I have been doing quite a bit of research on my buggy project, and have decided on triangulated 4 links front and rear and full hydro steering. the only decision I still need to make is how to suspend it. Here are the pros and cons of each that my research has turned up. Comments? opionions? experiences?

Quarter eliptic pros:
cheap
lower C/G in both the spring and supporting structure
more controled droop, better manages unsprung weight
Cons:
bulky
may comprimise link positioning
slightly heavier

Coilover Pros:
Way cool looking
compact
lots of adjustability
easy to mount
Cons
Spendy (do I need all this high speed race tech?)
higher C/G
uncontrolled droop( although I think this could be
controlled somewhat with shock valving)

all I can tell you is that when it comes time to make my buggy, I will be going with 1/4s front and rear because they are WAY cheaper. Just wouldn't be able to justify the price of coilovers. Also I don't think I have ever seen a buggy with 1/4s front and rear, i think it would look way pimp.

Originally posted by 44Runner
all I can tell you is that when it comes time to make my buggy, I will be going with 1/4s front and rear because they are WAY cheaper. Just wouldn't be able to justify the price of coilovers. Also I don't think I have ever seen a buggy with 1/4s front and rear, i think it would look way pimp.

you mean besides sniper's numbers 2-3-4, and 5?

it can work pretty damn good...just get the links right!

all I can tell you is that when it comes time to make my buggy, I will be going with coil-overs front and rear because they are WAY cooler. Just wouldn't be able to justify my freinds having cooler stuff that works better, unless it's a ramp contest . Also I don't think I have ever seen a buggy that didn't have coilovers front and rear, i think it would look way pimp.

Everyone can't be wrong.

Just kidding.

3 link-4 link, coilover-1/4 elleptictical, to be or not to be.....Just build it, use good basic rules rvryone talks about on this page everyday, and drive the sh!t out of it. It all works.

see ya,

tony k

for me 1/2 eliptical up front and coilover in the rear is the ticket.

have you read the body roll topic?

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59321

Dont forget regular coil Springs, IMHO best of both worlds in the rear.
http://www.alaskaoffroad.com/images/Tech/Rear_Suspension/4link_rear.JPG

with 1/4 elip you can add leaves to really control body roll/exessive droop.
dontthink it can be done with coils

Good point, but you can use stiffer springs and/or swaybars. I havent ran my coil rear yet, but if I dont like the body roll ect, I will experiment with sway bars.

After having driven on my coilovers this last weekend, I'll NEVER use anything else. Super smooth ride, they work nice. Plus, you can tune in the front and rear much easier with different spring rates. You can get the price down if you look around.

how much $$$ do coil overs range from?:confused:

Originally posted by peeJ
how much $$$ do coil overs range from?:confused:

$350 -1000 just depends on how cool you neeed to be :D

i'd go with regular Ford Aerostar Rear coils. They look bitch'n and they flex like crazy (if built right), it would be cheaper that coil over, how "cool" would it look with one tire 2 feet off the ground with coil overs, and how "cool" would it look with one tire 6 feet of the ground with 1/4 eliptic:rolleyes:

yeah your right 1/4elip cant travel like a coil :flipoff2:
you cant just add or remove leaves to tailor your spring rate
you cant buy $uper adjustable shocks unless they have coil spring mounts :rolleyes:

I agree with camo. I'm running coilovers in front and leafs in back with a little modified flex and it is stable as anything I've been in.

Originally posted by peeJ
i'd go with regular Ford Aerostar Rear coils. They look bitch'n and they flex like crazy (if built right), it would be cheaper that coil over, how "cool" would it look with one tire 2 feet off the ground with coil overs, and how "cool" would it look with one tire 6 feet of the ground with 1/4 eliptic:rolleyes:

how COOL is it to spit out the coils...........


not very

Blind leading the Blind



If I had to make an educated choice I would pick coil-oversF/R.

Although, I have built vehicles useing 1/4 F/R that worked great.

Things I have not seen work:
1/4 rear with anything else up front.
coil-over front with anything else in rear
coil-over rear with anythin else up front ect.

just givin it to you streight.
just my opinion, but what do I know?
ericfilar@fatcity

What about Steve Watson's ORD Blazer? He has coilovers on the front ans 63" leaves in the back.

Originally posted by camo
for me 1/2 eliptical

:confused: did you mean 1/4 eliptical, or is 1/2 something else?

1/2 eliptical is just a normal leaf spring:rolleyes:

also called semi-eliptical, right?

