I'm finally cutting out the IFS on my Toyota and upgrading to 60's front and rear. I'm going to setup the front suspension with coilovers and a suspension system like the rubicon Express long arm setup, with two lower control arms and two upper control arms that attach to the lower ones. I'm also going to run coilovers in the rear, and my question is what is the best control arm setup for the rear? I was planning on doing the same as the front on the rear, but I've heard bad things about that setup in the rear?

triangulate that rear end. don't mess with a trackbar (panhard). You will be glad you did.

Originally posted by kodak
triangulate that rear end. don't mess with a trackbar (panhard). You will be glad you did.

I would venture to say the same about the front, however it will upset the hardcore panard guys.
ericfilar@fatcity

Originally posted by FatCity


I would venture to say the same about the front, however it will upset the hardcore panard guys.
ericfilar@fatcity

DOn't you think it will cause bumpsteer in the front without a panard bar? Seems simple enough to avoid bumpsteer so why not, I can understand its not a big deal but easy to deal with mostly.

Originally posted by NE-RokToy


DOn't you think it will cause bumpsteer in the front without a panard bar? Seems simple enough to avoid bumpsteer so why not, I can understand its not a big deal but easy to deal with mostly.


If the sterring geom. is correct, no it won't.

example: Leaf spring set-ups have been used for years, many with no bumpsteer, a leaf spring travels streight up and down + forward or backward, much like a triangulated link system, with the correct steer geom. they don't have bumpsteer.

Panards are for people that are to lazy to do it rite.
OOOOHHHHH!!! thats gonna stir up something, I just know it

ericfilar@fatcity

That are the Pro's/ Con's of the triangulate rear end when compared to a true 4 link system? I'm also going to be driving my truck about 40 miles a day with that in mind whats the better way to go?

Originally posted by TXSE
That are the Pro's/ Con's of the triangulate rear end when compared to a true 4 link system?

A triangulated 4-link is the true 4-link.

No cons what-so-ever, the pros are a better, more stable feeling ride
ericfilar@fatcity

t r i a n g l e

and that's it......:D :D

Then what is the difference in flex and on road driving feel between a triangulated 4-link system with the control arms from the top of the housing mounted to the frame/ crossmember, and a system with control arms from the top of the housing mounted to the lower control arms? :confused:

Originally posted by FatCity



If the sterring geom. is correct, no it won't.

example: Leaf spring set-ups have been used for years, many with no bumpsteer, a leaf spring travels streight up and down + forward or backward, much like a triangulated link system, with the correct steer geom. they don't have bumpsteer.

Panards are for people that are to lazy to do it rite.
OOOOHHHHH!!! thats gonna stir up something, I just know it

ericfilar@fatcity

SMACK!!!

Ouch that hurt, I guess if your draglink is close to parralel it will work fine with a triangulated front.

Originally posted by NE-RokToy


SMACK!!!

Ouch that hurt, I guess if your draglink is close to parralel it will work fine with a triangulated front.


I tried to sugar coat it, but it still sounded that way didn't it
sorry
ericfilar@fatcity

Originally posted by TXSE
Then what is the difference in flex and on road driving feel between a triangulated 4-link system with the control arms from the top of the housing mounted to the frame/ crossmember, and a system with control arms from the top of the housing mounted to the lower control arms? :confused:

you probly won't be unsatisfied with the panard style flex, even though there will be a bind in the suspension, but the on-road drive will feel much more controlled with the triangulated system.

ericfilar@fatcity

I guess I am the hard core pan-nerd guy. I think with a triangulated front suspension or with a leaf spring front suspension, and the drag link horizontal, you can get essentially no bump steer, but the reason I don't like that design is because if you are extremely articulated like axle 20 degrees to the frameyou are not going to be able to get full lock to lock steering. Not having full steering in an extreme situation is gay, I would rather not have the articulation and keep full steering. Using a panhard bar that is the same length as and parallel to the drag link lets you get full steering in the completely articulated setup and it gives you no bump steer. The other way to accomplish this is to go full-hydro with the triangulated front suspension. I think that is a good way to go too. Just depends on what you think the priorities are. To me it is pretty important to be able to steer all the way all the time. If you don't think that is a priority that doesn't bother me.

So whats everyones opinion on the triangulation, triangulated 4 link, or wishbone with single heim at the diff housing? What would be the pros and cons to each? Or do they handle the same?

P.S. I agree with fatcity, run triangulated link system front and rear (no tie-rod), and full hydro.

Hey marcus, go with the RE setup up front, it will be a lot easier to actually fit under your truck without modifying the frame, or having clearance issues with the motor. I would put a 3-link in the rear with a 1" heim on top of the carrier, these seem to do a better job of keeping the axle from walking sideways when off-camber, and they give awesome flex, if you don't use a Jam Nut on the heim. Then run some Poly-U bushings at the frame side of the upper A-arm, and it will ride NICE. I know you are staying with the narrow(gay) axles, but if you can get the lower arms to angle out as they go toward the axle, that will help prevent axle-steer, and keep it solid.

btw- what is this i hear about some dude from "maximum altitude" working on yer rig...

sounds fishy man, that place scares me...

Thank you everyone for your help and input. Elffy I think thats the set up I'm leaning towards, what do you think the two lower control arms should use heim or jonny? I heard use the Jonny becaue of the 50% road aspect? As for the shop I'm using, Its this new guy who just started a small Business fabricating. I've seen some of his work and its really good reminds me alot of victors work. Now if I didn't have that thing call work A.K.A. responsibility, I would drive up there and we would do it.

hmm, after messing with johnnies, i am starting to prefer heims now. I would run heims at the frame on the upper arms, and poly bushings at the axle. Try to mount the arm as high on the axle housing as possible. The more parallel with the ground, the better, but you still want to have ground clearance, so don't build a drop bracket on the frame side. Also, i would only run one side with a radius arm. That way it won't bind when flexed, put it on the pass. side, 'cause it will be easy to mount it above the carrier, and use heims for both ends of the radius arm. Just don't use any jam nuts on the heims, they will rattle around, but it will flex like MAD!

if you put the draglink parrallel and the same length as the locating link it will have the same bumpsteer characteristics as a panhard rod setup with the draglink parrallel to the panhard rod.
you just have to open your eyes and look at where the steering needs to be and not get stuck on 'crossover thinking' where it doesnt fit.
it is fairly obvious isnt it?