I am in the process of starting my rear suspension. When I do, I will have to fab up a Anti-wrap bar so I don't destroy u-joints/yokes on a daily Basis. I came up with a little bit of a different design from the Norm. Here is a rough picture schematic of what I came up with. What is different is How it will connect to the crossmember at the frame. My main concern is, if 3/4 Heims at the cross member will handle the shearing/bending forces. Mostly all Heims are built in a compression/tension type load bearing systems(link suspensions, steering, panhards). I want to go Heims for the added ability of flex and movement under wheeling conditions.

Also, the load transfer at the cross member will place a rotational force on the main frame rails, transfering to the front suspension, causing the front to plant under load. This is all in theory of course. What you all think:
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i183/jpfrk/DSC01414.jpg

Of course there will be triangulated braces between the upper and lower bars. Has anyone ever done this type of attachment on the frame end. I will add gussets to fight the rotational forces on the 1/4 wall 2" square tubing. Or should I go 2" 1/4 wall DOM on the cross member?

I have not bought any Material as of yet, so speak up and give input. Other detailed pics are welcomed!

I used all heims on mine. Been running it about a year including a week in Moab.
No problem with the Heims.
I used 1" DOM and taped the ends. I put a web between the bars to stiffen them.
Beefed up the stock belly pan on a YJ and attached it there.
Running 37's with 488's.

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z41/bigtyrs/DSC01919.jpg

http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z41/bigtyrs/DSC01920.jpg

Question.

Is the top bar on the anti-wrap bar supposed to be parallel with the frame/ground like a 4-linked setup?

I really need to consider doing one too.

Question.

Is the top bar on the anti-wrap bar supposed to be parallel with the frame/ground like a 4-linked setup?

I really need to consider doing one too.

I don't know?:confused: Another great question added to the thread. And I would say AkaBud answered the question about a Heim that will withstand the bending/sheer load that it sees.

Now in Akabud's setup, yours is pulling straight up on the chassis under load. My designe will put a rotational force on the cross member, therefore in theory, cause the front end to sguat under load. Just a theory:confused:

As for keeping the upper bar parallel to the rig, Im willing to give it a try and see what happens:goofball::jester:

looks good , here's mine:

[QUOTE=The Black Sheep;8724773]Question.

Is the top bar on the anti-wrap bar supposed to be parallel with the frame/ground like a 4-linked setup?

QUOTE]

no, not EVEN possible on my junk anyways. mine works great, no wheel hop/axle wrap at all.

looks good, but Id suggest if youre going to go to all the work involved that you NOT attach to the belly pan even if you beef up the pan. I did that and it eventually tore/ripped the belly pan. the better way to connect it is to weld in a cross member between the main frame rails ~ its not all that much more work than beefing the belly pan. since gettin grid of the belly pan mount I four-linked my 93 YJ so no need for the antiwrap bar any more...

looks good, but Id suggest if youre going to go to all the work involved that you NOT attach to the belly pan even if you beef up the pan. I did that and it eventually tore/ripped the belly pan. the better way to connect it is to weld in a cross member between the main frame rails ~ its not all that much more work than beefing the belly pan. since gettin grid of the belly pan mount I four-linked my 93 YJ so no need for the antiwrap bar any more...

Thats why I have a separate crossmember in the works for my application. Good advice for others reading. :beer: Keep it coming.

thanks ! and good luck with it. post pics when youre finished and from when youre fabing it up.....

thanks ! and good luck with it. post pics when youre finished and from when youre fabing it up.....

I have a build thread here in non-hardcore documenting my axle/suspension work on my junk. I will just revive it with detailed pics. I just picked up some material today. Not near all of it. Just starting to collect material to get this in the motion

here is pics of my setup, was done by local shop in Maple Ridge, BC - Jeep Thrills Customs. super beefy setup and works like hot dam!

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/5043/jeep004sk4.jpg

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8087/jeep006sv7.jpg

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/7177/jeeppic3je6.jpg

I've seen some setups on some yota trucks (not that it really matters-just haven't seen it on Jeeps) that uses a similar triangular arm. The difference is it does not use the shackle type setup on the crossmember. Instead the top tube of the arm is two pieces. The tube on the crossmember side is a slip fit into the other side of the arm. It just uses a bushing type mount on the crossmemeber. This application allows the arm to rotate with the axle and slip/extend with flex, but still does not allow wrap. Seems simple, cheap, and effective to me. Just my thoughts. I can't seem to find the pics though.

