I have a 91' RRC on a 3 inches of lift (2 springs, 1 body) and am running 33's and want to get the most flex without going nuts and chopping the car apart. I have access to any sort of welding/fabricating facility needed but I just need some help designing it.

Im thinking of doing something similar to the Safari Guard 3 Link kit.

Thanks,

William

Get some longer shocks and keep the stock set up. It flexes way good enough for someone who wheels on 33" rubber and doesn't want to go nuts.

I've done a DIY 3 link on the front of my RRC, there's a build thread on here if you search under my profile.

The basics of the system where twin lower links from radius arm mounts on the chassis to axle then a single offset (to the left) upper link between a custome cross member under the gearbox to the top of the axle.

Flex with the system is really great, way better than the hockey sticks. You may not need to chop the car apart to do it, but you will beat it once you have the 3 link on. By the way, having seen the above post it doesn't take much to lift the truck while you're at it and up to 35s or 37s. I combined my 3 link with TLC 80 series axles too to give lockers and strength, then the work involved is worthwhile.

I got a little flamed for some of my bracket design, so maybe beef things up a little compared to what I did. For those who commented on mine, I'm still alive, but a rebuild is coming over the winter :D

This recent thread on a UK LR forum may be of interest...

3 Link Front Ends (http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=27817)

I got a little flamed for some of my bracket design, so maybe beef things up a little compared to what I did. For those who commented on mine, I'm still alive, but a rebuild is coming over the winter :D

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.

We have a death bet on you at work. Your over/under is 12 months. Get out there and wheel hard! I need a new pair of shoes.

I have a 91' RRC on a 3 inches of lift (2 springs, 1 body) and am running 33's and want to get the most flex without going nuts and chopping the car apart. I have access to any sort of welding/fabricating facility needed but I just need some help designing it.

Im thinking of doing something similar to the Safari Guard 3 Link kit.

Thanks,

William

If you want one like the SG, buy the SG. The price is resonable and the kit is designed ok.

If you are going to build your own, go center link high. And put it all in the 3 link calculator. I had to do a little creative placement to get the roll angle under 6. :laughing:

What about copying the yeep radius arm for more flex?

Use some large diameter lower links with JJ or similar on both ends.
The top links Y off the lowers.

http://image.fourwheeler.com/f/9539254/129_0802_12_z+2007_jeep_wrangler_rubicon+front_arm s_front_axle.jpg

You would have to really change the frame mount, that is a ton of pressure on just two points. I remember thinking the same thing when I sold my TJ for the Classic, but I never bothered to put much effort into it. If you can makeit work it would be easier than the SG three link, at least I would think. Could you use parts for a Jeep and just mod them and the mounts?

What about copying the yeep radius arm for more flex?

Use some large diameter lower links with JJ or similar on both ends.
The top links Y off the lowers.

http://image.fourwheeler.com/f/9539254/129_0802_12_z+2007_jeep_wrangler_rubicon+front_arm s_front_axle.jpgHow would that give any more flex than stock?
If he heims the frame mounts he has the same thing you show.

Radius arms are radius arms. They all share the same design problems; binding when flexed, unloading when climbing.

You would have to really change the frame mount, that is a ton of pressure on just two points. I remember thinking the same thing when I sold my TJ for the Classic, but I never bothered to put much effort into it. If you can makeit work it would be easier than the SG three link, at least I would think. Could you use parts for a Jeep and just mod them and the mounts?How do you think the axle is held on now?

How would that give any more flex than stock?
If he heims the frame mounts he has the same thing you show.

I believe its the extra joint in the crotch of the Y.
Unlike the Ford or Rover radius with the fixed Y this style does provide more movement.

http://jeep.off-road.com/jeep/data/articlestandard/jeep/172008/512141/fabtechjeep13.jpg

But again thats why i asked. I am just guessing based on what I have seen on some jeeps, and always wondered why no one had tried this yet on a rover.

Get some longer shocks and keep the stock set up. It flexes way good enough for someone who wheels on 33" rubber and doesn't want to go nuts.

I have OME shocks and have pretty good drop, the thing stopping my flex is the radius arm hitting the bushing. Is there any way to do a ghetto mod to get the radius arms to get more flex.

pull the bolt and bushing from the front hole in the left hand radius arm (furthest from the driveshaft) . Dont drive it on the road like this, and dont say I told you to do it. It helps a good bit and it’s free. But it will probably get you killed if you hammer on the brakes at 60mph. :eek:

pull the bolt and bushing from the front hole in the left hand radius arm (furthest from the driveshaft) . Dont drive it on the road like this, and dont say I told you to do it. It helps a good bit and it’s free. But it will probably get you killed if you hammer on the brakes at 60mph. :eek:

What does that do for helping articulation? Wont that just put lots of pressure on the other bolt?

The remaining bolt acts as a pivot. The constraint limiting articulation is removed.

I seem to recall, however, that people who tried it found instability issues. I can't remember the details, but I thought everyone backed away from that mod.

The earlier style radius arms articulate a lot better than the newer ones.

What does that do for helping articulation? Wont that just put lots of pressure on the other bolt?

do a google on wristed radius arms
Same idea as removing one bolt.
I have ridden in a 90 that had this mod. Did pretty good off road. of course I was comparing that to a parabolic sprung 88

I would not run it long term like that. I heard it worked, tried it, and decided it was not the best idea. And yes it probably puts a lot of stress on the remaining bolt, especially under braking.

The remaining bolt acts as a pivot. The constraint limiting articulation is removed.

I seem to recall, however, that people who tried it found instability issues. I can't remember the details, but I thought everyone backed away from that mod.

The earlier style radius arms articulate a lot better than the newer ones.

So removing the front bolt from the passenger side of radius arm?

do a google on wristed radius arms
Same idea as removing one bolt.
I have ridden in a 90 that had this mod. Did pretty good off road. of course I was comparing that to a parabolic sprung 88

Same ? as above.

I would not run it long term like that. I heard it worked, tried it, and decided it was not the best idea. And yes it probably puts a lot of stress on the remaining bolt, especially under braking.

So couldn't you fit a pin in that bolt and remove when off-roading? What kind of handling side effects did you experience?

Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.

We have a death bet on you at work. Your over/under is 12 months. Get out there and wheel hard! I need a new pair of shoes.

That's just plain nasty. At the moment I'm choosing not to wheel it until it's time to tear it down and do it better (actually I don't get the time with children and houses, but either way). So does your bet require more wheeling pictures to prove i've used it and not died?

