Ok, I did a search and didn't find anything usefull.

I'm using 4 link suspension designs front and rear on my project vehicle. And, I am thinking about using a transverse mounted leaf spring for the front since space is kinda limited and I don't have the funds to go Coil-Over.

http://www.AzChatfield.net/MiscPics/Transverse_Front.jpg

For the rear I plan on using 1/4 ellipticals, 'cause I have plenty of room. But up front, space is a little tight. There is plenty of room above the axle to mount the spring though. Essentially it would be like taking 1/4 ellipticals and turning them sideways, except not as long.

Anyone heard, seen or done anything like this? Any problems encountered? Suggestions/comments/questions?

Oh, and the axles are 20" from the ends of the vehicle, so conventional leaf springs are out, 'cause I'm not having the leafs stick out way past the front and rear of the Jeep. :D I thought about coils, but I've seen too many "extreme" TJ's spit coils out at the spotter. :flipoff2: Plus with leafs I can adjust the spring rate/ride height without having to buy new springs.

<iFrame src="http://www.AzChatfield.net/Signature.asp" width=95% height=70 border=0 frameborder=0 align=center scrolling=no></iFrame>

A rig called Twister out of Arizona ran this front and rear and boy could it twist. He ended up changing it out after a while but see what you can find out about the Twister.

I think if you look under any Ford auto between the years of 1911 or so and 1948, you will find that Old Henry used a transverse front and rear spring system all those years with pretty good success. If you look under a 1995 Buick Regal, you will find that the General is using a transverse rear spring under the rear of it too. Oh yes, the Corvette used them on the rear too for most of its history, if not all of it. BTW, the old moonshiners would tell you that the Ford was not only faster than any other car of its day, it would out handle any other auto too. Have fun. It should work great!!

Check out the SRC home page and there is a project jeep called slinkey I think and it has the same suspension setup. Also there was a thread a while back about custom suspensions or the God of suspensions do a search for that ti has a few pics and a little discussion on this type setup I think it's 7/8 elliptical or something like that.......hope this helps

Here's a couple from the SRC page. I think it's a cool idea.
http://www.sierrarockcrawlers.com/images2/0612.jpg
http://www.sierrarockcrawlers.com/images2/0611.jpg

Originally posted by 66CJdean
A rig called Twister out of Arizona ran this front and rear and boy could it twist. He ended up changing it out after a while but see what you can find out about the Twister.
http://www.alloffroad.com/pictures/issues/december/cover/1.jpg
Hmm.. I've seen twister up close and even talked to Jim Allen a bit about it. That sure is one different design! He pulls a pin and that thing flexes like mad, but its a bit different than what I was thinking. His mounts the center of the spring to the diff and the ends to the frame; I'm going the other direction. BTW, did ya know that thing is made with Pipe instead of Tube?

Originally posted by convertiyota
SRC page. I think it's a cool idea.

Thanks, I'll check out the pics real close -- that looks exactly like what I want to do.

<iFrame src="http://www.AzChatfield.net/Signature.asp" width=95% height=70 border=0 frameborder=0 align=center scrolling=no></iFrame>

I would expect it to be pretty scarry on side hills though with the mount point in the middle. With no supprt at the corners ti is going to get bodyroll from hell I would expect.

i was just thinking the same thing as dean, that is a crazy amount of flex:eek:

Originally posted by 66CJdean
I would expect it to be pretty scarry on side hills though with the mount point in the middle. With no supprt at the corners ti is going to get bodyroll from hell I would expect.

If you look close you can see where the spring would hit the frame if it wasn't flexing. All he has to do is put the pin back in and no more body roll. Even with the pins in it flexes better than alot of rigs I've seen.

In the rear he's gone to a kind of bar and coil spring suspension. Its real hard to explain -- you have to see it. I think that helps alot on side hills. Plus it sits pretty low so the COG is down there.

- Mike

I have looked at Jims setup and think it is pretty cool but the diagram above and the SRC rig look like it is going to be scarry. If it is riding on the rubber snubbers then it just might be the way to go. I think it is going to take some playing with spring rates to get it to work the way you want but hell that is half the fun to me.

spring rate and some straps to limit it a little.:eek: gotta be alot of force on the center mount(frame).

Originally posted by FULLSIZE
spring rate and some straps to limit it a little.:eek: gotta be alot of force on the center mount(frame).