For my own truck, I really like the way it handled with about a 65/35 split on the flex available - with 65% of the flex being up front. I liked the predictability of knowing that the vehicle stayed with the rear axle under most circumstances on the trail.

Now, based on what I have seen, for my own preferences a standard leaf spring rear mixed with coils, coilovers, or 1/4 eliptical front springs for LOTS of flex in the front end would be what *I* would prefer.

David I don't agree with that. Not that I'm any expert. Lots of flex at one end and little(relatively) at the other end makes for a bad combo. When one end is really stiff then the body and frame stay more relative to that axles position.
So say you are coming over a ledge off camber. You have to come down one back tire at a time. Since your back isn't as flexy, when the first back tire comes over the ledge the ass end of your truck is gonna pitch. If both ends are flexy then that first back wheel will droop down and your body will stay more parallell to the ground. Not sure if that's hard to visualize or not.
I had the exact same setup you are talking about. Coilover front and leaf rear. The ass end would dictate where my body went.
Of course if we could all make trucks like Eric then he would be out of a job :D

You can disagree if you like, but I drove my truck set up like that for 3 years, on plenty of trails - and the fact is I *do* like it that way. ;) :p


I see far too many trucks on the trail with 50/50 flex and they flat out SUCK. You never know where it will lean going over a ledge...

what about airbag suspension? *seems* like the best of all worlds. individually adjustable capability, "pro-active" vs "passive" when traversing a side slope or need to raise or lower a corner of the rig to compensate for the other one? this seems under utilized to me. any real reasons?

I'm no expert but having ran aerostar coils I would say forget it unless you have a 2000 pound vehicle or less and you are running them in the rear only. Having said that I think it is key to have a "balanced" suspension set up with perhaps the rear flexing a bit more than the front. I run 1/4 elliptic set up in the rear using F350 leaves including the main overload leaf. I have also limited down travel alot so you don't have a tire hanging so far under your vehicle that it is starting to crawl toward the front of the vehicle and causing you to roll. I run E.B. James Duff coils in the front and they actually flex with the rear unlike most of the people I see who run the 1/4 elliptic in the back and 1/2 elliptic in the front. On those vehicles the spring rates have to be wrong cause you see the rear flexing all over hell and the front end is doing close to nothing. I run rockwells so they are pretty damn heavy too. Just get your spring rates close and I think you'll be happy. I personally like a soft suspension. I run wide and heavy so my c of g is low and is near impossible to roll. Just my .02

Originally posted by FatCity
Blind leading the Blind

Things I have not seen work:
1/4 rear with anything else up front.
coil-over front with anything else in rear
coil-over rear with anythin else up front ect.

just givin it to you streight.


Well that settles it, everybody running these set-ups better re-design because your doesn't work. At least he gave it to us streight (but I think he meant straight :rolleyes: )

Be a little more open minded, geesh;)

I think that it has nothing to do with what style it is (1/4 rear/coilover front; leaf front/coilover rear; yada yada) They should be balanced in my eyes. Having most of the flex on one end to me is not as good as being as close to 50/50 as possible. I think this is far more important on a competition rig than it is on your trail rig.

Originally posted by The Rockslut
I think that it has nothing to do with what style it is (1/4 rear/coilover front; leaf front/coilover rear; yada yada) They should be balanced in my eyes. Having most of the flex on one end to me is not as good as being as close to 50/50 as possible. I think this is far more important on a competition rig than it is on your trail rig.

I agree, I am building my rig primarily for competition. My front and rear suspensions will be virtually identical. My plan also includes a 50/50 weight bias. Great discussion though. If anyone cares, I am leaning toward coilovers all around.

If you're gunna build it for comp. then since you will be crawling up super steep stuff why would you want coilovers? Seriously I think the preload on those things is the only real crappy thing about them. Fine when you're buzzing across relatively flat ground but then go to climb up stuff and the front end goes skyward due to preload. I see some people hooking up their winch to the front axle, but why not go with something with far less preload, if you're main thing is to rock crawl.

I'm sorry, you lost me there. I would think that would have more to do with supension geometry than what kind of spring you use.
spring rate and peload are all easily adjustable on a coilover.

Originally posted by The Rockslut
Having most of the flex on one end to me is not as good as being as close to 50/50 as possible.

As I said - a suspension set up with a 50/50 balance means that you lose predictability. Dropping off a ledge - the vehicle may lean with the front axle one time, or the rear axle another time - you never know.

Instead, having one end stiffer than the other (which end is purely preference IMHO) allows a measure of predictability in the function of the suspension - a predictability that the driver than know and account for repeatedly.