Similar to below, the upper part is two piece where one slides into the other. You would want the upper bar to be a little larger diameter for strength...Maybe 1.75 or 2". That way the smaller slip tube is still 1.5" or larger. I braced my theoretical traction bar very well, just in case anyone thought it was an issue :flipoff2:

I have a set up simillar to what most the others and you have drawn. The way you have the hiem mounted to the crossmember in your drawing isn't the strongest way to mount it. it puts stress in the shank in a sideways manner if you can keep the stress in line with the shank then it will be the strongest.
3/4" cheapo heims is what I used one with a male thread and one with female threads screwed together. this is my shackle. instead of mounting the heims to the cross member. It has worked well for me for the last couple years.
I'm thinking that the spread at the bushings is 8", the more height you can get on the top bushing the more torque you will transfer to the cross member
which will plant the rearend harder to the ground.
Now if you think about the forces applied to the torque bar under power the arm is rotating up since the differential is trying to rotate up. This will do the opposite of planting the front axle. it will try to lift the front of the frame.
Also try to keep the top bar as level to the ground as you can, make the bar as long as posable. I'm thinking 32" is the lenght of my bar if memory serves me right, That's all the lenght I could fit in my CJ7.
I had the bar mounted to my skid plate but I finally had to get rid of the skid plate, it hung too far down, I just used some tubular cross members I made and one is just for the torquearm.
I tried to find a picture or 2 but can't seem to find where I put them on this computer!:shaking:

vebuholzer ~ dude, that anti wrap set on your 91 is one shweet looking piece of fabbing work ! what leaf springs are showing in the pic, they look beefy enuf to hold up a watertanker ....

I'm drooling about that turbo.. I hear what youre saying. when I pulled my worn out stock 4.0 everybody was installing small block chevs or bigger and said thats the way to go. But i had my eye on the HESCO 4.7 stroker and when they offered an aluminum head I knew I had to have it. I had to wait 8 months to get that motor and with the high compression have to blend in some race fuel but its ONE OF A KIND... guys hear it start up or run and wonder what the hell is under the hood. Small flow thru muffler, no cat, best I can describe it is it sounds like a super charged farm tractor ... 75-80% of HP and torgue all happen at about 2200 rpm accroding to the dyno data sheet that came with the motor. Now, if only I could install that turbo you have.... yeehaw :smokin: HESCO offers a dual t-body intake manifold, which I'm thinking seriously about....

I have a build thread here in non-hardcore documenting my axle/suspension work on my junk. I will just revive it with detailed pics. I just picked up some material today. Not near all of it. Just starting to collect material to get this in the motion

The turbo is awsome. There is Corey that has a turbo on a 4.7 stroker. I couldn't imagine what that feels like!!

If you do a stroker, make sure you take down the compression to at least 8.5:1 MAX! turn boost up to 8 psi. If you have forged pistons, you can turn boost up to 12 max.

Thanks for the comment on the turbo system. I will update the other thread on the continuation of the suspension system. waiting on more material to come in.

Azhayseed: Are you talking about the attatchment style I want to do? In my drawing I would think that the torque transfer would place a rotational force on the chassis, therefore causing the front end to "Plant" under load?

I've seen some setups on some yota trucks (not that it really matters-just haven't seen it on Jeeps) that uses a similar triangular arm. The difference is it does not use the shackle type setup on the crossmember. Instead the top tube of the arm is two pieces. The tube on the crossmember side is a slip fit into the other side of the arm. It just uses a bushing type mount on the crossmemeber. This application allows the arm to rotate with the axle and slip/extend with flex, but still does not allow wrap. Seems simple, cheap, and effective to me. Just my thoughts. I can't seem to find the pics though.

Similar to below, the upper part is two piece where one slides into the other. You would want the upper bar to be a little larger diameter for strength...Maybe 1.75 or 2". That way the smaller slip tube is still 1.5" or larger. I braced my theoretical traction bar very well, just in case anyone thought it was an issue :flipoff2:

This is the exact same setup I run and I beat on it pretty hard and haven't had any problems thus far. I used 1.75 for the main structure of it and whatever diameter it is that goes inside it. Both .120 wall. I just greased the part that slides in the 1.75 and havent had any noises or binding.

does it matter which side you put the anti-wrap bar on? (passenger side or drivers side)

I'm having issues with axle wrap in my YJ. I'm running a 4.6 stroker inline 6, with AX-15, 231, 4.88's in a Ford 8.8. But just this year I have broke a set of leafs due to axles wrap and yesterday I broke the U-bolt straps on my yoke.

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/323/dsc6829jl2.jpg
By jonsjeep (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/jonsjeep), shot with NIKON D70 (http://profile.imageshack.us/camerabuy.php?model=NIKON+D70&make=NIKON+CORPORATION) at 2008-09-28

So... anti-wrap is my only cheap fix other than linking the rear. I just linked the front, so I'm halfway there but I dont feel like having down time.

