Hi, is there a way to improve the front end articulation with out adding a three link system. I have OME 764 with ranch 9207 and stock radius arms. I'm going with Rock ware front shock mount and ranch 9014, but I was told there would not be any difference unless I go with three link... Any input is appreciated:)

Welcome Newbie :flipoff2:

Did you search? I think not because you would of found THIS (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61187&highlight=bushings) and many many more!:rolleyes:

OS,

Your getting mellow these days huh?

:flipoff2:


Since when do you need a special mount to do 9014?

j

Thanks OS:flipoff2:

No I did not search, but will do next time...

I allready did that, but did not increase any thing, it only made the front end articulate with less force on it. Maybe need to make the hols bigger:D and run a longer shocks.

Redrangie, I meant 9012.. with eyeled to eyeled.

Why not scrap the radius arm design and throw in a four link similar to a TJ and believe me you will have as much flex as you can handle. :D

Originally posted by onsafari
Why not scrap the radius arm design and throw in a four link similar to a TJ and believe me you will have as much flex as you can handle. :D

Oh gawd, here we go....

Maybe he should install those ridiculous 90deg, sharp edged, leading edge mounts for those tj links, so he can get hung up on even more stuff.....
:flipoff2:

Seriously though, 764's won't do much to gain articulation, and 9207's are pretty short. However, much longer and you will need to retain your front springs. Are your front bushings single or double sleeve? Poly or rubber? Why do you NEED more than that?

and finaly, your not the doctor are you?

j

Originally posted by redrangie


Oh gawd, here we go....

Maybe he should install those ridiculous 90deg, sharp edged, leading edge mounts for those tj links, so he can get hung up on even more stuff.....
:flipoff2:


j

What the hell are you talking about. I have no problem with getting anything hung up on my axles. Also who said they have to sit below the axle. The lower links can come off the center line of the axle and will sit a hell of alot higher than the current radius arms. Another thought is venture into the Bronco world and visit James Duff and check out what they are doing to create awesome amounts of flex with there radius arms.

On another note, Larry G has about the most amount of front flex I have seen a Rangie get and to be perfectly honest its more than the $G three link but leaves alot of room for improvement.

If you are good at fabrication and have a decent set of tools then it is really not that expensive or difficult to put a three link on your truck. I assume that cost is probably the biggest factor for you for changing your front end. If cost is not an issue and you are not confident in your fabrication skills buy the SG three link and save yourself the trouble. Another option that I haven't seen listed directly is Quinn Duisenberry's (don't know if that's spelled right) hinged radius arm. It's a little cheaper and allows almost as much flex and can be pinned to return it to stock driving feeling. If you want some more info on a do it yourself three link PM me and I can tell you about it. I don't know if you are trying to maintain your street ride or not that is not indicated in your post and the more front end articulation that you get the more unstable that the vehicle becomes on the street. (Yeah I know that's pretty obvious) So remember it's always a trade off.

-ben

Originally posted by onsafari


What the hell are you talking about. I have no problem with getting anything hung up on my axles. Also who said they have to sit below the axle. The lower links can come off the center line of the axle and will sit a hell of alot higher than the current radius arms.

Down boy.... I forgot he is on 35's, you are on even bigger no? Those of us still in the small tire world get hung on every fricking thing. NO offense meant to you....

Cool?

I have over 12 inches travel in the front, and worry about my non-retained (currently) 18.5 inch long springs! I think that is plenty of travel for a non 3 link.

j

Man...This list seems to be going the way of the D90 list....Damn.

--D

Originally posted by RockRover
Man...This list seems to be going the way of the D90 list....Damn.

--D

I apologize dude. I only responed out of boredom. I am waiting to see everyones sic pictures from the rally.

Yousef, PM me if you would like some ideas on how to increase your front articulation without the complexity of the three link modification.

j

OnSafari wrote:

"""On another note, Larry G has about the most amount of front flex I have seen a Rangie get and to be perfectly honest its more than the $G three link but leaves alot of room for improvement."""

I gotta call bullshit on that one man. Show me a pict of a non-3-link, non-hinged radius armed rig (Rangie or other LR using conventional radius arms) with more front flex than this pict (which is 764's retained with 9012's and 3-link). Not to mention all the front flex that Adam Way gets with his 3-link on his Rangie.
:rolleyes:

Billster (feelin kinda frisky after a night on call)

Originally posted by FrankenRover
OnSafari wrote:

gotta call bullshit on that one man. Show me a pict of a non-3-link, non-hinged radius armed rig (Rangie or other LR using conventional radius arms) with more front flex than this pict (which is 764's retained with 9012's and 3-link). Not to mention all the front flex that Adam Way gets with his 3-link on his Rangie.
:rolleyes:

Billster (feelin kinda frisky after a night on call)
Billster,
I'm with you.... kinda... I was out with Way last weekend and got to see that hybrid beast in action. He was DEFINITELY flexy, but I couldn't believe how tippy! I agree after seeing it, that his 3link is quite abit EASIER to flex, with my stock arms flexing, but it takes more to get them to max out. It looked real wicked scary on side hills, does yours get tippy on side hills as well? I know you are both running the same shock.

j

Originally posted by onsafari



On another note, Larry G has about the most amount of front flex I have seen a Rangie get and to be perfectly honest its more than the $G three link but leaves alot of room for improvement.

Uh Oh! Now I'm getting dragged into this. I suspect my frontend setup is very similiar to yours John. I have yet to see yours, but it sounds like we are basically using the same components.

I half-heartily agree with Mark (onsafari). However now your getting pretty custom. I still think it would be a better alternative to the 3-link for on-road and off-road driving.

But then again what the hell do I know!:flipoff2:

Larry, sorry I didn't mean to drap you into this but after seeing the three link on those two Rovers I lead through Metal Masher at the Rally I am not one bit impressed with that set-up. I think yours has better ability to flex, maybe not more (bad choise of words above) but I would rather have your set-up or a four link up front than the $G three link.

Blister you are right, your D90 does have alot of flex up front but do you drive that thing as a daily driver or is it a trailer queen? For the price of the three link I think one could have something built for the same price that would handle alot better on and off road. Also Blister above I said the best amount of flex on a Rangie not a D90 but after re-reading the original post, his ? is for a D90 so that kinda makes my comments null and void :D

Didn't want anyone to take things personally, but I was responding to the specific quote that someone was getting more flex out of a specific setup compared to the SG 3-link (using stock radius arm configuration). I don't believe it, and would love to see some detailed picts to back it up. I still stand by my statement without reservation.