Originally posted by bigdude


Well that settles it, everybody running these set-ups better re-design because your doesn't work. At least he gave it to us streight (but I think he meant straight :rolleyes: )

Be a little more open minded, geesh;)


YEAH what would he know........... did you here how HORRIBLE the rig he built did in ttc? :rolleyes: have you seen his websight? what would ever give him the idea that he would even remotely know what he is talking about....... I really don't think he needs to be open minded about this. I think you need to be a little more open minded in listening to people that know what the FAWK they are talking about.

well i do accept the fat city observation as flat out wrong, according to him, tracy jordans and don robins and shannon campbells rigs dont work.....explain that one to me.....both tracy and don run coilover in back spring under in front and shannon ran leafs up front with 1/4 eleptic in back...not bustn ur balls just telln it like it is:p

Originally posted by SNORTclown



YEAH what would he know........... did you here how HORRIBLE the rig he built did in ttc? :rolleyes: have you seen his websight? what would ever give him the idea that he would even remotely know what he is talking about....... I really don't think he needs to be open minded about this. I think you need to be a little more open minded in listening to people that know what the FAWK they are talking about.

Bawahahahahaha:eek: :eek:

Way to get your panties in a wad:rolleyes:. FatCity and I have had our little arguements on here before and I was just giving him some shit. Thus the ;). I know who he is and that he knows his stuff. Thanks for the laugh, I hope you enjoyed getting all worked up :D

Originally posted by FatCity
Blind leading the Blind



If I had to make an educated choice I would pick coil-oversF/R.

Although, I have built vehicles useing 1/4 F/R that worked great.

Things I have not seen work:
1/4 rear with anything else up front.
coil-over front with anything else in rear
coil-over rear with anythin else up front ect.

just givin it to you streight.
just my opinion, but what do I know?
ericfilar@fatcity

Lets say you are a poor bastard, and can't afford coil-overs.
What then? I am assuming that you are saying the combinations don't work because it is tough to balance the flex with different spring combos front/rear.

TIA

Coil-Overs are sweet because they are easy to adjust, and they travel more fluidly than a 1/4 elliptic spring. A 1/4 elliptic spring can be single-rate, or progrssive depending on how you build it, but if you just cut some F-350 leaves in half, i think it would be very hard to balance them with the front end. My opinion is that 50/50 flex is key for all situations, and coil-overs make it easier to attain that AFTER you have them in place. Who wants to keep removing 1/4 spring packs, and changing leaves? not me.

DRM - it's called weight transfer. If you are 50/50 balanced, your rig will follow the weight. This will be different in every situation, but it is far from unpredictable. You don't have to make the rear a brick just so you know how your rig will act.

ECF - what do you mean "preload". It seems to me that all suspension methods will have preload that is equal to the weight placed on the spring. it shouldn't matter what kind of spring it is. Maybe you have just seen some very low-rate coil-overs, and you are going off of what you have seen. A soft spring would have more "preload" travel than a stiff one under the same weight, right?

Originally posted by elf_cruiser
DRM - it's called weight transfer. If you are 50/50 balanced, your rig will follow the weight. This will be different in every situation, but it is far from unpredictable. You don't have to make the rear a brick just so you know how your rig will act.

Who said I should make the rear a brick?

No, I ran SUPER soft and flexible leaf springs up front, with relatively stiff (comparatively) in the rear. The setup gave me a 65/35 or maybe a 60/40 split on the flex and I flat out loved it. Like I said - it was perfectly predictable in ALL situations of how the truck would act, and I was able to take that predictability and work with it quite well.

to the airbag guy.
they have the same problem as 'un-captured' coil overs/coils/goofy links/hinged 1/4 elip
they allow the suspension to fall away controlled only by the shock.
I am going to run them on my truck, but the application is different then these rock buggy guys.

Air in drivers side

air out drivers side. Air bag over quarter

flex 35% front 65% rear
weight 60% front 40% rear

its what works look at all the successful comp rigs. Weight and flex bias that is.

Originally posted by Darth Vader


:confused: did you mean 1/4 eliptical, or is 1/2 something else?

no i mean 1/2. like a stock leaf spring.