Thats what I was thinking.....A LOT OF FORCE! I am impressed though, both those rigs have some savage amounts of flex :eek:

Do you think it would make a big difference inn rock crawling (like the high line in the box) or just in traversing side hills?

Originally posted by 66CJdean
I have looked at Jims setup and think it is pretty cool but the diagram above and the SRC rig look like it is going to be scarry. If it is riding on the rubber snubbers then it just might be the way to go. I think it is going to take some playing with spring rates to get it to work the way you want but hell that is half the fun to me. Yep, my plan is to have the spring mounted solid in the center, not on a pivot like the SRC rig. There will probably be about 1" to 2" of space between the spring and the bumpstop; I will probably start at 2.5" to 3" and then play with spacers and the spring pack until I get where I want it.

If I'm correct in my thinking, because the shackle connects to the axle near the ends, as far as stability is concerned, it should be like having coils or coilovers that connect in the same area.

I'm gonna start with a 2.5" lift spring pack, take a 2nd pack, cut the ends off and add its main leaf and about every other leaf. And then add or remove from there.

Hopefully by the end of the summer I'll have both F & R suspensions done. I'll snap some pics and post them. It'll probably be another 6months/year after that before its on the trail though.

Originally posted by FULLSIZE
spring rate and some straps to limit it a little.:eek: gotta be alot of force on the center mount(frame). By mounting the spring pack solid, I'm hoping that I won't have to add a limiting strap, but that will be determined on the trail (or more likely on a ramp).

As for the cross member to support the spring pack - it will be a little over 24" long and I figure to use a piece of 2"x2"x.25" square tube, welding that to 1/4" plate, with gussets and then welding the 1/4" plate to the frame. Pictured below, the 1/4" plate welded to the frame is Red, the Gusset plate (1/4") is Green, the cross member is light gray and the frame is dark gray:

http://www.azchatfield.net/miscpics/crossmember.jpg

<iFrame src="http://www.AzChatfield.net/Signature.asp" width=95% height=70 border=0 frameborder=0 align=center scrolling=no></iFrame>

The shocks will be the limiting strap. The further out to the ends of the axles you mount the shackle the better the stability, ride, and flex because the sprinds will be longer but the support will be further out.

I am not sure about binding/flex but how about something similar to a dual front transverse 1/4 eliptic?

have 2 different springs mounted transverse. one from teh passenger frame rail to the drivers side of the axle and another from the drivers frame rail down to the passenger side of the axle?

like I said, I am not sure if it would bind or not, but ideas for you to play with....it would also help to control the body roll on sidehills more than a single transverse spring.

The shackle will take care of the binding.

By mounting the spring pack solid, I'm hoping that I won't have to add a limiting strap, but that will be determined on the trail (or more likely on a ramp).

it will be on the trail when your upside down cause your ramp forgot to compensate for sidehills.:p

i asked the same question a while back when the TOTW was custom suspensions. it seems to me that a transversly mounted spring setup would be easy as hell to swap to coilovers when you can afford ot buy them. the problem i found is that you would havce to have one hell of a spring rate to keep the body from flopping over to one side. i was thinking maybe 1 ton leafs, but they may be to stiff.

let me know how this goes as i want to do something simular.

Just a note on body roll. I plan to use an Anti-Rock swaybar type set up, Front and Rear. Having seen these work in person, and with their flexibility in design, I believe I can control body roll and tune the suspension so that both front and rear do equal work. While some might argue that the anti-rock swaybars will decrease flex, flex isn't everything, especially on the trail.

Originally posted by mkbruin
how about something similar to a dual front transverse 1/4 eliptic?
After doing some measuring this weekend, it appears that this is a better idea, at least for my setup, since I am not running full width axles. I'm using a Wagoneer D44 front, and I'd need a spring that is around 40" long when flat. The stock YJ spring I have measured around 44" -- a little long.

I'll do some more measuring and thinking before this is through, but right now I'm looking at two transverse mounted 1/4 elliptical springs between 24" and 30" long.

Thanks everyone for the input, I'll be sure to post pics and such when I get it done.

- Mike

Originally posted by AGGIECJ-7
it seems to me that a transversly mounted spring setup would be easy as hell to swap to coilovers when you can afford ot buy them...

let me know how this goes as i want to do something simular.
I was thinking the same thing about swapping in coil-overs in the future -- it really depends on how well the transverse setup works.