BTW - Nothing was mentioned about on road driveability (fawk that!):flipoff2:

Billster

ps. Way runs a bit more weight than me up high (which may account for his tippiness), mine does not feel tippy at all (in the old D90 config.). We shall see with 5" lift 38" tires and assorted other goodies when I get the 110 on the trail.

As far as daily driving goes, yes the D90 was a daily driver up until disassembly a few months ago. With 764's up front and the 9000's set on about 4 it handles rather nicely thank-you. No sports car manners, but just fine for around town and heading out on the freeway. I have managed several panic stops (damn those 14.5" SSRs can howl when locked up) and panic avoidance maneuvers with this config. and always felt very confident.

Was it a trailer queen going to the events? - damn right it was! I wanted to be able to get home after doing the extreme stuff. If you come wheel with us without a towrig to get home, then don't expect to be back to work on time. :)

Now, will the new truck be the same - no way.

Billster

Originally posted by redrangie

I agree after seeing it, that his 3link is quite abit EASIER to flex, with my stock arms flexing, but it takes more to get them to max out. It looked real wicked scary on side hills, does yours get tippy on side hills as well? I know you are both running the same shock.

j

FWIW, my truck is very stable on side hills. Suspect it's not the shocks as Way and I have the exact same shocks, however the valving is different.

I had my truck to about 40 degrees on Rocker Knocker this last weekend. It was a bit nerve racking, but I didn't tip over!

Originally posted by FrankenRover


ps. Way runs a bit more weight than me up high (which may account for his tippiness), mine does not feel tippy at all (in the old D90 config.). We shall see with 5" lift 38" tires and assorted other goodies when I get the 110 on the trail.

He was empty up top, except for a tire and rack, as was I, which is a rarity for both of us, but yes; much more weight than your 90.


Well, I am going to try and yet another inch of droop in the front before this weekend, and retain my springs. I will try and take a picture of it, but I don't have any way to flex it to it's max at home with the tires on. As it is, I am getting slightly over 19" of spring perch to perch measurement (full droop). How does that compare to other rigs?

Seriously asking...

j

BTW - this is all kinda sounding interesting from a comparision point of view. How about showing up in Cruces in Feb. for the CC and lets see all this "better flex" in action! I know 5 rigs that will already be there:

my 110
Dougy's 108" monster
Rich's ?"
Ben's 90"
KC's mog

Lets get this list going for the CC again!

Here are some picts of last year:
http://www.defender-90.com/chile02.htm

Billster

I get 14" from SP to SP just sitting level in the garage with no flex (with the 764's in front). Haven't put the 5" Rovertym springs on yet. Haven't measured it flexed though.

Billster

Blister,

Don' worry about me taking anything personally I love this kinda shit. I however just think there are better ways of building a suspension for a Rover without giving an arm and leg to Greg. At the Rally I had the operatunity to run different levels of trails with different types of Rovers and don't believe that the three-link is a big advantage after seeing them preform. :)

You know, when I sat and thought about it you guys are right. The 3-link is overpriced and should not be purchased. There are plenty of cheaper alternatives for increasing the flex in the front end of a stiff LR. No one should ever buy it.........ever.






















So, when you wheel with us 3-linkers we can keep on smokin' ya
!!!!:flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2:

Billster

Is anyone going to answer my question about flex measurement, or is this going to continue to be a "my shiat is better than yours"? :flipoff2:

Seriously, I am not looking for competition, I am looking to see if I am wasting my time looking for more droop in the front. So in case you missed it, What's some different peoples perch to perch at full droop? mines 19 & 7/16". That's when both wheels are dropped.

j

Is it really a measurment of "flex" when you just jack up the front end and see how far the axle will drop out? Just dropping the front end out with the axle parallel to the ground is only gonna tell you how worn your radius arm to frame bushings are. And maybe if your shocks are limiting your down travel.

Billster

ps. I will be running a center limiting strap on the front and rear axle to limit down travel of the axle as a whole to about 3-4".

Originally posted by FrankenRover
Is it really a measurment of "flex" when you just jack up the front end and see how far the axle will drop out? Just dropping the front end out with the axle parallel to the ground is only gonna tell you how worn your radius arm to frame bushings are. And maybe if your shocks are limiting your down travel.

Billster

ps. I will be running a center limiting strap on the front and rear axle to limit down travel of the axle as a whole to about 3-4".

Good point Billster. I should have mentioned that with a floor jack on the other side I am getting the same droop. I am loosing springs at full flex on the trail, so I know that my droop is the same, however, it does take full compression on the opposite side to accomplish this. I am just trying to see if someone else has been down this road before with a standard front. I hate going through the pain of "re-inventing the wheel" for no reason.

I don't attend a lot of the events, so I haven't had as much exposure to other peoples tricks. I am not looking to copy ideas either, hence why I was only looking for measurements.

j

Originally posted by RockRover
Man...This list seems to be going the way of the D90 list....Damn.

--D

If only Bonner were here to tell us that his hinged arm is far more flexy and sexy than any other possible or imaginable front end setup.

Johnathan

I was wondering what he was up to these days? Not a peep on any of the lists from him, since he got banned from the POR list.

Billster

ps. Hey Tis, how was the Rally? Break any stuff?

Hmmmmmm. I wasn't gonna' get into this but again...Boredom begat injection...

Anyway, what's so fin' "pricey" about a 3-link? You get a tie-rod protector...A tera' chromo 3rd link...Two radius arms (and if you wish a new way overbuilt, x-member). I think I paid $450 for mine complete. Price out the tube, the tera link and powdercoating and your getting close to that. Ask a fabricator to build you one...Then tell me how pricey *$G* is.

I've said this before and I'll say it again...Performance of a particular mod is never indicative and/or proportional to the performance level of the driver...If you were witnessing suspension "performance" on a trial like metal masher, then well, you need to check the same on a trial like Rusty Nail, UH, LH etc. Pritchet doesn't' count IMO (although rocker knock. is a beiatch now). Also most that install a 3-link don't install longer travel shocks to go with it. That's a major mistake with that kit, because the only limiting factor for travel after a 3-link installed is the shocks.