Yes. Put it on the passenger side. It seems that you get a little torque steer when accelerating when it is on the driver side.

I don't think I can put mine on the passenger side because Im planning for a 3" exhaust:(

i dont know what axle your going to use in the rear but weld your tubes to the housing. i didn't and paid the price on my 14 bolt, twisted the tube, maybe you all ready did.

buy the way for peaple that say pipe is junk my antiwarp bar was made from SCH80 1.25 black iron pipe. the bar lived the 14 bolt didn't, jason.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=578424&highlight=420willys

X2 on the crapper pipe

do people use anti wrap bars up front? after that spring swap during hard acceleration my junk wants to lift up in the front and the tires kinda float a bit like they feel liek they unload an kinda wobble in the front

I don't think I can put mine on the passenger side because Im planning for a 3" exhaust

my anti wrap is on the drivers side, barely. my rear axle is offset to the passenger side so the bar is mounted maybe 3" to the drivers side of center. didnt notice any torque steer to speek of.

maybe mine isnt far enough to the drivers side to be a problem?

I don't think I can put mine on the passenger side because Im planning for a 3" exhaust:(

Is that going to leave you with sufficient back pressure? I've never been in a turbo 4.0, but it would seem that and exhaust that large would all but kill your bottom end. Might make the top side of things interesting though :flipoff2:

I don't think I can put mine on the passenger side because Im planning for a 3" exhaust:(

I have 2.5" and mine baaaarrely squeezes by.

Stupid turbos needing that fat exhaust tube.:flipoff2:

my anti wrap is on the drivers side, barely. my rear axle is offset to the passenger side so the bar is mounted maybe 3" to the drivers side of center. didnt notice any torque steer to speek of.

maybe mine isnt far enough to the drivers side to be a problem?

Wait. It's more like it causes one side to squat and one side to jack up. Which in turn causes a little torque steer. It does it really bad on my friends jeep. Maybe someone can explain this phenomenon better.

Is that going to leave you with sufficient back pressure? I've never been in a turbo 4.0, but it would seem that and exhaust that large would all but kill your bottom end. Might make the top side of things interesting though :flipoff2:

Nah. Turbo guys need less backpressure to help spool the turbo up faster or something like that?

Is that going to leave you with sufficient back pressure? I've never been in a turbo 4.0, but it would seem that and exhaust that large would all but kill your bottom end. Might make the top side of things interesting though :flipoff2:

The actuall Turbine itself provides all the backpressure under idling/rock crawling speeds. In some states, the turbine counts as a muffler.

My thought's on the torque bar being on the driver's side are:
the engine torque tends to lift the drivers side of the vehicle and the torque bar will also push up on the drivers side of the vehicle, when it pushes up on the passengers side it tends to counter act the torque of the engine.
I may be totally off base but that's what I've been thinking.

I have tomorrow off and I will have to take a peak and see how much room I have on the passengerside. My exhaust might be in the way. :(

My thought's on the torque bar being on the driver's side are:
the engine torque tends to lift the drivers side of the vehicle and the torque bar will also push up(ACTUALLY PULLS UP) on the drivers side of the vehicle, when it pushes up(ACTUALLY PULLS UP) on the passengers side it tends to counter act the torque of the engine.
I may be totally off base but that's what I've been thinking.


Your thinking along the same lines as I am. But the way I see it, the bar actually pulls up at the frame end. Not pulls. Think how the rotational force off the axle, transmitted to the torgue bar, dependant on HOW the torque bar is attacthed to the forward crossmember. But you can also have a push up force on the frame if the shackle is mounted from the torque bar and attacted above the bar to the frame. More commen is the the shackle is mounted down below the bar to a crossmember. It just depends on how each individual designs their system.

Well went ahead and built a anti wrap bar. I thought it would cure a few issues butit did not ? The pinion don't move but the hole Jeep does ?!? When i put it from reverse to drive the hood raises up about 3" ? I hate it when i'm climbing a hill and it looks like i'm going to flip back ...... What else could it be ?

Jeep is a 97 tj with 1.5" SOA rear and 14" coil overs in front ?

Well went ahead and built a anti wrap bar. I thought it would cure a few issues butit did not ? The pinion don't move but the hole Jeep does ?!? When i put it from reverse to drive the hood raises up about 3" ? I hate it when i'm climbing a hill and it looks like i'm going to flip back ...... What else could it be ?

Jeep is a 97 tj with 1.5" SOA rear and 14" coil overs in front ?

Pics? post pics of your system please.