I know there is no "perfect" wheelebase but with that in mind I am thinking about changing mine. Right now I have a '78 Bronco ( www.superford.org/?vID=210 ) on leaf springs at 106". I have been thinking about anywhere from 110" to 120". My primary useage is rocks and I wheel in mostly "open" areas. Opinions? :idea:s?

Steve

i think wheelbase is very important and i have had one on every vehicle i have owned:flipoff2: do some searching and reading before you ask a lame ass question

Originally posted by swamper502
i think wheelbase is very important and i have had one on every vehicle i have owned:flipoff2:


THATS CLASSIC :laughing:


But realy 106" sounds great
ericfilar@fatcity

Longer is better. Try something in the 200 inch range. Yeah, that's the ticket.

if 106" is good, 200" must be better!:flipoff2: seriously though 106 is good:beer:

106"??!?!?!!!???!!!?!?!

dude, you need AT LEAST 107"

c'mon.

seriously, what size tire are you gonna run eventually. If you are sticking with the 42's i would say stretch it to 110, if yer gonna go 44's or bigger, then maybe 115. I am at 97" and when i get 39.5's it will be a little short, i think. Don't wanna be flippin over backwards, now...

I'll be running with 42's and I'm seriously considering 115"....Might drop her down to 110" but I have to make up my mind soon...Gonna' locate the rear this weekend! Wahoo!

--D

long and strong

I wheel in Tennessee, so we can't really do to long a wheelbase unless you feal like smaking trees alot. Seems like the Custom rigs are around a 110" wheelbase

My rig is going to be 112", but most that is going to come from very off-centered springs. Yeah in TN most of the rigs are getting stretched, after to many roll-overs and even us "Stupid Rednecks" catch on. I'm building my rig similar to Chris Durham's, light, low, and long. But I'm going to run real tires 38" SX:skull:

I am shooting for 105"-110" on 42's....

I was originally planning on 110 with my 42s. After taking it out and playing around at 132 (stock LWB GM), I'm thinking maybe a bit longer. Like 115-120 even. Sure was nice being long on some of those obstacles. Who knows...

I'm somewhere between 106-108 on my rig with 42s.

CJ

Originally posted by swamper502
i think wheelbase is very important and i have had one on every vehicle i have owned:flipoff2: do some searching and reading before you ask a lame ass question

hey swamper,

does being that nasty come easy & naturally for you, or do you have to try really hard to get there?:flipoff2: :rasta: :flipoff2:

by the way, haven't heard any comment from you on the
last posts regardind the "rear steer" issue.

were they right in their interpretation of rear steer or
did you actually screwed up that one?

do'nt tell you gave up on me so quickly;)

Originally posted by Ultim8kaos
I have been thinking about anywhere from 110" to 120". My primary useage is rocks and I wheel in mostly "open" areas. Opinions? :idea:s?

Steve

i think it depends mostly on what you do with your rig.

if you do serious rocks you need "higher belly" and therefore
you have higher COG which means you must have longer
WB and wider track.

i personally am a LWB freeck(131"). it makes you climb
ledges and obstacles much easier.

but, if you're mostly wheeling on other kinds of terrain you may
not need that much length.

i'd say 110" would be logical in your case.

Guys,
Thanks for all the input. :beer: I think that 110" will probably be the easy one to obtain and will be where I end up. I am thinking I will just relocate the spring center pins. The Bronco body will probably be shelled for just a cab and then tube work for the rear.
Later,
Steve

We are building a '79 Bronco here with Rockwells and 44's and we decided on 117". We moved the front axle forward 8" and the rear back 4". It looks like it's going to be a good start. We also did a doubler, clocked the transfer cases and raised the 460 3" so nothing hangs below the frame. Haven't got a chance to test it yet but we're thinking it will work good. It could maybe use another 3" in wheelbase though. 115-120 works well with tall tires and a fullsize.

do'nt tell you gave up on me so quickly

froggy i just like to have a little fun with people, nobody gets hurt

and about the other thread I don't care so i haven't read it in a while but you should think about longer arms for the 4 link just my .02

Originally posted by swamper502

you should think about longer arms for the 4 link just my .02

you may have a point here - i used to have a 16"
shorter WB = 115".

when i made it longer, i moved the frame mounts of the
radius arms & the triangle back, using the same arms & triangle.

do you think the current setup justifies longer arms? the
proper length of radius arms is something i do'nt really know
much about.

i know that inspite the fact that i did'nt change the arms length,
this setup works just great - never felt any limitation even in
the most difficult situations.

BTW - it's not a 4 link suspension, it's a 3 link one.