It's really ALL about the driver. ALL (most) rovers on this list are essentially the same damn thing with the exception of a little more/less wheel base and weight. If you clean an obstacle that someone with all the goodies can't then fin' good for you...You may have more skill, or probably got lucky...But please don't use that as an excuse to bash some other product just because you did a "knarly" obstacle in Moab that someone else with more money than sense didn't.

If your having fun AND have cash coming out your ass, then mod the rig to your hearts' content...If your a cheap poor bastard like me then you learn to appreciate those who can spank the sheiat out of a trial with very little mod's (Matt P and Rich H. for example). These guy's TEAR IT UP all the time with very little modifications and/or travel...Routinely spank the *supper modded* 90's and rangies and HAVE FUN doing it without letting it get to their heads (well Rich likes to let it go to his head, but that's a different story! :flipoff2: )

Okay...Time for lunch.

--D

Here are my suggestions for getting better performance out of the front 'stock' suspension.

1. Buy a drill.

2. Learn to drive.

3. Go do it!!!!

:flipoff2:

bill here's a pic for thought. Granted there isn't a spring or shock in the passenger side front (fell out) on that pic and I have KC's tires on it but it actually dropped about an inch further with my tires on it (due to weight) and with the rest of the stuff bolted on. Also we figured out that we can use more travel than a 9012 is capable of provding set perpendicular to the axle. My truck is still without a tranny in it (damn LR can't order the right parts on our third order to get the right flex plate a flywheel) I'll snap some when I get it out running again. I have to admit though that I'm changing my suspension most likely to a three link but we might stay with the radius arms with some mods. Always a work in progress.

-ben

ps bill when you coming up? Gotta see your truck on the ramp. And get working on the rest of it.

here's a pic of the bronco granted different vehicle but same concept (radius arms)

-ben

Originally posted by FrankenRover
OnSafari wrote:

"""On another note, Larry G has about the most amount of front flex I have seen a Rangie get and to be perfectly honest its more than the $G three link but leaves alot of room for improvement."""

I gotta call bullshit on that one man. Show me a pict of a non-3-link, non-hinged radius armed rig (Rangie or other LR using conventional radius arms) with more front flex than this pict (which is 764's retained with 9012's and 3-link). Not to mention all the front flex that Adam Way gets with his 3-link on his Rangie.
:rolleyes:

Billster (feelin kinda frisky after a night on call)

OK Billster your on. Get you measuring stick out. :flipoff2:

This is about as much as I can get. And remember those are 42s Im swingin. :flipoff2:

Sam

And forgot to say in this pic its got a totally stock rover radius arm setup with drilled bushes, 14in travel shocks and totally captured stock early RR front springs (130lb/in)


Now Ill be the first to say that a three link will let you have more flex than this. In this pic it is the radius arms that are limiting the travel but it still does have quite a lot of travel.

IMO if anyone is thinking about a three link then first at least get to this much travel with the stock radius arm setup by using longer shocks and matching the shock mount height and bumpstops to agree with your spring height/rate cause you are going to have to do this anyway if you do go to a three link.

I ran a hinged radius arm for a year and would never put one of those things in my rig again. The increased flex that it does allow is good. But IMO the problems in terms of stability in tippy situations with the front axle lifting and pulling down on one side of the rig far outweigh any benefits.


And Billster dont worry about the tape. Im fairly sure you got more flex but I think Im close enough.

Sam

Here you go, nah neh nah neh boo boo!

Billster

btw. Nice flex Sam. You rock man.

Ben, What radius arms are you running there - not stock I think?

Originally posted by m016324
here's a pic of the bronco granted different vehicle but same concept (radius arms)

-ben

Notice where his shocks are. Hint Hint.

j

9207 shocks, stock everything but with blue polys. running OME 764s and a 1" spacer

better pic, the shocks are limiting the droop right now.

Originally posted by FrankenRover
Here you go, nah neh nah neh boo boo!

Billster

btw. Nice flex Sam. You rock man.

Ben, What radius arms are you running there - not stock I think?


Like I said you win. :D

Radius arms are absolutely stock. Just drilled bushes (double shell ones)

Sam

Heres the same shot from the other angle.

Sam

Quotes from my 4yo daughter:

Looking at Bill's:

"ooooohhh, look at that one. Did it get stuck? Look at the wheel, it's out!"

Looking at Sam's:

"ooooooh, that one looks like the Serious One, except blue! Is it stuck too?"

Just thought it was funny.

Originally posted by FrankenRover
I was wondering what he was up to these days? Not a peep on any of the lists from him, since he got banned from the POR list.

Billster

ps. Hey Tis, how was the Rally? Break any stuff?

The rallye was much fun, we did Iron Chest and 21 Road on the way out then LH, Behind the Rocks, and Pritchett Canyon during the event. We mainly wheeled with Fear Factory and the TDI/crawlerbox bandits and the Flexy Boys(Brendon and Greg). Matt "back on 33's and you can't follow me" Peterson ran with us on Saturday. I didn't break anything luckily since I drove my rig out and back, yep 33 hours each way, and no I don't smoke crack!
What a difference the autobox makes on the trail, that is probably the best mod I've made in a while(since I'm not totally redoing my rig like a few of you maniacs).

The one point I'll make about this front end talk(since we've had this same friggin' discussion before albiet on another list) is that the trails in Moab don't require or necessarily show the benifit, IMHO, of a long travel front or balanced suspension. Most of the obstacles are ledges or rock steps/slabs where you rangie guys really did well with the longer wheel base. For example, Mark and Larry both climbed White Knuckle Hill like it was child's play while the swb rigs couldn't get anywhere without liberal use of the stupid pedal. Nice work BTW. Anyway, the other interesting observation I've noticed is that those who generally discount the 3-link as stable or safe on a daily driver usually have never driven or spend much time off or on road driving with one. As I mentioned, I drove my rig 1800 miles to and from the event, and love the way it handes with the 3-link, just my .02.