What about copying the yeep radius arm for more flex?

Use some large diameter lower links with JJ or similar on both ends.
The top links Y off the lowers.

http://image.fourwheeler.com/f/9539254/129_0802_12_z+2007_jeep_wrangler_rubicon+front_arm s_front_axle.jpg

Where's Frank? Can't find his build, but he did a Y radius arm set-up like that on his D2, been waiting to see how he liked it, but I think he got sidetracked on another project or something. I've seen what XJs and whatever they call the Wrangler that shares the front suspension of XJ with long arm set-ups perform very well. Seems like a good solution for a Rover, it would require minimal welding and keep everything up high, rather than the boat anchor under-the-axle SG type set-ups.

I was about to order the tubing for my links, then I thought about how I haven't driven my truck in almost 2 months and got a little emo. Going to get the thing back together and run some trails then get to my links, unless I buy the 109 I've been eyeballing:shaking:

Yeah what i am thinking right now is 2.25x.375 for the main lower links with ballistic joints at each end. Then 1.75x.25 with 1" heims for the upper links.
The lowers will be 44" long so the frame mount ends up higher on the side of the frame instead of on the bottom. Rear lower links mirror the fronts.

They don't work near as well as a 3 link. I am in a hurry but I will tell you all why later. There is also a very easy and cheap way to free up travel on a stock front with almost no side affects. It still is not as a good as a 3 link though.

I've seen tons of these longarm setups on XJs, YJs, TJs, etc.
They perform like any other radius arm. Well the longer arms lessen the negatives slightly.
Nothing wrong with them, just like there's nothing wrong with the rover RAs.
But if you're looking for a big performance gain in the rocks, this ain't the way.
A similar gain can be gotten by just changing the rover frame mount to a spherical joint.

IMO for trail performance, RAs, any RAs, don't hold a candle to 3 or 4 links.

The cheap and easy solution is to change to the earlier narrow arms. They articulate a lot more than the wide ones.

The cheap and easy solution is to change to the earlier narrow arms. They articulate a lot more than the wide ones.

Even more if you drill the bushes too.

Yah, but I don't think it is a good idea on the narrow arms as it causes the bushes to fail very quickly, at least that is what I've heard.

I've never measured, but from watching different trucks drive through things, I'd guess the narrow arms allow at least 50% more articulation than the wide ones.

Yah, but I don't think it is a good idea on the narrow arms as it causes the bushes to fail very quickly, at least that is what I've heard.

We'll see. My RR has got narrow arms and drilled bushes. At least they are cheap to replace.

I've seen tons of these longarm setups on XJs, YJs, TJs, etc.
They perform like any other radius arm. Well the longer arms lessen the negatives slightly.
Nothing wrong with them, just like there's nothing wrong with the rover RAs.
But if you're looking for a big performance gain in the rocks, this ain't the way.
A similar gain can be gotten by just changing the rover frame mount to a spherical joint.

IMO for trail performance, RAs, any RAs, don't hold a candle to 3 or 4 links.

Thanks.

Can a 3-link with panhard handle the highway as well (as safely) as the stock RA?

Thanks.

Can a 3-link with panhard handle the highway as well (as safely) as the stock RA?It's actually the design of choice among many of the KOH guys.
Several years ago I built one for an XJ.
It ran 70mph down the highway, straight as an arrow, on unbalanced, beadlocked, 35" Creepys.

A standard 3 link uses two lower links and one upper, however, I don't see why the Safarigard version (two upper/one lower) wouldn't work just as well.

So removing the front bolt from the passenger side of radius arm?



Same ? as above.



So couldn't you fit a pin in that bolt and remove when off-roading? What kind of handling side effects did you experience?

the wristed radius arm, remove a bolt mods are not a good idea on the passenger side because of its proximity to the drive shaft. The wristed radius arms have removable pins.

We'll see. My RR has got narrow arms and drilled bushes. At least they are cheap to replace.

Where can I get those?

Where can I get those?

There is a guy in Australia that is/was producing them commercially. Sorry, I can't remember his name. Being a notorious tightwad, I made my own using a 10mm bung boring cutter borrowed from the chemistry dept. at work.

To achieve a balance between control and flex, I just cut two holes, one at the top, and one at the bottom. Not like this (http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=13207) - too many holes in the wrong places :shaking:

Look at my link in post #4 for the full story behind that pic.
.
.
.
.
.

They actually had ones cast with holes as they found the drilling weakened them too much. Not sure if they still do it.

Haultech Engineering. Look it up on Outerlimits.

They actually had ones cast with holes as they found the drilling weakened them too much. Not sure if they still do it.

Haultech Engineering. Look it up on Outerlimits.

They do. I have them.

This is my rig's front flex with standard wide front arms and Haultech Holy Bushes. 3" Lovells coils and shocks..

http://i474.photobucket.com/albums/rr102/MickaMal/DSC_8214.jpg

An ordinary drill bit leaves a very ragged hole. A bung borer like I used produces a very clean and smooth hole. I'm hoping that it will mean the bush lasts longer.

I've had a look on tinternet and it seems the correct term is 'cork borer'.

See here... Cork borer set (http://www.rapidonline.com/Educational-Products/Science/Laboratory-Equipment/Cork-borer-sets/78937/kw/06-6604?source=googleps&utm_source=googleps)

there is also the "X-Link" setup. Basically there is a bar connecting the 2 front radius arm mounts on a pivot in the center of the axle. so that stock drivability is retained but less strin is put on the arm bushings because they spend less itme fighting each other.
scary steering.... on a toyota
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l236/professorhilux/21092007241.jpg
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l236/professorhilux/21092007243.jpg
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l236/professorhilux/DSCF0057.jpg
http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l236/professorhilux/DSCF0049.jpg

There's an issue with the Panhard on a Rover axle though...

That's just plain nasty. At the moment I'm choosing not to wheel it until it's time to tear it down and do it better (actually I don't get the time with children and houses, but either way). So does your bet require more wheeling pictures to prove i've used it and not died?

IF your not driving it and redoing it, I won't flame anymore. Your doing the right thing.

The cheap and easy solution is to change to the earlier narrow arms. They articulate a lot more than the wide ones.

I ran those. If they flex better than "other" radius arms, then damn! :laughing:

It's actually the design of choice among many of the KOH guys.
Several years ago I built one for an XJ.
It ran 70mph down the highway, straight as an arrow, on unbalanced, beadlocked, 35" Creepys.

