the heim race in place is the only thing that keeps the axle from moving sideways?

Ok, once again let me reiterate, THE PICS ARE NOT OF MY TRUCK.

For the record, and the purpose of this thread
I just modified the pump, and the steering box for him.

That is not how I would have setup the front 3-link. Since the time these pics were taken the front has been overhauled, though I haven't seen it since.

Is this the "ideal" setup, probably not. However, the strength of the Chromoly the joint is made of, seems to have shown itself to be strong enough to handle the bending and shear loads being placed upon the 1.25" shank. Not just on this truck, but countless others. I personally would have oriented the joint 90 degrees from where it is. If you're really worried about side loading, a track bar would help some, but this rig was a low-hp trail only rig.