I'm trolling for opinions here the story how it got started is that
we recently swapped to leafs in the rear of our TJ's and now while they travel the same it takes a bit more force to get them to flex.
So if you could choose what axle would you rather have flex more F or R or have them travel the same?
Last weekend we finally got to test out the new setup and I was very pleased while the rear didn't move around as much it seemed to make the front tires bite more which really made for a better feeling/wheeling machine.
So now I'm like "uh" maybe stiffer in the rear might be the ticket let the front take all the bumps and leave the rear to push everythig along.

(this probably has something to do with the whole squat anti squat thing eh ;) )

i have mine setup exactly the oppisite. my front is stiffer than the rear.

upfront i have leafs springs and out back i use a 4 link and coilovers. just the way i did it. i like it.

Originally posted by camo
i have mine setup exactly the oppisite. my front is stiffer than the rear.

upfront i have leafs springs and out back i use a 4 link and coilovers. just the way i did it. i like it.


Question do you ever wish that the rear didn't flex so much?
I have seen some rigs and pics where the flex seemed to hinder rather than help. Of course it's not always so :)
Just like most everywhere I suppose build it for how you drive and what you run on.

thanks

i think that either one is just as good, it just depends on how you drive, my front end fexes way more than the rear, and i have learned to drive with it. i have a friend with a IFS Chevy, and he has learned to wheel with only having flex in the rear.
i think it is easier to drive with something that has significantly more flex on one end cause it adds stability.

I've always thought and tried to emulate the idea of having a balanced setup. I've seen rigs with heaps of rear flex get into some weird angles etc as the body suddenly keels over to one side as the weight shifts. if you can have a balanced setup with out a bias to either it feels a lot better and combined with lockers can get you through most obstacles. granted i don't do the extreme rockcrawling but more rutted tracks, ledges and mud due to our terrain down under.

Originally posted by GDGMOJO



Question do you ever wish that the rear didn't flex so much?
I have seen some rigs and pics where the flex seemed to hinder rather than help. Of course it's not always so :)
Just like most everywhere I suppose build it for how you drive and what you run on.

thanks

no but while mine has alot of flex i did keep it on the lower end of the scale becsause i don't like how the ultra flexy rigs behave out on the trail

Originally posted by camo


i don't like how the ultra flexy rigs behave out on the trail


Agreed,

I like to set'm up stiffer in the rear, not so much flexier in the front as JUST stiffer in the rear. If I had to make a choice it would deffinatly be flexier in the front, just FEELS more stable to me.
ericfilar@fatcity

i think it is easier to drive with something that has significantly more flex on one end cause it adds stability.

huh?? if all yo flex is on one end, that would be highly unstable. I am gonna try to build a 50/50 balanced rig. Like eric said, it should be stiffer in the rear. this is for ledges and hill climbs, like RCAA type stuff. however, just because it is stiffer, doesn't mean it has to have less flex...


laters-

Myself, I shot for 50/50 when builing my rigs. I feel it gives the
best overall balance and the rig never unloads from front to back.

I went with 50/50 and it works great.

sorry but i do'nt see the problem with high flexibility.
on the one hand people get wild with loooong coilovers, quarter eliptic and all kinds of crazy setups, and on the other hand you complain about getting too flexy.

i think the flexier the better, BUT you should be able to control it.

this is why i have an enormous flexibility but i also have a very
massive custom stabilizer.

whenever i want to be flexalltheway, i disconnect it and whenever i need the vehicle to be more stiff & contolable i connect it.

maybe i did'nt see or get what you were saying, but it seems to me to be the right way.

i hope i wo'nt have to stand corrected....:emb4:

frog

my own experience is that 50/50 is the way to go. If you're not 50/50, then you end up doing wheel stands as one end fails to flex over something the other end did. For instance, in my old setup the front had WAY more flex than the rear. When crossing a big crack, the front would flex fine over it, but as soon as the rear dropped in, it wouldn;t, and it would lift the opposite corner front tire WAY in the air. I resolved this somewhat by increasing rear flex.

In the end, I think a 50/50 balance is going to result in the rig staying as level as possible over the widest range of situations. Now those of us with YJs know that getting equal flex out of the rear can be difficult, due to the spacing of the rear springs.

I agree on the 50/50 flex for the same reasons ChadLloyd pointed out. I also believe that vertical wheel travel should be limited to around the same as the radius of the tire. This makes the tires less likely to get hung under ledges. jmo

50/50% flex - does experience show that this is best for a vehicle with 60% front, 40% rear weight distribution with a longer wheel base (say 100")?