A standard 3 link uses two lower links and one upper, however, I don't see why the Safarigard version (two upper/one lower) wouldn't work just as well.

Your right, but not necessarily because it was the "best" system. In a lot of the buggies with extremely low stance and maximum uptravel made for packaging challenges. It is a great system, but the side to side movement of a panhard can be a negative.

the wristed radius arm, remove a bolt mods are not a good idea on the passenger side because of its proximity to the drive shaft. The wristed radius arms have removable pins.

Why?


If you are going to hang on to your radius arm setup, the best "fix" I think is what KC did for me. He shortened the distance between the axle mounts on one side of the axle. It reduces the stress between the two bots, which is the stress that locates the pinion and binds in travel. It made the front able to max out about 13in of 14in coilovers. There was no negatives as far as handling but the bushings do wear faster. The nice thing about this mod is anyone can do it and it costs about $6 worth of brackets.

After a few yeas of running like this, one of the arms started to bow. I just kept running on it.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd299/buckon35s/P1010158.jpg

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd299/buckon35s/P1010159.jpg



Now, that said, when I ran this system, I was very happy with it, only because I didn't know how much better a 3 link was. Radius arms in any form, are just a poor design for wheeling. And, they are why every utube video ever posted shows a rover half way rolled over on a tiny rock. Unless you plan on wheeling backwards, dump the radius arms if you want to do harder trails.

The last year I had RA's I rolled or flopped 7 times in one season. Since I got rid of it, I have only even been close once. Not to mention all the other things that got better too.

Radius arms were designed for reliability and simplicity. they hold up well to rough use and lack of maintenance. When radius arms were first used on Range rovers and Broncos the only comparison was against leaf sprung Series Rovers and Jeep CJs. Nobody really thought about extreme flex and rock crawling back then. Unfortunately the design is a bit dated.

So should I consider making my own 3 link? Ive been looking at Curry Johnny Joints and think its pretty doable?

So should I consider making my own 3 link? Ive been looking at Curry Johnny Joints and think its pretty doable?

I don't know you. If you feel confident in your fab skills, definitely. I will help you as much as I can.

I have all the neccesary equipment and have a Nuclear Certified welder that can do the important welds if needed. I just need a design really, the one plasticbadger did looks okay, just needs to be beefier. I could weld that stuff onto my axle housing like he did for the middle link without any problems right? He has Toyota axles so just wondering. SafariGard's design seems a bit overbuilt with the big huge box section over the trailing link.

Just my thoughts, what do you think?

I could weld that stuff onto my axle housing like he did for the middle link without any problems right?

Duh! The original mounts are welded to the axle housing! The axle housing is slightly thicker than 1/4".

Don't forget to pay a lot of attention to the crossmember and the connection for the center link as this was said to be a major flaw in early SG designs.

I have all the neccesary equipment and have a Nuclear Certified welder that can do the important welds if needed. I just need a design really, the one plasticbadger did looks okay, just needs to be beefier. I could weld that stuff onto my axle housing like he did for the middle link without any problems right? He has Toyota axles so just wondering. SafariGard's design seems a bit overbuilt with the big huge box section over the trailing link.

Just my thoughts, what do you think?

Where are you and what motor do you have?

Send me your e-mail and I will send you my excell of the 3 link calculator I did for mine. If you have room for a link right next to the front driveshaft, then my design is the easiest to make.

Using a 3-link were there are two on the bottom, and one on the top.
If you don't have any clearance issues, would there be a problem running all three links inside the frame rails?

I have the space, with the single top on the drivers side.

Using a 3-link were there are two on the bottom, and one on the top.
If you don't have any clearance issues, would there be a problem running all three links inside the frame rails?

I have the space, with the single top on the drivers side.

If you can do that and still run it wide on the axle end then it would be awesome. You would have to notch the frame. If you brought the axle end links in as well, Roll axis goes back up, but not horribly. I don't like it though. Not for a particular reason, but it just works in my head that the axle links being that close together would cause tremendous stress.

Agreed. :(

Was just trying to get around the issue of the lower arms hitting the bulkhead outrigger. Was trying to mount them up higher on the frame.

Agreed. :(

Was just trying to get around the issue of the lower arms hitting the bulkhead outrigger. Was trying to mount them up higher on the frame.

Shouldn't be any worse than the radius arm clearance, unless you notch the frame, and then I think you'll have axle and motor clearance issues. You may need to notch the outrigger a bit, but shouldn't be a major issue. Unless you're working on something other than a Disco or RRC, don't have a Series, or Defender laying around to look at.

Agreed. :(

Was just trying to get around the issue of the lower arms hitting the bulkhead outrigger. Was trying to mount them up higher on the frame.

Hey,

Why are they even close? If you run lower outers even with the axle links being as high as you can get them with proper VS you still wont hit it. Am I missing something??

Safari gard 3- link.. used to always drive it to the trail at high speeds on 35s...

Heres a pic of it at the top of a 20 deg ramp with all fours on the ground.. front shocks are 14 inch foxes with longer shock towers...

Agreed. :(

Was just trying to get around the issue of the lower arms hitting the bulkhead outrigger. Was trying to mount them up higher on the frame.

on coil sprung rovers the radius arm mount is incorperated to the outrigger/bulhead mount....now if you were making new mounts for the chassis and they were further back it may be a problem, but nothing that coucldnt be sorted with a bit of fabing

Serg

The major difference between a standard radius arm and a 3 link (or X link or unpinned radius arm etc) is roll stiffness.

Less roll-stiffness makes for more articulation and easier articulation, however it also means less stability on sideslopes and has got to cause some major handling issues.

My truck needs a lot of roll-stiffness in the front to keep it going straight, I get rampant oversteer if I reduce it. Maybe a dislocating front sway bar is needed for a truck that's still driven to the trail with a 3 link?

The major difference between a standard radius arm and a 3 link (or X link or unpinned radius arm etc) is roll stiffness.

Less roll-stiffness makes for more articulation and easier articulation, however it also means less stability on sideslopes and has got to cause some major handling issues.

My truck needs a lot of roll-stiffness in the front to keep it going straight, I get rampant oversteer if I reduce it. Maybe a dislocating front sway bar is needed for a truck that's still driven to the trail with a 3 link?

Yes, maybe, kinda, sorta, not really.