Originally posted by mj
to the airbag guy.
they have the same problem as 'un-captured' coil overs/coils/goofy links/hinged 1/4 elip
they allow the suspension to fall away controlled only by the shock.
I am going to run them on my truck, but the application is different then these rock buggy guys.


i have never dealt with airbag stuff before......
i thought Airzuki's rig did pretty well in the rock crawling stuff?


my thought was only regarding substituting an air bag in place of coil/leaf/whatever allowing user adjustable spring rates and ride height etc. i'm afraid the rest is over my head as far as the black art of suspension trickery:D :beer:

Zags,

Did you watch my Sami work when I was up there this year. I'm running spring under front, and coils (captured) rear. I have better flex in the rear than the front. This works very well here in OK where we do a LOT more vertical. On vertical, with leafs on the rear the weight transfer pushes the springs into a higher weight compression (the progressive nature of leafs springs). This makes the rear stiff and over powers the front. The result is the front does not track the terrain well, and you have a tire in the air A LOT! If the front is in the air, it's not pulling and has difficulty climbing over even small ledges with the one loaded tire.

With coils on the rear, the springs stay linear under load and they don't over power the fronts, allowing the front to better track the ground. The rear then flexes and follows the front.

This also works well on ledges, where it's easy to push the front up the ledge, but tends to be hard to pull the rear up it. With the flexy coils, I hit it at an angle, then allow the rear to climb one tire at a time using flex and the stability of the leafs up front.

Now, on the terrain I saw there in AZ my setup was not as well suited. With your stuff, you do a lot of maneuvering boulders on relatively flat ground. You climb over with the front tire, set it back down, then over with the rear. This favors a balanced suspension to keep the vehicle stable.

My personal opinion is I don't like uncaptured coil springs (or drop arms on leafs or drop away 1/4 elips). After reading some of the previous discussion on the higher roll center effects, I can see some real benefits to the coilovers. I would love to see someone modify the coilover to capture the spring ends and see what happens. That could be the best of both worlds….

Just to make life a little more complicated. How about building a long travel coilover eliminator. Design for captured springs, then run a set of 9000's for shocks. It would still have the 'cool factor' of the coilover (because very few could tell the diff ;) ), cost a lot less and still have the higher mounting point for the elevated roll center. With the somewhat adjustable dampening of the 9000's… Just a thought :)…

Preload, so when your vehicle is sitting on flat ground the coil over is compressed considerable, more so with soft coils than with stiff ones, for obvious reasons. This preload isn't a problem when you have the full weight of the vehicle on them, so they are quite successful in baja and such events because while you are bouncing along in rough terrain you are still essentially on flat ground. However when you are climbing stuff the weight then begins to shift rearward so that there is no longer the full weight of the vehicle (i.e. motor, trans., and what not) on the front coilovers. Thus the coil over begins to lengthen and in turn shoves the front of vehicle higher in the air or backwards on really steep stuff. Yes every suspension system does this but coilovers from what I have witnessed do it a lot more. Take my coils for instance, with the full weight of the vehicle on them they compress only 3 inches. If you have a set of flat springs up front like many people do, I would imagine they might bow again with the weight off them but only a few inches or so. Coil overs seem to compress a lot under the vehicles weight, at least with some of the setups that I have seen this is in part why they function so well on the bumps and stuff. That is why you see guys hooking their winch up to the front axle and they will suck the front end down when crawling up steep stuff to keep the preload from unloading when the weight transfers rearward. Just from what I've seen. If you builders out there have managed to do it different, say so, cause I'd love to run them, but haven't seen anyone cure the problem fully yet.

ECF, you are exaclty right, but my argument is that the actual suspension device is not important. I think the reason you see this alot with coil-overs is because most people run extremely soft springs to get more travel. With dual and triple-rate setups, the overall rates are usually between 150-200 lbs/inch. that is far below your average set of leaves or stand-alone coils. Try taking a 4" lift Rancho spring pack, and removing all but the main leaf, then slap that under your rig, and it will do the same thing that you are talking about.

The main advantage I see to a coilover is the adjustability it affords. It is the main reason I have decided to go with them. I dont see any of the concerns above that can't be adressed by adjusting spring preload,rate or shock valving. If a coilover spring is ever fully unloaded (hanging loose) it is the wrong spring for the aplication. I agree that if an axle is "hanging" by a captued spring, it is adding the unsprung weight to the equation to reduce the tendancy to roll, but is a much less significant factor in a properly designed link system.
Weight transfer is a misnomer for load transfer. The weight of the vehicle does not move per se. the load applied to each suspension point does however. How, and at what rate this load is applied is again a factor of proper suspension geometry and shock valving. I am not saying anyone is wrong. Alot of very valid points have been brought up, and in my eyes anyway, the adjustability of a coilover will be the best way to adress most of them. :)

good call, zags

Originally posted by okcrawler
How about building a long travel coilover eliminator. Design for captured springs, then run a set of 9000's for shocks. It would still have the 'cool factor' of the coilover (because very few could tell the diff ;) ), cost a lot less and still have the higher mounting point for the elevated roll center. With the somewhat adjustable dampening of the 9000's… Just a thought :)…
So... you basically just want someone to make a "guide rod" (dead coilover) for the coilover springs, and then use a 14" travel RS-9000 for the shock? Hmmm...