I think the original question was in regard to ways to improve the front suspension without going to a 3-link. I'd have to say from what I've seen that Sam's idea of drilling the bushings provides the most flex from a radius armed front end. For those who still think that a radius armed rover can come even remotely close to the 3-link potential(read relocated shocks, longer coils, coilovers, ect) take a look at Brendon Loveday's truck(not quite 42s Sam, but 37's)

Johnathan

PS-anyone else having trouble attaching images?

OK Billster get the tape. I think I got a shot (maybe)

Just went out and backed it up the ramp (the front flexes more this way) and took some shots.

Sam

other side.

Nah on second thoughts you win.

Sam

Originally posted by Jtisdale



I think the original question was in regard to ways to improve the front suspension without going to a 3-link. I'd have to say from what I've seen that Sam's idea of drilling the bushings provides the most flex from a radius armed front end. For those who still think that a radius armed rover can come even remotely close to the 3-link potential(read relocated shocks, longer coils, coilovers, ect) take a look at Brendon Loveday's truck(not quite 42s Sam, but 37's)

Johnathan



Absolutely agreed.


So where are the pick of the rally. Sounds awesome.

Sam

And while we are talking ramp champ stuff I think that this guy is the winner. This is from the Aussie Tuff Truck comp a few weeks ago. This is actually an awesome rig - got some really trick stuff on it.

Sam

All right Doug, I heard that comment about my head.:rolleyes:

My greatest fear is that after all the stuff I am planning for my vehicle, it will perform as poorly as you high zoot guys:flipoff2:

Rich

The D90 is not my daily driver, so I don't care how it drives. I really have no interest in 3 or 4 link system b/c with this setup the D90 gets tippy on side slope. It already feels like $hit on side slope when I hear my rear spring coming off. However I thought about Rock Ware building me a hinged radius are, but not sure yet. I really want to keep my two link "radius arms" on the front. I thought about the 764's falling out with a longer shocks, so I'm picking up my 3" Rovertym springs this weekend and I think that they are 18"+ long, so I should be fine with longer shocks. I also found a way to retain both the upper and the lower of the springs with out doing an external shock mounts.

Redrangie, no I'm not a Doctor.. Why

Also what do you guys mean buy PM me.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yousef ReD90
[B]The D90 is not my daily driver, so I don't care how it drives. I really have no interest in 3 or 4 link system b/c with this setup the D90 gets tippy on side slope. It already feels like $hit on side slope when I hear my rear spring coming off. However I thought about Rock Ware building me a hinged radius are, but not sure yet. I really want to keep my two link "radius arms" on the front. I thought about the 764's falling out with a longer shocks, so I'm picking up my 3" Rovertym springs this weekend and I think that they are 18"+ long, so I should be fine with longer shocks. I also found a way to retain both the upper and the lower of the springs with out doing an external shock mounts.

Redrangie, no I'm not a Doctor.. Why

That feeling you get while side sloping is more of a product of your spring rate and shock setting/valving than radius arms as opposed to a 3-link. Also you mentioned your rear spring coming off, thats where the instability comes from as you unweight the rear end, retain those rear springs man!

Johnathan

Originally posted by rhills
All right Doug, I heard that comment about my head.:rolleyes:

My greatest fear is that after all the stuff I am planning for my vehicle, it will perform as poorly as you high zoot guys:flipoff2:

Rich


Ha ha!!! I just knew I could pull you out of the wood-work with that one! :flipoff2:

Soooooooo....Still planning? Hmmmmmmm. Seems to me you only have 1 year and counting now...But who's counting? ;)

-D

Originally posted by Yousef ReD90
The D90 is not my daily driver, so I don't care how it drives. I really have no interest in 3 or 4 link system b/c with this setup the D90 gets tippy on side slope.

As Jonathan said being tippy has nothing to do with the 3 three setup.

Loosing the radius arms has lots of benefits. Firstly it increases the amount of front flex that can be attained. Secondly it removes the extra roll stiffness caused by the radius arm bushes so that the front can be more easily setup cause the radius arm bushes dont stuff things up. It also allows you to run much higher spring rates (for a given munt of roll stiffness) which is much better cause the stiffer springs will unload less on hills and ledges and you will also be able to drive faster at bumps without bottoming out.

Sam

Originally posted by Jtisdale
[QUOTE][i]

That feeling you get while side sloping is more of a product of your spring rate and shock setting/valving than radius arms as opposed to a 3-link. Also you mentioned your rear spring coming off, thats where the instability comes from as you unweight the rear end, retain those rear springs man!

Johnathan

Tis,
I have never disagreed with you, and I guess I don't completely disagree with you here. I have cones on my truck, and a type of guide for the fronts, but heres the deal. It all goes to spring rates and shock valving as you mentioned. Especially finding the right combination between rebound and compression. Now spring rate can help make up for a lack of compression dampenning, and also to some extend rebound. Most of the coned / non retained rigs I see here in CO, (remember that place?) have way to light of spring in them for their set up, and are running non adjustable shocks.

Unfortunately, Rancho's only adjust compression and rebound at the same time, or I would run soft on compression, stiff (fast) on rebound. I run what most people consider an extremely stiff set up, but I feel it works. I routinely hit 35 degs, (albeit on an inclinometer:rolleyes: ) and I am NOT unloading my rear or front light side with my shocks dialed up. However, I witness many on 230lb springs that do. Now I am more familiar with Disco's and Rangie's, so I have NO idea what rates would be effective on a 90.

Sorry for rambling, but I just wanted to counter the retainer thing. I especially feel that if you aren't running 35's that you need the quick flex that the drop outs give you.

j

Tis, as you know I'm not locked and every bit of droop helps. When ever I get lockers I'll have those springs retained. With my current setup I can do up to 38deg. but what bothers me is when the spring go back in they make that load "clunk" noise and I'm getting tired of that.

Redrangie and Yousef,

I agree to a point with you guys about the benefits of cones, I ran rockware's setup for a couple of years before lockers and larger meats...it did help get me places that I couldn't go before. Yousef I do disagree that every bit of droop helps, it looks cool but when that rear wheel is fully dropped out and you have open diffs all your power is going to that wheel that is about a foot below your rock slider. Ever tried lifting that wheel off the ground in that situation, doesn't take any effort at all to make it loose contact with the ground. I think you should try drilling your bushings and retaining your rear springs to force the front and rear to work together, you will have less sexy flex in the rear but will have much more contact pressure resulting in more traction IMHO. It won't cost anything so why not try and see. Look at Sams rig flexing in this thread, he appears to have his rears retained with the fronts drilled, lots of flex and a fairly balanced body postition. I'm not saying the cone setup is wrong, because I was very impressed with what you and your truck could do at Holy Cross, but it took me going away from the cones(which at the time I thought was the best thing since sliced bread) to realize the difference and benefits.