Roll angle will affect sway (roll) more than even a radius arm setup. The radius arm does't start to bind enough to affect anything for about 6in. So by the time that the positive affects of the radius arm are felt in the corner, your side has already dipped enough to feel like the indiana jones ride at Disneyland. Add that to the very positive roll angle of a mildly lifted rover rear and you get a ton of body roll. Thats why rover went way too stiff on the stock springs. Trying to mask the roll factor. A sway bar will help of course, front or rear, but I would say a properly designed 3 link would not make driving on the street any worse than the stock radius arms.

This is all from my experience with both setups.

Thats why rover went way too stiff on the stock springs. Trying to mask the roll factor.

What do you mean by "too stiff on the stock springs"?
Stock springs were around 130 lb/in, the HD springs were 180lb/in.

I haven't run standard rubber bushes for years so I can't measure the existing roll-stiffness.

Not trying to hijack too much.
I am doing a coilover series body onto an RRC frame.
The frame RA mount is under the bottom of the frame. Same as the rear lower links.
The Defender frames I have looked at have the same mounts.
I want to move the frame mounts. Instead of hanging down underneath, they are up near the top of the frame. I also want to move the axle lower mounts up a little higher.
By increasing the length of the links this can be accomplished with out changing the angles.

I have also been playing with the 3 link and 4 link calcs to get the roll axis as high as possible.

Not trying to hijack too much.
I am doing a coilover series body onto an RRC frame.
The frame RA mount is under the bottom of the frame. Same as the rear lower links.
The Defender frames I have looked at have the same mounts.
I want to move the frame mounts. Instead of hanging down underneath, they are up near the top of the frame. I also want to move the axle lower mounts up a little higher.
By increasing the length of the links this can be accomplished with out changing the angles.

I have also been playing with the 3 link and 4 link calcs to get the roll axis as high as possible.

You want the roll axis as low as possible! 0 is perfect. Near impossible on a rover, but perfect. You also want as much vertical seperation as possible on the frame end mounts. Thats really important. I wouldn't do what you are thinking!

Sorry, I meant roll center as high as possible :emb:

Front and Rear numbers so far

Sorry, I meant roll center as high as possible :emb:

Front and Rear numbers so far

Hey,

Your front is as good as I have ever seen on a rover. Well done. One question though, how are you going to be able to turn your front tires? My front end is 7in wider than stock, and I have my links 4in a side further in than you, and I still bury my tires into the links.

On the rear, it looks good but the roll angle is a little high and the anti squat is going to drop the rear pretty hard when you accelerate. I would get closer to 0 or 100.

It all looks very good though. :smokin:

Edit: I am assuming you are keeping the upper ball joint on the axle end since you points come together. How are you getting a measurment that tall? Did you move the center mount way up? Where on the ball are you measuring? I have mine as 27.5 from the ground with 40's and it is 2in higher than stock. Just trying to figure out if we are on the same page.

ack, I was fooling around seeing what you had to change to raise roll center and must have saved it by mistake.

For the rear ball I am trying to measure to the center of the pivot, so its about in the center of the socket joint. I get 23 with the center of the axle 17" above the ground.

Stearing is over rated :D
Yeah I need to play around some more with the front lowers, I just copied the info from the rear with out thinking

can somebody send me that program?
BreakellW@gmail.com

search on this site for 3link calculator and 4link calculator.

They are just MS Excel spread sheets that a PBB member created.

Could you start this out by putting in the third link then taking out one of the bolts in the radius arm.

Could you start this out by putting in the third link then taking out one of the bolts in the radius arm.
It won't articulate as well as a decent 3 link setup.

I agree but it would allow you to do the most difficult part while keeping it trail worthy.

I agree but it would allow you to do the most difficult part while keeping it trail worthy.

:shaking:

Could you start this out by putting in the third link then taking out one of the bolts in the radius arm.

As dumb as it first sounded to me, it actually would help on a few levels.

-Like he said, you can still drive it while doing the fab work.
-All the angles and dimensions; pinion, caster, centering axle, etc would pretty much be in place as he set up the new links.

When everything is in place, pull the RAs and weld the new link mounts to the axles.

Don't see any downside to doing it this way.

I set everything up on the stock suspension. Stuck in a 2" block under the springs.

Measured front the bottom of the frame to the top of the axles. Cut some 2x2 to length and welded it in. Then cut off all the stock brackets.

you can probably get some ballistic fab or poly performance brackets to work so you wont have to spend as much time making brackets.

or get a spare set of axle housings and go to town, then swappy swappy.

I would guess you will have at least 1 month of downtime from pulling it in to driving it out. you have to think about everything and stuff you didn't htink about...
Brake lines, breather tubes, driveshafts, abs sensor lines, moving stuff under the hood to get shocks to fit right.

Are you at the point where you arent getting the flex you need out of the radius arms?

I have acess to a plasma cutter but you are right those ballistic tabs are dirt cheap.

Are you at the point where you arent getting the flex you need out of the radius arms?

To my way of thinking, this is the real question that needs to be answered by the OP.

IMHO he is l-o-n-g way from maxing out the potential travel from the stock RA set up. Yes the 3-link will flex better, but for 33" rubber and 3" of lift, the RA are way good enough.

To my way of thinking, this is the real question that needs to be answered by the OP.

IMHO he is l-o-n-g way from maxing out the potential travel from the stock RA set up. Yes the 3-link will flex better, but for 33" rubber and 3" of lift, the RA are way good enough.

I completely disagree.

You don't know how annoying RA are untill you lose them. In the rover setup, sure, you can get them to go what 10in? But, in order to do it you have to have the rear maxed out first. The front always forces the rear to move first. Which is exactly opposite how it should be. Unless you drive backwards.

When I dumped even my modded RA front and added a stiff sway bar to the rear, the truck is completely different. Soooo much better and rediculously stable. If you have the means to lose the RA, do it.

I completely disagree.

You don't know how annoying RA are untill you lose them. In the rover setup, sure, you can get them to go what 10in? But, in order to do it you have to have the rear maxed out first. The front always forces the rear to move first. Which is exactly opposite how it should be. Unless you drive backwards.

When I dumped even my modded RA front and added a stiff sway bar to the rear, the truck is completely different. Soooo much better and rediculously stable. If you have the means to lose the RA, do it.


That's interesting because I have not found that to be the case in my rig. For a stock set up it is very well balanced front to rear. What you are describing sounds more like a Nissan front end.