I'll keep the board and my website up to date on what I'm doing.

I was thinking aobut doing this for the longest time on my rig. I had the whole thing planbned out, and then said this idea is STUPID!!!! The sidehilling capabilites SUCKS!!!! I decided to go with a conventional SOA up front.

On another note, if you are dead set on doing the 4 link up front, do a tested design. Slap some coils in there for now until you can afford the coil overs. All the work is in the 4 link. I would hate to see all that work go to waste.

Dimitri

Originally posted by Flatty
I was thinking aobut doing this for the longest time on my rig. I had the whole thing planbned out, and then said this idea is STUPID!!!! The sidehilling capabilites SUCKS!!!! I decided to go with a conventional SOA up front.

On another note, if you are dead set on doing the 4 link up front, do a tested design. Slap some coils in there for now until you can afford the coil overs. All the work is in the 4 link. I would hate to see all that work go to waste.

Dimitri

this is true....never thought of it that way. how much would a set of 6" TJ springs run. isnt alot of the cost in new control arms and all that BS?

you can usually pick up a set of coils for under $150

if you are going to go that route you would be much better off in the long run making your own CA's instead of buying any existing ones.

I agree with Dimitri though.....to an extent:D I would love to see that transverse setup in at least one rig eventually!

It would be easy to gain similar flex from a 1/4 elip by just inboarding the spring packs a little bit and that would retain more side hill capabilities than a transverse leaf.

J. J.

I did the 1/4 ellip in the back of my Flat Fender, and got GOBS of flex, and was able to sidehill all day long. The transverse mounted spring will have very minimal abilities to sidehill. I say go with the Coils or a basic SOA up front. You can get the front springs to move like crazy as well.

As for the 1/4 ellip, I put my springs under the frame, and it worked like a charm. The further in the springs are, the more flex you will get, but you wil also lose stability.

Dimitri

Don't know anything about it, but saw the picture thought yall might be interested.

http://www.extreme4wheelin.com/images/poker_01_19_02/p1190736_med.jpg

(sorry, don't know how to post the pic.)

Justin

That pic was posted in the "TOTW: Custom Suspensions" thread....

I think your pumpkin would hit the spring, limiting up travel. I imagine that's why the other designs didn't have the bumpstops.

reviving a really old thread. Are there any more ideas on this? I mean it's be 3 years someone has to have tested this thouroughly by now.

DAMN!!!!! 91 Blaze, you got a lot of free time to search for this? hahahaha As for the traverse spring. There was a guy that built his rig around that in Hollister (he was in TTC a caopuple of years back). I think he ended up swapping it out for a conventional coil setup. If you are going to do this. By all means, have fun, b ut throw a anti-sway bar up there. Make sure it can't move like crazy. You will have to limit the flex, and I still say sidehilling will suck.

Dima

and I still say sidehilling will suck
it might not be too bad with the sway bar to limit it.

put a transverse leaf in both ends of my rig-best thing i ever did.
got rid of the excessive body roll on the corners,still twists the axles 90deg to each other.put some time into the design stage,you can make an impressive setup,and its simple to build and tune.

put a transverse leaf in both ends of my rig-best thing i ever did.
got rid of the excessive body roll on the corners,still twists the axles 90deg to each other.put some time into the design stage,you can make an impressive setup,and its simple to build and tune.


how bout some pics

http://www.trailmonster.com/MonsterRides/DisplayMonsterRide.aspx?ID=60

What are some springs than can be used to a transverse setup without going custom? Every spring I can think of has different eyes on either side of the springs.

As it looks now I am going to be getting some built by alcan, but it would be nice to test it out with junkyard springs before getting a custom set built.

why not just use nitrogen shocks they are way cheaper than coils, you can adjust
ride height by puting more nitrogen in or letting some out, we are using them in a flat fender with 3 link front and rear and it is going to run us about 800 hundred for the four of them.