Johnathan

This is a cool discussion I think.

Mainly because I don't have my rear springs retained, and have wondered what the tangible benefits would be from retaining them.

I know we've talked about all of this before, but now it's finally starting to sink in and make sense.

I wonder what will happen to the Serious One if I retain my rear springs?

Then again, I've promised myself that any future mods on the springs will be the elimination of coil springs and the introduction of air springs.

I have thought about zip-tieing one of the OME spacer pads to the top of the coil spring so that when it re-seats the 'clang' would be muffled.

The cool thing about these air springs is that they will have downward force through the entire range of the shock, and beyond the point where I have my rear limiting straps, so I 'theoretically' wouldn't have the same axle fall-out that I have now with coils that are unretained.

Am I missing something????

Originally posted by Serious One
This is a cool discussion I think.

I have thought about zip-tieing one of the OME spacer pads to the top of the coil spring so that when it re-seats the 'clang' would be muffled.
the pad doesn't last too long from what I hear, get's torn/deformed.


The cool thing about these air springs is that they will have downward force through the entire range of the shock, and beyond the point where I have my rear limiting straps, so I 'theoretically' wouldn't have the same axle fall-out that I have now with coils that are unretained.

Am I missing something????

Back to suspension 101 for a moment. The springs job is to handle the weight of the vehicle and to maintain that weight over a given terrain, keeping the axle in contact with the ground if possible. The trick with droop is to keep a balance between compression rate and rebound drop. To Tis's point, the wheel of most peoples dropped wheels doesn't not have much force holding in contact with the ground. The key is to have the downward force of the drooping wheel modulated by the opposite wheel. One way to do this is to find a spring or shock rate that will offer resistance to compression while allowing sufficient rebound. In other words, the shock needs to have a faster rebound than compression. This does not nescessarily mean stiffer. On compression you may be stiffer, as gravity will assist the compression. The shock valving needs to be so that the spring is allowed to rebound quickly, allowing droop.

Confused yet?

Getting there...

so....what shock to use is the question right?

I have RS9000's on all of my trucks, S1 included. The shocks won't change when I go to airsprings.

I carnt see that shock rates will affect anything when crawling slowely over stuff. High speed yes, but not crawling.

The non retained guys, how much does the springs come unseated???

When I retained my springs I got the exact same amount of wheel travel as unrestained (this is to do with spring rate and axle weight and the amount of unconstrained droop thaty I had initially) but the rig just worked so much better it was unbeliavable. I would never go back to uncontrolled droop again its just plain scarey.

Sam

Once again Sam I agree 100%...I think the perception out there is that they will reduce articulation and "wow-ability" if they retain the springs.

My advise is to try it and see for yourself...What are you out? A few pieces of 1x1/4" strap and a few 3/8ths bolts?

--D


Originally posted by Strange Rover
I carnt see that shock rates will affect anything when crawling slowely over stuff. High speed yes, but not crawling.

The non retained guys, how much does the springs come unseated???

When I retained my springs I got the exact same amount of wheel travel as unrestained (this is to do with spring rate and axle weight and the amount of unconstrained droop thaty I had initially) but the rig just worked so much better it was unbeliavable. I would never go back to uncontrolled droop again its just plain scarey.

Sam

Originally posted by RockRover


My advise is to try it and see for yourself...What are you out? A few pieces of 1x1/4" strap and a few 3/8ths bolts?

--D




That, my friend, is too high a price to pay. :flipoff2:

I also agree with you guys about the unretained drop out springs. Having run both setups for several years, I much prefer retained springs (had the SG drop out springs, but they never really dropped out anyway) and would never go back to the drop outs. The wow factor of really dropping out the rear end was great, but at the expense of instability on off camber drop offs (nearly rolled the 90 a few times this way with drop outs).

The 90 was MUCH more stable offroad with retained springs, given no change in springs or shocks.

Billster

Originally posted by Serious One


That, my friend, is too high a price to pay. :flipoff2:

There is a cheaper and faster way to do it.

Get a piece of 1" x1/4 about 2in long and bend it into a tight radius so that it forms a hook that can be looped over the spring.

Put one on the bottom coil and weld it to the spring base and do the same at the top.

If you want to be really clever then weld the hook in a place that you can easily cut off with an angle grinder.

I mucked around with bolts and shiat before and welding is definately the easiest and strongest option. And last time I swaped springs I just cut the hooks off (took 30 sec) and when the new springs were in I just welded them back on (took another 30 seconds)

Sam

the control gained from retaining the spring is very signficant. Although usually it takes doing it to actually be convinced. I ran unretained for a little while my truck flexed like a champ but it was unstable feeling at the limits. I made some retainers and bolted them on and my truck was much more stable and I only lost about 2 inches of droop with RT 3+ springs. Not enough to really make a difference especailly since th truck is so much more stable now. Tis is absolutely right the weight on that tire drooped way out is vitrually nothing and thus no ability to truly power the vehicle. Try the retainers if you don't like it, what, you're out ten bucks in supplies and maybe three hours labor.

-ben

Got to disagree on the no weight on the drooped tyre thing. If the spring is not in contact and all the weight is being placed on the axle by the spring on one side only then you would get about 80% of the weight on the compressed side and about 20% of the weight on the drooped side.

Its because the spring pushes on the axle inbaord the the compresses tyre and not directly above it.

But totally constrained springs are definately the go although if you didnt have lockers then you are trading off more than just stability .

Sam

Ok, grab your hammers and prepare to pound this into my head once again.

In theory:

The minimal (to none) gain in traction, as well as the unstability of the vehicle while the spring is dropped out of the upper spring perch is worth the trade off of retaining the spring in the perch?

-or-

The vehicle stability gained by retaining the rear springs more than offsets the lack of downward travel of the rear axle, and the minimal traction gains that the unweighted tire recieves.