I just think it needs to be kept in mind that the OP is wheeling on 33s, not 37s or 40s. I agree that he will be better off with a 3-link (mine is going that way with a set of Mogs) but, surely that is a few steps away in the evolution of his truck (and perhaps his capabilities as a wheeler?). I'm damn sure your truck didn't end up going from stock rubber to coil-overs and 39.5" Iroks overnight. In my experience it is often the driver and not the rig that sets the limits.

And was your experience with the stock RA when yours was a 90" wheel base or lengthened?

Micka.

That's interesting because I have not found that to be the case in my rig. For a stock set up it is very well balanced front to rear. What you are describing sounds more like a Nissan front end.

I just think it needs to be kept in mind that the OP is wheeling on 33s, not 37s or 40s. I agree that he will be better off with a 3-link (mine is going that way with a set of Mogs) but, surely that is a few steps away in the evolution of his truck (and perhaps his capabilities as a wheeler?). I'm damn sure your truck didn't end up going from stock rubber to coil-overs and 39.5" Iroks overnight. In my experience it is often the driver and not the rig that sets the limits.

And was your experience with the stock RA when yours was a 90" wheel base or lengthened?

Micka.

The RA are a binding system. The rear suspension is not and does not bind. It is impossible for it to be balanced as the front is not linear in the force it takes to travel. Therefor it forces the rear to travel first. It's simply the way it is.

The reason you think it was balanced stock is because it was less noticable with less travel. But it wasn't balanced.

Edit: Missed your question, wheelbase has no affect on it.

The RA are a binding system. The rear suspension is not and does not bind. It is impossible for it to be balanced as the front is not linear in the force it takes to travel. Therefor it forces the rear to travel first. It's simply the way it is.

The reason you think it was balanced stock is because it was less noticable with less travel. But it wasn't balanced.

Edit: Missed your question, wheelbase has no affect on it.Agree completely.
I have never seen a picture of a crossed up LR (w/ RAs, obviously) where F&R are equally stuffed.

Iadded a stiff sway bar to the rear,

What did you use for this?

P

What did you use for this?

P

I built one using a Toyota torsion bar. I'll post pics up in the cut time thread when I get home.

:beer:

I completely disagree.

You don't know how annoying RA are untill you lose them. In the rover setup, sure, you can get them to go what 10in? But, in order to do it you have to have the rear maxed out first. The front always forces the rear to move first. Which is exactly opposite how it should be. Unless you drive backwards.

When I dumped even my modded RA front and added a stiff sway bar to the rear, the truck is completely different. Soooo much better and rediculously stable. If you have the means to lose the RA, do it.

Basically , A radius arm setup turns the axle housing into a sway bar, But since the housing doesnt twist, the rubber bushings do the twisting.

Agree completely.
I have never seen a picture of a crossed up LR (w/ RAs, obviously) where F&R are equally stuffed.

If they aren't exactly equal, they are pretty close...


http://www.noots.org.uk/images/matt01.jpg

If they aren't exactly equal, they are pretty close...


http://www.noots.org.uk/images/matt01.jpg

Nope. The rear is maxed out.

You find a pic of a RA front maxed out and the rear not I will pay you one million Turkish Leera.

I completely disagree.

You don't know how annoying RA are untill you lose them. In the rover setup, sure, you can get them to go what 10in? But, in order to do it you have to have the rear maxed out first. The front always forces the rear to move first. Which is exactly opposite how it should be. Unless you drive backwards.

When I dumped even my modded RA front and added a stiff sway bar to the rear, the truck is completely different. Soooo much better and rediculously stable. If you have the means to lose the RA, do it.


I completely agree also,
what I was saying, is the OP at the point of needing balanced suspension articulation? is he running trails that warrant the modification? I would really venture to guess no.

I would, however, do something like frank or chicagodon and upgrade the axle's at the same time as linking the front and rear. if don was closer, i would lowball his axle setup and put it under my d2.

How much up and down travel will you get with radius arm stock and will you get much more johnny jointing the ends that connect to the frame? Looking at the stock radius arm I was thinking you could cut the end off then slide a piece of tubing over it. weld the hell out of it from the inside on the end that goes to the body then the outside where its lower on the arm. Slip in a threaded insert and make tabs in the existing mount locations or cut them off and mount new ones a little farther back. Just a thought. If it would improve anything. Seems as though it would. How much is the question. Is it more the axle side mount that binds or the frame side. I feel like I could mod the existing arms well enough. Do you think tht plug welds along the tube where its over the existing arm would be required? Or would that hurt the strength? With the other mods I have in mind this as much as I could probably get away with doing for the front for know. I didnt look at it real close but it looked like a 3 link would be a bit difficult in the front with how the exhaust runs. I guess i could turn the exhaust manifolds upside down and run them through the hood. lol. Might have trouble with inspection. Although i do live in WV. We dont even have any smog laws.

How much up and down travel will you get with radius arm stock and will you get much more johnny jointing the ends that connect to the frame? No, unless you make the arms much longer, and then still not really. Looking at the stock radius arm I was thinking you could cut the end off then slide a piece of tubing over it. weld the hell out of it from the inside on the end that goes to the body then the outside where its lower on the arm. Slip in a threaded insert and make tabs in the existing mount locations or cut them off and mount new ones a little farther back. Just a thought. Already did it and made the arm 8in longer. By itself it would do almost nothing. If it would improve anything. Seems as though it would. Not really. How much is the question. Not much. Is it more the axle side mount that binds or the frame side. Axle side. It is all in the axle side. A longer arm will lessen the bind on the axle side, but not by much. I feel like I could mod the existing arms well enough. Do you think tht plug welds along the tube where its over the existing arm would be required? No, but wouldn't hurt. Or would that hurt the strength? With the other mods I have in mind this as much as I could probably get away with doing for the front for know. I didnt look at it real close but it looked like a 3 link would be a bit difficult in the front with how the exhaust runs. I guess i could turn the exhaust manifolds upside down and run them through the hood. lol. Might have trouble with inspection. Although i do live in WV. We dont even have any smog laws.

.

Nope. The rear is maxed out.

You find a pic of a RA front maxed out and the rear not I will pay you one million Turkish Leera.

The front tire looks to just be touching the ground to me, so that is maxed...

There is a huge difference between the narrow and wide arms. It is very important to know which ones are being discussed...