I think the shock valving is an important issue to consider, as well. Several people who utilize coilovers that I've seen tended to just get the "right" setting for the weight it will be seeing when the order them, and leave them be,... and the shocks are another crucial factor in how a rig climbs.

Originally posted by rockracer
well i do accept the fat city observation as flat out wrong, according to him, tracy jordans and don robins and shannon campbells rigs dont work.....explain that one to me.....both tracy and don run coilover in back spring under in front and shannon ran leafs up front with 1/4 eleptic in back...not bustn ur balls just telln it like it is:p


Those three do work well, I'll give that to ya, but they don't work the way I like things to work. It's just my oppinion, Shannon likes all of his travel in the rear,and if anything I'm oppisite of that.
Again just my oppinon...


ericfilar@fatcity


bigdude,
Tanks fur kurectin mi spelin;)

coil spring slider (http://www.speedwaymotors.com/eCCStoreFront/smi/product_images/medium/91045555.jpg)

:D

Originally posted by bigdude


Bawahahahahaha:eek: :eek:

Way to get your panties in a wad:rolleyes:. FatCity and I have had our little arguements on here before and I was just giving him some shit. Thus the ;). I know who he is and that he knows his stuff. Thanks for the laugh, I hope you enjoyed getting all worked up :D


Yeah..... I was all worked up. thanks for clearing that up. hopefully tomarrow I'll be able to function. :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Dr. Evil
I think the shock valving is an important issue to consider, as well. Several people who utilize coilovers that I've seen tended to just get the "right" setting for the weight it will be seeing when the order them, and leave them be,... and the shocks are another crucial factor in how a rig climbs.

Very good point, the 9000 is far from optimum valving for us. They tend to have a higher rebound then compression dampening. I've seen trucks working a tough spot and begin to wheel hop, the back end will actually sink from the overdampted rebound.

I researched the coil overs at one point, and I asked a rep from sway-away about their valving. The response from them was something like 'our standard valving should work for you'. I don't think the guy really had a clue what we did, or what kind of valving we need. He never even asked me the weight of my vehicle. I really doubt that the valving for a 4000lb baja racer is going to be well suited for rock crawling. That was about a year ago, so hopefully things have progressed since then.

I'm sure if Zags puts his mind to it he can come up with something cool that works great. Maybe he'll have it going in time for a winter visit to AZ by us Okies. :)

We just finished up a rig that had 1/4 elliptic rear with standard leafs up front. We had Charles@Alcan build our 1/4 packs with the right amount of spring rate so the fronts and rears match in flex (aka, this job doesn't flex it all in the back with next to nothing up front).
http://www.dandcextreme.com/1.jpg
http://www.dandcextreme.com/2.jpg
http://www.dandcextreme.com/5.jpg

I'm now re-building Snoopy to match the same rear, but with 5.5" EB coils up front (no, I won't be using the :rainbow: 2-link system). I'll use our 3-link system up front to provide more movement.
http://www.dandcextreme.com/snoop1.jpg


But honestly, you can get quarter elliptic packs for pretty cheap ~ pre-built lift coils are cheap as well. Just depends on what vehicle you want to use them from. Just confirm the coil-rates before you buy.

Sure coil-over-shocks are sweet ~ but most guys don't have the $$ to buy them, and axles, and tires...

O.K., anyone have an opinion on which coilover to buy? I am looking at buying the Bilstien 9100 rockcrawler from AZ Raceshock or the Sway Aways from Avalanche

I've heard that there is a long wait on Sway-Away's, and Avalanche is upposed to be switching to King because of shipping delays, etc. A buddy of mine just ordered King's, and they sound like they will be pretty sweet. They are like Jack-In-The-Box, they don't make it til you order it!

I have seen coil-overs listed in Stock Car racing catalogs, but the ones they list are all 23 inch over all enght and 9 inchs of travel. what size length coil over are most of you running ?

Check out FOX coil-overs

Originally posted by Rockrat
Check out FOX coil-overs


yeap, im definately giving them some thought...........

I thought the FOX were pretty high $$$$ for what you get.
Maybe I needed to shop around more.