800 bucks,eh.

the leafs i used were just sitting around....basically free.
that way theres a few bucks left to fill the nitrous tank.

http://www.trailmonster.com/MonsterRides/DisplayMonsterRide.aspx?ID=60


so you have three trannys and two tcases in your ranger???WEIRD
really bad design-and not any trail shots of that thing

There is a major lack of stability in that design.

st ranger: Id really like to hear more about your drive train. I couldn't find a pic that I could see it all in.

so you have three trannys and two tcases in your ranger???WEIRD
really bad design-and not any trail shots of that thing

There is a major lack of stability in that design.



there is no lack of stability-as a matter of fact,that is why i went with the transverse leaf-to gain the stabillity it lacked when it had coil front and conventional leaf rear.
as for the drivetrain being wierd,yes it is.
if you want to see things that are considered normal,you might be on the wrong site.
i dont have too many trail shots of it because i have a really hard time driving and taking pictures of the rig at the same time.my arms just are not long enough to get a good distance shot from the driver's seat.the few i have i've had to steal from sites where others have posted pics.
if you feel you must criticize the design,then at least come up for a ride and a closer look first......there really isnt enough info in those pics for anyone to make an educated design critique....which i'm sure explains your response.

there is no lack of stability-as a matter of fact,that is why i went with the transverse leaf-to gain the stabillity it lacked when it had coil front and conventional leaf rear.
as for the drivetrain being wierd,yes it is.
if you want to see things that are considered normal,you might be on the wrong site.
i dont have too many trail shots of it because i have a really hard time driving and taking pictures of the rig at the same time.my arms just are not long enough to get a good distance shot from the driver's seat.the few i have i've had to steal from sites where others have posted pics.
if you feel you must criticize the design,then at least come up for a ride and a closer look first......there really isnt enough info in those pics for anyone to make an educated design critique....which i'm sure explains your response.

You have a TTB50 front that is welded together to make it a solid axle. :shaking:
You claim three trannys and two tcases which: "the compound low is 3240:1.at idle one revolution of the tire takes 7minutes" Why? :shaking: there is no terrain on this planet for which this is beneficial. Not only that, but the pic shows the output of the tcase behind the rear axle rendering it useless. :shaking:
I see the pic of you driving up trees. Bad move dood.

As far as the transverse leaf spring. It is not even attached to the axle. The housing floats and contacts the leaf spring with those buckets. There is no control in the droop. Completely unpredictable setup. What happens when you side hill??? You have polished one of the nastiest turds to ever show up in this forum. And for the record, this is the jeep forum. You are in the wrong spot.

first of all,about being in the wrong spot...the uestion was about transverse leafs-i have used them to good effect.
if only jeep stuff is allowed here,then why.at the moment are there 5 threads on ford 8.8rear ends,a post 19 pages(19!)long about ford 302's,a thread on chevy 4.3l motors,using toyota difs,and chevy sm465's in the first two pages of threads?a quick check of the other manufacturer oriented forums showed no such cross-brand antics.
as for the spring not being attatched to the diff,tell me what holds the spring to the diff on the front of a cherokee,or tj.
next,that t-case behind the diff-tell me all about why that case is there.you have noticed an output with nothing attached.....so what is it for?a spare?you obviously have all the answers.so tell me.
the ridiculously low gearing is as useless as climbing everest or watching action movies.its there because i can and its entertaining.shuts up those knobs bragging about 300:1 compound lows pretty quick.
the d-50?simple...they are cheap and plentiful,and with the balance of the truck they have little trouble staying together.so what if its not as stylish as a custom d 60 setup,it works.
oh ya,the tree.any tree i drive up is usually cut down and sent south to build your houses out of within a couple of weeks anyway,so why dont you go to your local lumberyard and tell them how you feel about the plight of the forests.

...if only jeep stuff is allowed here...
I welcome any cross brand use of parts, my comment was that you are in the wrong spot, not myself.

as for the spring not being attatched to the diff,tell me what holds the spring to the diff on the front of a cherokee,or tj.
I cannot possibly recommend that anyone run coil springs without them being retained top and bottom. That is my preference and for the same exact reasons as stated against your gadget assembly

next,that t-case behind the diff-tell me all about why that case is there.you have noticed an output with nothing attached.....so what is it for?a spare?you obviously have all the answers.so tell me.
No fawking clue dude, it looks like a gimmick to me.