I DO agree though that a stock narrow arm RA rig is not completely balanced, but it is not far off.

Edit, here is a picture of my rig when is was basically stock. Front tire is off the ground (I think), rear, not maxed yet, but close. I'm level, but the rear has quite a bit more travel.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/Red90rover/Poseur_flex.jpg

I completely agree also,
what I was saying, is the OP at the point of needing balanced suspension articulation? is he running trails that warrant the modification? I would really venture to guess no.


How do you figure that? I have ruled out a 3 link at the moment because im getting another arb for the front. I want to have the most I can out of my setup, if its only doing some bushing/slight mods to RA's then I want to do it regardless of the trails I run. Even flex is safer flex.


You don't know how annoying RA are untill you lose them. In the rover setup, sure, you can get them to go what 10in? But, in order to do it you have to have the rear maxed out first. The front always forces the rear to move first. Which is exactly opposite how it should be. Unless you drive backwards.

When I dumped even my modded RA front and added a stiff sway bar to the rear, the truck is completely different. Soooo much better and rediculously stable. If you have the means to lose the RA, do it.

I agree, although right now I do not have modded RA's and only a ghetto rear link mod. If I ordered/fab'ed my own RA with corrected castor angle would that help me significantly?

-William

The front tire looks to just be touching the ground to me, so that is maxed...

There is a huge difference between the narrow and wide arms. It is very important to know which ones are being discussed...

I DO agree though that a stock narrow arm RA rig is not completely balanced, but it is not far off.

Edit, here is a picture of my rig when is was basically stock. Front tire is off the ground (I think), rear, not maxed yet, but close. I'm level, but the rear has quite a bit more travel.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/Red90rover/Poseur_flex.jpg

The rear looks maxed, the front not at all.

I had the narrow radius arms. They are not balanced. They can't be. The RA cause a progressive rate. You don't have to believe me. Find an RTI ramp and drive up it forword, and then backwards. You will find that the truck will go a lot farther in reverse.

How do you figure that? I have ruled out a 3 link at the moment because im getting another arb for the front. I want to have the most I can out of my setup, if its only doing some bushing/slight mods to RA's then I want to do it regardless of the trails I run. Even flex is safer flex.



I agree, although right now I do not have modded RA's and only a ghetto rear link mod. If I ordered/fab'ed my own RA with corrected castor angle would that help me significantly?

-William

Don't let my reality come across as negativity. The rover RA's don't suck, they just are not and will not be as good as a 3 link.

I wheeled the hardest trails out there with a modded RA system for years. I rolled a lot, but other than that, it was fine. Do the mod I posted in this thread. It is near free, and works. KC came up with it. The correct caster angle is good for vibes and will lessen your steering stress, but won't affect what you are after.

Don't let my reality come across as negativity. The rover RA's don't suck, they just are not and will not be as good as a 3 link.

I wheeled the hardest trails out there with a modded RA system for years. I rolled a lot, but other than that, it was fine. Do the mod I posted in this thread. It is near free, and works. KC came up with it. The correct caster angle is good for vibes and will lessen your steering stress, but won't affect what you are after.

Well I just backed my car up my "flexin' spot" and saw the RA's maxed out! But my rear 3link was not maxed out. It was pretty damn good! But when I drove my car front first the RA's didnt flex out near as much, while my back dropped out a lot.

The safest thing to do is to get my RA's to get as much flex as my back, which is entirely possible the way my rear is set-up right now. Im thinking for when Im doing trail I can remove the front bolt from the passengers side Radius Arm. Im going to try this on my flexin' post and see the difference. Is it dangerous to myself or vehicle to drive this way off road only??

Well I just backed my car up my "flexin' spot" and saw the RA's maxed out! But my rear 3link was not maxed out. It was pretty damn good! But when I drove my car front first the RA's didnt flex out near as much, while my back dropped out a lot.

They are not balanced. They can't be. The RA cause a progressive rate. You don't have to believe me. Find an RTI ramp and drive up it forword, and then backwards. You will find that the truck will go a lot farther in reverse.

The safest thing to do is to get my RA's to get as much flex as my back, which is entirely possible the way my rear is set-up right now. Im thinking for when Im doing trail I can remove the front bolt from the passengers side Radius Arm. Im going to try this on my flexin' post and see the difference. Is it dangerous to myself or vehicle to drive this way off road only??

Man, It's like I'm psychic! :laughing:

Is it dangerous? Dunno, what do you wheel like? If your like me, and you crawl all day, then race your buds at breakneck speeds back to the lake bed to see who can grab the first cold beer, then yeah, it's dangerous.

If you are a normal Land Rover owner and you crawl up dirt roads and then stop to grind up gourmet coffee and sip chilled cognac before talking about how you're better than other people, then yeah, you'll be fine. :flipoff2:

Man, It's like I'm psychic! :laughing:

Is it dangerous? Dunno, what do you wheel like? If your like me, and you crawl all day, then race your buds at breakneck speeds back to the lake bed to see who can grab the first cold beer, then yeah, it's dangerous.

If you are a normal Land Rover owner and you crawl up dirt roads and then stop to grind up gourmet coffee and sip chilled cognac before talking about how you're better than other people, then yeah, you'll be fine. :flipoff2:

This :D

hahaha I only wheel on the weekends and drive the car around town, im in VA so no epic rock-crawling (compared to CO ect..) but my main concern is if I have my front RA mount disconnected while wheeling is that going to move around and break/bend something else on the truck? Or should I shut-up and test it out?

There is no way Im gonna drive on the road with the bolt disconnected, I would do it at the trail and coming off the trail.

Thanks Buck.

[QUOTE=williambrea;10328576]This :D

im in VA so no epic rock-crawling QUOTE]

Try Gore VA. I was there all day today and its as nasty as you want. They have level 1-7 trails. 1 fire roads. 5 lockers and winches reccomended. 6-7 Rock buggies and the like. You tube 'The cove' Gore Virginia for some gnarly shit

I rolled a lot, but other than that, it was fine.

Kinda like saying "I got crabs every time I was with her, but other then that, it was fine"

Kinda like saying "I got crabs every time I was with her, but other then that, it was fine"

Rolling is quite a bit of fun, crabs, not so much. :flipoff2:

Well I just backed my car up my "flexin' spot" and saw the RA's maxed out! But my rear 3link was not maxed out. It was pretty damn good! But when I drove my car front first the RA's didnt flex out near as much, while my back dropped out a lot.