-or-

You'd rather have your axle dangling by the spring hanging in air rather than have it unweighted and increasing the unstability of your vehicle sitting on the ground not doing much of anything.

How many different ways do I have to say it before it becomes clear????

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.




Originally posted by Serious One
Ok, grab your hammers and prepare to pound this into my head once again.

In theory:

The minimal (to none) gain in traction, as well as the unstability of the vehicle while the spring is dropped out of the upper spring perch is worth the trade off of retaining the spring in the perch?

-or-

The vehicle stability gained by retaining the rear springs more than offsets the lack of downward travel of the rear axle, and the minimal traction gains that the unweighted tire recieves.

-or-

You'd rather have your axle dangling by the spring hanging in air rather than have it unweighted and increasing the unstability of your vehicle sitting on the ground not doing much of anything.

How many different ways do I have to say it before it becomes clear????

Originally posted by RockRover
Yes.

Yes.

Yes.



Splat!

Need a cigarette?

:flipoff2:

Well...Since the hamer didn't work...:flipoff2:

--D


Originally posted by Serious One


Splat!

Need a cigarette?

:flipoff2:

Originally posted by Serious One


Splat!

Need a cigarette?

:flipoff2:

YOU ARE SICK!

I only say this after picking myself up off the floor from laughing so hard.

Look, its really simple. To each his/her own.

I too am doing everything I can to keep all 4 wheels on the ground, as left foot lockers work better that way. I just happen to have my rig sprung like hell, which doesn't allow the weighted side to compress as much, resulting in less body roll. I was scared sh!tless with week springs and a drop kit. I have seen cheap bastard lifts with drop kits wobble like weebles. If I didn't carry so much weight getting the to the trail, and had a fully locked rear, I would probably switch back.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Strange Rover
[B]Got to disagree on the no weight on the drooped tyre thing. If the spring is not in contact and all the weight is being placed on the axle by the spring on one side only then you would get about 80% of the weight on the compressed side and about 20% of the weight on the drooped side.


Kinda confusing Sam, 20% of what weight measurement. When I say no weight, I mean not enough to give good contact pressure for traction. If your saying half the vehicle weight(say 2250lbs) just for arguments sake, then the drooped side should have 450lbs of weight on it. This is why I disagree with that theory. When I had the cones and fully articulated my 90(cones just barely locating top of spring on the drooped wheel) I could grab the lip of the rim with my fingertips and pull that wheel off the ground, hence no significant weight. I may be missing your point and don't have the mathematical insight to factor spring rate forces as they compress in relation to axle location or anything like that so please enlighten me if that is the case here.

Johnathan

Tis,
Maybe I can help. The axle should be working like a see/saw or teeter totter. It is a live axle. You should not have been able to lift the unloaded wheel unless you did not have full contact with the ground on the other side, or your tire pressure was extremely low.

If your spring rate is too light on the loaded side, it would not be holding the wheel down. The spring is there to push the wheel down as well.

You guys can keep going on this, I am going to go drill my bushings finally...
j

Tis and such, the reason the tire gets light on the drop side, is that your truck is teetering on the roll axis. the front drop side is compressing. This makes it feel like the rear is light. Watch the truck as you do it, and you will see. the axle has reached its travel limit on that side, that does not mean it doesent sortof carry the load. If you back down a few inches, the axle will slightly compress on the drop side, and give say 20 or 30% weight. but once the axle reaches full travel, it will no longer assist in driving the truck, as traction is lost.

K.C. carpenter
taking place of BEN due to lazyness and not wanting to sign off and on.

That's a easier version of what I was trying to say...
j

Good gawd, started off as a lame ass thread, but after reading all of that....not too ad. One question is what are the guys that are running quality shocks (7100s or similar) doing for rebound and compression for valve ratings.

I have an off camber fear that isn't too bad on 32-35 degree stuff, but with all of the weight I have up top, I seem to feel really light when off camber. Much more so than any other rover I have ever seen. Redrangie can back me up on this. I am going to do some mods to the rack to lighten it up a bit, and would consider replacing the front rs9000s (have 7100s in rear) or adding an additional shock or both to make a durastic difference in off camber stability. Any suggestions?

Is anyone going to answer my question about flex measurement, or is this going to continue to be a "my shiat is better than yours"?

Oh yeah amlost forgot, my shiatt flexes better than yours....:flipoff2:

Originally posted by Way
One question is what are the guys that are running quality shocks (7100s or similar) doing for rebound and compression for valve ratings.



Way, I run 7100's as you do. I don't know what the specific "valving" is on my truck, but I do know which disc I removed from the 360/80 valve stack. It made a huge difference in cornering at Highway speeds and made the rig very stable off-camber.

This is my best attempt to explain.

Looking at the Established Off-Road Valve Stacks table from Bilstein, it list all the plates and their dimensions required to make up a particular valve stack for both Compression and Rebound. Looking at the 360/80 valve stack here are the plates I removed/replaced.

Rebound:
Rplace plate#6 (18 X .50) with 19 X .50 plate

Compression:
Removed Bypass Plate#1 (18 X .15)


BTW if you don't have this sheet, Call Shane at Bilstein and have him fax/mail you one, or I can fax you mine.

I have the book from when I worked at Durango 4x4 during college. It explains theings pretty well. I also have a sheet on how to rebuild the shocks that Shane emailed me a long time ago. Do you have anything different than what I have?

Also at what position is your shock located at. I run 14" travel in the back and they are raked forward. I think my valving is 345/135, but I may need to go find the sheet in the garage. I have trouble remembering exactly. What is funny is that I think the "up-lift" for lack of better words is caused a lot by the Rancho shocks not having a whole lot of rebound control. Setting 5 feels stiff for the front for compression, and it is still not enough rebound control for my spring rate (regardless if on 3 or 5)?? Knid of hard to explain, but what is even more strange is that John (redrangie) doesn't have this problem and his spring rate and shocks are extremely similar?????? Go figure?

Way

Still carnt see that shock valving will make any difference in stability in off camber situations. Especially when crawling or when stationary cause for shocks to have an effect the wheel needs upwards or downwards speed and when Im driving off camber I tend to drive very slowely.

Sam

Valving does matter at slow speeds sam.

The "valve" essentially slows down the fluid/gas pressure equilization. I am not that articulate (as many have notice) so I can't go into the fiziks (pun intended) as much as I would like.