the ridiculously low gearing is as useless as climbing everest or watching action movies.its there because i can and its entertaining.shuts up those knobs bragging about 300:1 compound lows pretty quick You should be proud of yourself

blah blah blah, I am sick of typing - show me any rig that has proven itself that drives the trails that has transverse leafsprings or 30kahillionto1 gearing and I might think something positive about your contraption. :barf:

that rig is on the trails more then most

Well here is what i noticed about the t-case setup. My buddy did the same thing with his 205's. He has the tranny output (2wd tranny) attaching to a driveshaft, that goes back to a rear mounted t-case, which has a driveshaft going to a center mounted 205. This 2nd 205 has the driveshafts going to the front and rear t-cse. A waste of a lot ofenergy in my opinion, but it does work, and work well. aS for the transverse mounted spring, I still say it CAN NOT be beneficial when it comes to sidehilling. I can't see the lateral forces holding the axle centered. It would have to be linked up, so why not just drop the money on a set of air shocks, or use a 1/4 ellip setup or a coil spring setup. Hey it works, so I guess I am wrong.

Dima

flatty,you have the concept down pat there on the t-case.the truck is mid engine,and the first 205 is used as a budget v-drive.i am only running off the front output on that one,and while a certain amount of energy is used up(in parasitic losses as well as build time)there is plenty of power to overcome that.
back to the subject-springs.
the thing that a lot of people seem to have a problem with when looking at a setup like this is remembering that the spring is being used simply to support the vehicle,not to locate the axle.there are control arms for that.the roll center has been placed at approximately the same hieght as the cg,so roll forces on cornering(and sidehills)are minimal.the spring is solidly mounted to the frame and of a fairly high rate so there is little tendency to roll,and since the spring itself dosent have a lot of travel,there is little tendency to jack the vehicle when on a sidehill.
when a truck is on a sideways angle gravity is no longer pushing down on the springs,transferring the load to locating links.if it is on it's side there is no weight on the springs at all.see how much of a difference there is in the loaded length and the free length of your springs-this is the amount they will jack the truck up as it approaches a rolled condition.this means as the angle of the sidehill increases,so does hieght of your cg,increasing the likelihood of rollover.at this point if the only thing keeping you from going over is the fact that the springs are attatched to the axle-high side at full extension,low side partially compressed,and cg raised well over roll center,i think its too late.
by having a stiff spring with a short range of travel the roll center and cg remain at simillar hieght even when the truck is at extreme side angles.when the truck is twisted up,the axle pushes on one end of the spring-both wheels have weight on them(the spring is pushing on the axle between the wheels so both will get loaded)and with no attatched spring on the low side trying to pull that wheel off the ground the rig is very stable in a crossed up attitude.when the axles are at 90deg to each other,you can push and pull on the thing all you want and it doesnt budge-all four wheels are still loaded,not hanging from springs.

You are not taking in to account the unsprung weight that axles, tires and wheels offer into the equation. In your assembly the body is rolling uncontrolled above the axle assemblies - especially on a side hill. You stated that having the spring attached to the vehicle as well as the axle assembly would pull the tire off the ground. It may do this, but only after the unsprung weight is overcome by the roll center of the vehicle. Without retaining the springs, the body will roll very unpredictably and before a retained spring would do so. There is no force that effectively fights body roll in your setup. The floppy behavior of your setup is great for the ramp - because there are opposing forces against the body roll. (being crossed up)
Sidehill - put both tires on the same side up at an angle and figure out your roll center. Then retain the springs and determine that roll center. Then compare it to a leaf sprung vehicle or other conventional suspension and determine that roll center.

glad you've decided to take a civil attitude on about this.the insults seemed just a little kindergartenish.
your assesment of the crossed up attitude on the ramp is bang on-the twist will effectively cancel out roll from either side.
what you dont have is the two years of using the system that i have.despite your beliefs,it has proven to be anything but "floppy".it was in the past with more cnventional suspension systems and i hated driving the thing.this system has accomplished exactly what i wanted from the truck-a stable platform with minimal body roll on cornering and a confident feel on sidehills(yes,we have some of those in bc)yet still be able to kick ass on the ramp and always keep all 4 wheels on the ground while wheeling.
i you choose to believe that i am lying about this,that is your choice-but if this system didnt work to my satisfaction,it would have ended up in the scrap bin with other setups that didnt produce results.

still lookin for more transverse info

I'm startin to think that if the roll center is below the pivot poin on the frame side hill capabilities will be improved over conventional coils and air shocks.