The safest thing to do is to get my RA's to get as much flex as my back, which is entirely possible the way my rear is set-up right now. Im thinking for when Im doing trail I can remove the front bolt from the passengers side Radius Arm. Im going to try this on my flexin' post and see the difference. Is it dangerous to myself or vehicle to drive this way off road only??

So does anybody wanna help me out? :confused:

Y link the front.

Y link the front.

haha a 1 link? I thought about doing that but coming from the front of the frame back to the axle. But to much shiz in the way, any pics of that? An X link looks pretty simple as well but I would need to get a new panhard rod.

But really, If I can pull a bolt and get good performance then I want to do that! So do you know anything bout that?

I was thinking I could build the link tower for the y link where the bump stop pad is on the axle. Same time make my new longer bump stops.

So does anybody wanna help me out? :confused:

Take the bolt out. If you feel unsafe, do something else. Report back.

Once again, the mod I posted in this thread is easy, cheap, and works for a gap fix.

Y links can flex.

http://www.jeeps-offroad.com/reader-rigs/BadgersXJ/9_2_04_05

Y links can flex.

http://www.jeeps-offroad.com/reader-rigs/BadgersXJ/9_2_04_05

Modded Rover radius arms can too. You just have to force them. Notice in the pic you posted the rear is off the ground.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd299/buckon35s/P1011127.jpg

Modded Rover radius arms can too. You just have to force them. Notice in the pic you posted the rear is off the ground.

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd299/buckon35s/P1011127.jpg

Nothing says "build me a better cage" like the above picture. Nice RiG

Nothing says "build me a better cage" like the above picture. Nice RiG

I disagree.


:flipoff2:

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd299/buckon35s/P1011123.jpg

Xj's have leafs in the rear. Not a whole lot of flex comparred to link. Thats an awesome pic. Any of the recovery.

So does anybody wanna help me out? :confused:
I though you question was answered back at post #88.

I tried removing the front bolt from the left radius arm on my disco to see how it was. It felt ok driving with care on road - I don't know how it would behave in a crash-stop. Off road, no problems were noticeable. I never left it like that as this is my daily driver and I have a rangie project for more serious off roading.

If you want to try remove/replace the bolt at or close to the start/end of the off road trail, then there should be no problem IMHO. It doesn't take very long if you have the tools ready.

Xj's have leafs in the rear. Not a whole lot of flex comparred to link. Thats an awesome pic. Any of the recovery.

More importantly did you give the truck a good scratch on the belly for bein' a good dog and not falling all the way down the hill?

3" RTE's rear, 3" RTE front's. Extended jointed lower links, three link front(combination SG/RT) front (selectable) and rear (detroit) lockers.... RETAINED. it's all you need for a full bodied truck. Except for me being stupid it's done everything I've asked of it and could easily do more. Any more and it becomes a Truggy..

More importantly did you give the truck a good scratch on the belly for bein' a good dog and not falling all the way down the hill?

3" RTE's rear, 3" RTE front's. Extended jointed lower links, three link front(combination SG/RT) front (selectable) and rear (detroit) lockers.... RETAINED. it's all you need for a full bodied truck. Except for me being stupid it's done everything I've asked of it and could easily do more. Any more and it becomes a Truggy..

This, what size tires are you running?

also I found these beauties!
http://www.d-90.com/prod/hinge1.jpg
Im making some of these!! :flipoff2:

This, what size tires are you running?

also I found these beauties!
http://www.d-90.com/prod/hinge1.jpg
Im making some of these!! :flipoff2:

35's now, was on 37's but the weight was too much for go fast stuff.
From experience (Bronco's), and you will find it to be true, this type of link will cause you to have nightmares about a sidehill more than 30 degrees. Say the jointed link is on the downhill side and you touch the brakes... It's all about physics, you're gonna fall over. Very unbalanced. My disco has done well past 45 degrees (yes I was sucKing cloth) and felt stable (good spotter)
The wheelbase is 103".

As butch and as a PITA as they where the SG three link was a great bolt on product. I improved it a touch with materials and length but that's about it.

I would consider a long arm set up much like a TJ to be the next best thing, but a better solution that the three link with a combination of mechanical and polybushed joints to create flex and STABILITY. Keep in mind this is all about stuffing this crap under a full bodied car with about 3" of lift.. Go higher and you really need to take the tire off the roof and even remove the roof to get a decent COG. Then do a front four link.

My 110 with cranked RA's uses all of a front 12" shock and could really use a 14" in the rear but it's a boat and I don't care to beat it that much, and the RA bushings are shot so it flexes nice but drives like crap.. The Disco has 14's all around and could use something longer.

The rear looks maxed, the front not at all.

I had the narrow radius arms. They are not balanced. They can't be. The RA cause a progressive rate. You don't have to believe me. Find an RTI ramp and drive up it forword, and then backwards. You will find that the truck will go a lot farther in reverse.

although i agree that in standard trim they are not balanced, you can make them ALMOST balanced by using the appropriate rated springs front and rear so that under close to max compression they exhibit simillar rates.
here`s a piccy of mine, front is definitely max'd out, rear very nearly so. And yes, forward motion had stopped (open diffs), but the rear was still pushing down on both sides but jsut with not quite enough force to carry me forwards. Reckon i had another 1/2" uptravel NSR and 1" downtravel OSR and nothing left at the front.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2436/3940247273_b3f68a534f_o.jpg

Rolling is quite a bit of fun, crabs, not so much. :flipoff2:Actually a great analogy:

Rolling is fun; fixing/paying for the damage afterwards... less so.
Getting crabs is fun; having crabs... far less so. :grinpimp:

although i agree that in standard trim they are not balanced, you can make them ALMOST balanced by using the appropriate rated springs front and rear so that under close to max compression they exhibit simillar rates.
here`s a piccy of mine, front is definitely max'd out, rear very nearly so. And yes, forward motion had stopped (open diffs), but the rear was still pushing down on both sides but jsut with not quite enough force to carry me forwards. Reckon i had another 1/2" uptravel NSR and 1" downtravel OSR and nothing left at the front.[/IMG]

You guys crack me up. If that rear was any more stuffed it would pop out the top of the roof. :laughing:

Actually a great analogy:

Rolling is fun; fixing/paying for the damage afterwards... less so.
Getting crabs is fun; having crabs... far less so. :grinpimp:

I stand corrected! :D

I've read a couple post about guys building a "standard" 3 link setup; two lower links/one upper.