With increased or decreased speed, the rate of impact or "force" changes. I don't remember the formula, put you get the point. You are still effecting the rate of progression for the fluid/gas by reducing the flow.

Way was with me last week, as I tried to figure out my valving for my new springs. Having 5 settings on a traditional shock was golden. I was able to dial in for the different obstacles, and did well.

The feel may change Sam, but you can't change physics. a smaller orifice results in less flow, which results in (depending on the shock) in more dampenning.

I have some materials somewhere from my suspension training that explains this, I will try to dig them up. They were from the Monroe company (I do believe that rancho has some ties with them now), but they have some good explanations.

Think back to your motorcycle days if you have them. Who can remember just having oil damped forks in the front only? Then they got smart and decided to add air to the mix for dampenning. By changing the dampenning, you would change the dive, which effected handling charectaristics. We ran differenet dampenning for different speed/terrain courses back then. (mine was an 85 bhp 2 stroke yamaha hey hey!) Did that help?

PS, I thought I had put single shell bushes in my front last time, but no. Anyway, I modded them regardless, just on both sides of the sleeve. MAN! what a difference! I put 7/64's on both sides of the sleeve. Fantastic! Thanks for coming up with this one Sam.

j

OK, if anyone wants to see what a pansy-ass, grocery gettin', mall crawling DII with drilled bushings will do, I'll shoot you a pic so you can see what a difference drilling makes. And my XL's should be delivered next week.:)

BS, shock valving does not affect the feel of tippiness felt in a truck at rest. Nore does it make a big difference at vey low spee.

If you are unlocked, and need speed to traverse a trail, you probably want to run a bit stiffer, as you will be using alot more throttle, this in turn causes drastic shifts in the attitude of the body. Slowwing down the roll of the body with the right shock valving is very important, but if the truck is sitting virtually still, and is in a tippy situation, you can have all the valving you want, and the truck will still feel tippy. remember, the shock only works if it is in motion. The spring however is always at work as long as there is pressure on both spring perches.

Granted, if you removed your shocks on a given off camber obstical, the truck would be very unstable. Which I beleive is what you guys are getting at. I think there are two difernet situations here static load and dynamic load. redrangie is using dynamic loading, which means thetruck is constantly in motion, and that makes a huge difference.

Strange rover is using statics. which means if the truck was not in motion on an off camber situation, the truck would be no more stable whether it had shocks on it or not. but once movement is induced, the truck would not react the same.

valving shocks properly, is very important. your truck will not feel right, but if you have 1000lbs of crap on your roof rack :confused: then if the truck wants to go over and you are motionless for to long, the truck will go over. try relocating all that crap on your roof, or leaving some of it back at the motel, unless you are hitting the trail for more than a day. keep in mind, that you cannot set valving for the weight only of the truck. you must account for center of gravity, and that means a compromise, if you want to run in town with no load on the roof and the trail with a ton of gear.

K.C. carpenter
No roof rack and proud of it.

Originally posted by Puffdragon
BS, shock valving does not affect the feel of tippiness felt in a truck at rest. Nore does it make a big difference at vey low spee.

If you are unlocked, and need speed to traverse a trail, you probably want to run a bit stiffer, as you will be using alot more throttle, this in turn causes drastic shifts in the attitude of the body. Slowwing down the roll of the body with the right shock valving is very important, but if the truck is sitting virtually still, and is in a tippy situation, you can have all the valving you want, and the truck will still feel tippy. remember, the shock only works if it is in motion. The spring however is always at work as long as there is pressure on both spring perches.

Granted, if you removed your shocks on a given off camber obstical, the truck would be very unstable. Which I beleive is what you guys are getting at. I think there are two difernet situations here static load and dynamic load. redrangie is using dynamic loading, which means thetruck is constantly in motion, and that makes a huge difference.

Strange rover is using statics. which means if the truck was not in motion on an off camber situation, the truck would be no more stable whether it had shocks on it or not. but once movement is induced, the truck would not react the same.

valving shocks properly, is very important. your truck will not feel right, but if you have 1000lbs of crap on your roof rack :confused: then if the truck wants to go over and you are motionless for to long, the truck will go over. try relocating all that crap on your roof, or leaving some of it back at the motel, unless you are hitting the trail for more than a day. keep in mind, that you cannot set valving for the weight only of the truck. you must account for center of gravity, and that means a compromise, if you want to run in town with no load on the roof and the trail with a ton of gear.

K.C. carpenter
No roof rack and proud of it.

Well Said.
Weight transfer and roll/load axis are critical. The problem with trail suspension is the you have to set up the vehicle for a wide range of situations. Cambered/off-camber, nose down/@ss down, nose down/45 deg list, etc etc.

This is why I think balance is key. I need to get another 3" in the front before I am there. Regardless of cone/retained, intial travel I feel is the key. If you are compressing or rebounding too quickly on the torsional axis of the vehicle load, you are in for a truly puckering experience.

I think that with the Serious One I have too soft of a setup actually.

After running with the drilled bushings and super squishy RR springs I think that the truck is just a little too mushy on the trail.

The last thoughts I have in my head about running UH is that the truck just was too tippy, and when i'd come down off of an obstacle the vehicle would just kind of go into it's own gyrations and take a minute to settle down.

'Course it didn't help I only had one rear spring!

But, I think that the whole key is balance like RedRangie said. I think I have very close to 50/50 suspension travel between the front and back. I have ramped the S1 forwards and backwards, and get the same result as far as RTI is concerned.

It's too bad I'm starting to pay attention to this whole spring thing now that air springs are just over the horizon.

I wonder how it'll change the truck?

Now I have been thinking about the air spring setup and have the following thoughts:

The system will be front bags connected with a T, and the rear bags connected with a T, both front and rear independantly controlled via switches in cab.

Now, if the uphill axle is compressing the spring, and I have the T setup, won't the air that was being compressed by the uphill spring want to force it's way into the downhill spring, thus effectively forcing the downhill tire down?

The airsprings I'm installing have 25 inches of total travel, so I might finally be able to use the entire range of the 9014's.

The Bilsteins you guys are talking about have my attention though.

Originally posted by Serious One


The airsprings I'm installing have 25 inches of total travel, so I might finally be able to use the entire range of the 9014's.