I'm looking down past the engine on both sides and see no possible way to get an upper link past the exhaust.
Granted, I'm running Hedman long tube headers but I don't think the stock exhaust, with the high mounted cats, gave any more room than I have.

I suppose I could go forward, in front of the bumper, up over the hood, and anchor into the A pillar.
Vertical separation might be a bit excessive though. :D

You guys crack me up. If that rear was any more stuffed it would pop out the top of the roof. :laughing:


that corner is NOT on the bumpstop or coil bound, there was still a little bit left of upward travel. Other side was NOT on full shock extension either. However front right WAS on the bumpstop and front left WAS on full extension.
read what you want from that. :shaking:


edited to add: cant actually do that anymore, cos i dont use those springs on the front now. They were too soft for my liking and made corners on tarmac 'interesting'......

I've read a couple post about guys building a "standard" 3 link setup; two lower links/one upper.

I'm looking down past the engine on both sides and see no possible way to get an upper link past the exhaust.
Granted, I'm running Hedman long tube headers but I don't think the stock exhaust, with the high mounted cats, gave any more room than I have.

Most people have diesels. Single exhaust....

that corner is NOT on the bumpstop .....

I believe you!



Thats because the tire was jammed up against your inner fenderwell! :laughing: :flipoff2:

35's now, was on 37's but the weight was too much for go fast stuff.
From experience (Bronco's), and you will find it to be true, this type of link will cause you to have nightmares about a sidehill more than 30 degrees. Say the jointed link is on the downhill side and you touch the brakes... It's all about physics, you're gonna fall over. Very unbalanced. My disco has done well past 45 degrees (yes I was sucKing cloth) and felt stable (good spotter)
The wheelbase is 103".

As butch and as a PITA as they where the SG three link was a great bolt on product. I improved it a touch with materials and length but that's about it.

I would consider a long arm set up much like a TJ to be the next best thing, but a better solution that the three link with a combination of mechanical and polybushed joints to create flex and STABILITY. Keep in mind this is all about stuffing this crap under a full bodied car with about 3" of lift.. Go higher and you really need to take the tire off the roof and even remove the roof to get a decent COG. Then do a front four link.

My 110 with cranked RA's uses all of a front 12" shock and could really use a 14" in the rear but it's a boat and I don't care to beat it that much, and the RA bushings are shot so it flexes nice but drives like crap.. The Disco has 14's all around and could use something longer.

Good Point about the modded arm, it will get good flex on a ramp but for real world situations your right it can be a problem. I might still do this mod anyways because I usually never do steep sideways travel, mostly uphill ruts and things of nature. I think that it can be beneficial to the cars performance as long as its applied in the proper situation.

Anybody know about X link? That looks much easier to design than the 3 link, with the only problem being the panhard rod but if it was relocated then an X link would be very do-able. Anybody have experience on this?

Just convert to leaf springs, I'm getting nearly 18inches of travel from my front axle, nothing special done.. just rear springs and 14" shocks :flipoff2:

http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt173/Toy-Roverlander/PICT0671.jpg
http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt173/Toy-Roverlander/PICT0672.jpg


btw, rear is still standard stuff, will be changed this weekend.. 14" shocks, longer shackles and custom propshaft:D..

Just convert to leaf springs, I'm getting nearly 18inches of travel from my front axle, nothing special done.. just rear springs and 14" shocks :flipoff2:

http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt173/Toy-Roverlander/PICT0671.jpg
http://i609.photobucket.com/albums/tt173/Toy-Roverlander/PICT0672.jpg


btw, rear is still standard stuff, will be changed this weekend.. 14" shocks, longer shackles and custom propshaft:D..

18in of travel :eek::eek:

Wow, I can't get anywhere near that with 16in coilovers. :laughing::flipoff2:

18in of travel :eek::eek:

Wow, I can't get anywhere near that with 16in coilovers. :laughing::flipoff2:

Good ol' leaf springs:smokin:

Yeah, so far I've got nearly 18" at the front and 14.5" at the rear. So total is 32.5". I'm hoping to get around 36" with the 14" shocks and longer shackles at the back.

Not bad, good enough for what I'm doing.. suspension travel is almost equal front and back and the suspension is nice and soft.. leans a bit in the corners, but hey.... you can't have everything.....

Good ol' leaf springs:smokin:

Yeah, so far I've got nearly 18" at the front and 14.5" at the rear. So total is 32.5". I'm hoping to get around 36" with the 14" shocks and longer shackles at the back.

Not bad, good enough for what I'm doing.. suspension travel is almost equal front and back and the suspension is nice and soft.. leans a bit in the corners, but hey.... you can't have everything.....

I was just ribbing you for the mistake. Travel is not the same as articulation.

I was just ribbing you for the mistake. Travel is not the same as articulation.

aah.... my bad... Hey, I'm Dutch, can you blame me :D? (don't answer that:flipoff2:)

aah.... my bad... Hey, I'm Dutch, can you blame me :D? (don't answer that:flipoff2:)

My wifes whole family is Dutch! She's 6'1 strawberry blond and smoken hot. I blame you guys for nothing! :smokin:



Except being nuetral but we'll just let that one go. :flipoff2:

I tried removing the front bolt from the left radius arm on my disco to see how it was. It felt ok driving with care on road - I don't know how it would behave in a crash-stop. Off road, no problems were noticeable. I never left it like that as this is my daily driver and I have a rangie project for more serious off roading.

If you want to try remove/replace the bolt at or close to the start/end of the off road trail, then there should be no problem IMHO. It doesn't take very long if you have the tools ready.

This is what I was looking for! :beer:
Im going to try this and will report back, if i can get my damn bolt out of the Radius Arm :( I tried to loosen that thing for a good while with no success. Guess I gotta get the impact wrench out :shaking:

http://i309.photobucket.com/albums/kk386/williambrea/2.jpg

http://i309.photobucket.com/albums/kk386/williambrea/3.jpg

http://i309.photobucket.com/albums/kk386/williambrea/4.jpg

http://i309.photobucket.com/albums/kk386/williambrea/4.jpg

http://i309.photobucket.com/albums/kk386/williambrea/6.jpg

This is with radius arms stock with 2inch lift and 1 inch bdoy lift, If i could get the front to flex like it did when I went backwards I would be happy with that..... I have ome shocks which are roughly 10 inches of travel