The Bilsteins you guys are talking about have my attention though.

9014's are right under 13" of total travel, were you thinking of 9012's? They are much longer, and with angled mounting you get a better travel ratio.

Yeah,

I can never keep them straight. I have 9014's on the RR's front, and 9012's on the S1.

doh!

In the S1 the front shocks are mounted nearly vertical and the rears are angled pretty well (similar to stock).

BTW Fox Sports Net right now has a kick arse show called BlueTorch about freestyle moto-X riders in Utah. (11:14am)

Hey mike, you wont want to drive the street with that T between the bags. The truck will have massive body roll. and the truck most likely will not sit level at ride height on even the flatest ground. the truck most likely weighs a bit more on one side, so it will lean to that side. toss the T setup, and run the bags independant from each other. unless you plan on only slow trailing the truck.

K.C. Carpenter

could also import a ride height system from an air suspended rig and forget the t..... if you want to be really trick.

j

Sam/Strangerover,

YOU ROCK!

I just got done testing my rig's flex after doing the "Holy Bushes" mod. OH MY GAWD!

Home depot has a paved birm (sp?) which I use to simulate a ramp, and is somewhere between 30-20 degrees, depending on approach. Anywho, I went up backwards with my left rear until my front was going to kiss it, and lo and behold my right front had another 4.5 inches until the bump stop, and my left front (the unloaded side) spring was already loose! with 18.5 inch springs! I am glad I have front lower spring guides!


My rears weren't even close to unloading from the mounts yet. Sam if I ever make it to the land of OZ again, you get a case of :beer: !

Just in from RTE. Thanks John.

http://pics.montypics.com/Old_Scout/2002-09-23/rrc_twist1.jpg

http://pics.montypics.com/Old_Scout/2002-09-23/rrc_twist2.jpg

http://pics.montypics.com/Old_Scout/2002-09-23/rrc_twist3.jpg

The toy/diff and 3 link are in...The shocks are 14" Bilstein and limits the front articulation...but it seems to be more than enought. Drew needs longer brake lines and a notched crossmember for the drive shaft so its still a parking lot truck. Ramping without the shocks got scary with the front tires not coming off the ground with the truck getting too damn far off the ground ,so it's flexy. Proberly needs to be limited with a strap. The 3 link feels solid with the tie rod out of the way for good geometry to the 3 link. Right now the tires(inside) are hitting the springs and shocks at the drop pictured so 1" wheel spacers are also in store. Drew is using the short 10 spline drive flange with the old RR CV (23 spline)as the breaking point so we can find the optimum weak link. I think ultimately an alloy short 23/24 spline shaft with a GBR drive flange will be the way to go after we figure out the optimum break point of the weak link...but changing in the field will be a 10 min job. Drew will be chiming in soon when he sees this up as his cloud 9 high on excitement has him pumped.

Sweeeeeet Jeeeeebuss that is freakin' awesome!

Wow,

I feel sudenly insignifigant. That is truly an achievment.

That thing is :smokin: Which front springs are those? And what are you running for rear srprings/spacer? How much total lift are you getting? I hope it handles as good as it looks.

Christian

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RoverWrench
[B]The toy/diff and 3 link are in...The shocks are 14" Bilstein and limits the front articulation...excitement has him pumped.

John-

Looks good, what do you and Drew think about shakin' that thing down with me in Tellico the weekend of Oct 26th?

Johnathan

:D :D :D

This is a LOT of flex. I'm wondering how far can it go on a side slope before it starts to tumble down hill :D

Is that a RTE 3-link on there or a $G in disguise ?

Oh - Toy axles ? nevermind

keith
:usa:

That is pretty sweet! Can we compare that to the holey bushings??

To answer several questions....a 3 link is a 3 link is a 3 link. And as long as the 3 link outer arms use the bushing on shaft thru std frame mount, maximum flex capability is no different as the frame mount is the limit. Drews may look more but it is just lift that makes it look like it has more travel. SG fathered the 3 link, so this is a SG look a like with just changes made for personal tastes to make a stronger unit, as we all have learned from the SG effort. Springs are std RTE springs(5" lift) being retained of course. After reading the whole thread the "Front End Articulation" thread has evolved into another disipline involving lift, stability and roll angles which in my opinion are not directly affected by a 3 link front end or radius arms. Lift and spring rates/design are the keys when combined with higher CoG and off camber dives. In this case Drew currently has no fear of heights more so than me as I am getting soft in my old age. I personally agree with the guys here on what maximum lifts feel safe to most...and if I wheel some of the places some of you guys do I would certainly redo my trucks lift to match. I was at 37 degrees off camber this last weekend and felt ok....but no more please....lol.
We are seeing what we learn as we go as all of us do when we build our own shiatt. We are still waiting on GBR shafts for the rear Salsbaury before we can get 4 wheel drive....so we are just seeing what we learn and passing it on.

Originally posted by RoverWrench

We are seeing what we learn as we go as all of us do when we build our own shiatt. We are still waiting on GBR shafts for the rear Salsbaury before we can get 4 wheel drive....so we are just seeing what we learn and passing it on.

This is the best worded posts in a while. I know from racing bikes that what works for one person at 100kph downhill, would scare the bejesus out of another.

Set it up for what works best for your terrain and your needs.
j

Originally posted by RoverWrench

.........We are still waiting on GBR shafts for the rear Salsbaury before we can get 4 wheel drive.....

Did you go for the 35 spline Macnammara(sp) kit or the standard 24 spline maxi's? 30 spline maxi's?
just courious

35 spline

the truck has 2 inch spring spacers in the front with 5 inch springs and a 2 inch body lift for a total of 9 inches in the front but as of right now it only has 5 inch springs and the body lift in the rear, for some reason it looks pretty level sitting in the parking lot.

i had to put extra lift in the front front because the tire was hitting the inner fender when compressed. and was limiting drop on the other side. we will see how it works out i am not sure that it will stay that way just waiting to see what happens.

the outer links where mounted to the frame use bushings with more rubber from the ID to the OD. to allow for more movement of the arms. the center link uses heim joint at the new cross member.

Drew

Nothing valuable to add other than complimenting the Rovertym sprung Range Rover of Drew's in the picture. Really sweet looking vehicle!!!

Way