I have been toying with this idea for quite a while and i have decided to make a prototype of this 2-link it in principle is the equivalent of rockstompers new rear with a few twists.
the main connecting link mounted to the diff ( on 3 axis) controls torque and triangulation, with a single link stopping radial movement. The benefits of the main link is 1 that it mounts directly under the t/case helping to give controllable drive shaft angles while 2 acting as a skid plate for both the diff and t/shaft.
The main plate is to be pressed from Bissalloy360 high-tensile wear plate(NKK360 equiv.). This is in parts just a fancy wristed radius arm but the extra benefits should surely help in a competition rig. The second control link is to mount at an equal offset to the main link in relation to the chassis center line. Both links mount to the chassis by knuckle arrangements allowing 360deg of free movement.
please if you have any thoughts or suggestions on modifying or improving this concept please advise.....
http://pics.montypics.com/1MadEngineer/2002-10-09/full_assy.jpg
(forgive the drawing as it was a quick layout to check angles and rotational arcs..)

Greg

This suspension will actually function very similiarly to the suspension that Soni Honneger used on his old flatfender jeep... The slickrock Spider or something like that. He kinda reversed the links from what you have... diff side had a radius arm, tube side had a link that made a Y that located the axle left to right. Nothing inherantly wrong with the design... travel will be straight up and down, instead of moving in an arc, which will be good with hydrualic steering, not so much with a conventional linkage. Biggest flaw I see is that the roll center is now off center, so the truck will have different handling characteristics left and right...

I can't tell what kind of attchment your using at the frame or axle on the large plate link............but

There is this guy I wheel with that has a Y shaped link made of square tubing (large) it is solidly welded to the axle tubes on center. This same link converges under the output of the trasfercase with a Ball and Socket type joint. I have never seen anything like it- I think it is from a tractor/or 18 wheeler application, it is huge... the ball is 3 inches or so in diameter and the joint is two pieces the bolt together and to a beefy crossmember.

It works very well and only requires a track bar, Zero axle wrap and little under steer. He is running coils on top of the square tubing with 9012's.

Not sure if this is even related but......

Way too much anti squat. Axle hop will be very bad. IMO any radius arm setup in the rear is a bad thing. You need parallel links (or sort of parallel) to control axle rotation.

Sam

If the arm s long enough the anti-squat will be negligable.
Many old american vehicles had this set up, called a torque tube suspension. The driveshaft ran inside a tubular version of your triangular link and pivited at the centre of the tranny output. Used a panhard instead of your rod.
Ken

http://www.yager.net/zukin/new/dscf0560.jpg (edit: added pic/ not link)

kinda like this? (pic doesnt show my panhard bar...)

I broke it due to weak materials, design seemed to work well on my zuke before it bent things..... (didnt add the "skid material" either)

Im using a 2.5" johny joint at the front pivot.

I wouldn't run this on a large heavy vehicle with out some thought as to having all forces in the suspension into 1 spot..

Anti squat wasn't bad at all. With my 1.3L/4:1 t-case/5.29s/35MTRs When i was jam'n on it in the street to "test" is at most I could only get the lift the suspension about 1" or so.... That was a 5k rpm dump in 1st gear low....

Here's what im fixing... strengthing the lower arm, and beefing other things up..

NOW the cool part.... REAR STEER !!!

Long term plans are to include using a small ram or sorts on the rear panhard bar to push/pull the axle 3-4" in either direction.

*This I fully tested when i broke :) it shifted things hard to the left side and man turning that way was awsome... Not like a true rear steer but an articulated joint set up.....

Again all things in perspective i have a 2500# buggy that doesnt see much road use...
-yag

http://www.phnet.fi/public/mika.jussilainen/kuvat/gaz/gazpera.JPG http://www.phnet.fi/public/mika.jussilainen/kuvat/gaz/gazetukolmio.JPG

i think the best part off my suspension system is that you can jump to rocks and never have to worry about broken parts.
and it slides nicely over the rocks.......

Glad im not the only one that thinks this set up is cool with many side benefits !!!

Got any close ups of your front pivot?

I should have built mine stronger like your setup... Lightweight is good only to a point.....

thanks -yag

Glad im not the only one that thinks this set up is cool with many side benefits !!!

Got any close ups of your front pivot?

I should have built mine stronger like your setup... Lightweight is good only to a point.....

thanks -yag

The setup will still suck IMO.

zukipuke - you say it doesent lift really bad but lifting 1in on flat ground is very, very bad. Wait till you point the thing up hill and you will be talking 3 or four inches. It will hop like a bastared and the rear will always try to walk under your rig.

Slowzuki - the arms would have join up somewhere near the front of the transfer case and the mount point would have to be very low IMO to get the sort of antisquat that most good multilink run with. Its just not going to work.


Whats the advantage of doing a setup like this?? The only one I can see is that it doesent take up any room (its very low profile) so that you will be able to cart heaps of shiat in the back when you go down to the shops. Which is the exact same reason car manufactures use this type of rear setup.

Sam

Originally posted by ZAG
http://www.phnet.fi/public/mika.jussilainen/kuvat/gaz/gazetukolmio.JPG

i think the best part off my suspension system is that you can jump to rocks and never have to worry about broken parts.
and it slides nicely over the rocks.......

I think the best part of your suspension system is the duct tape on the tire and the paint job, bling bling!

Just kidding, looks to be very interesting, but I too would be concerned about anti-squat.

I'm contemplating a coil rear suspension for one of my club members, a Bronco II with Early Bronco Dana 44 and 9", mild 302, 35's max.

Anyway, we'll be running the standard Ford Radius arm trac bar setup up front, and I'd like to set up the rear the same way. I think with the mild staic ride height and possibly lengthened radius arms it could work out well, maybe not for near vertical slick-rock climbs, but for the lame-duck muddy rocky trails Michigan has to offer it should work and ride quite well.

the 2 link under A CJ7 we built climb's very well with no hopping... Its a 2 link with extended radius arms and 1/4 elliptical with a panhard par... works perfect.

Mike-

Originally posted by 68BRONCO

This same link converges under the output of the trasfercase with a Ball and Socket type joint. I have never seen anything like it- I think it is from a tractor/or 18 wheeler application, it is huge... the ball is 3 inches or so in diameter and the joint is two pieces the bolt together and to a beefy crossmember.



I'll bet the ball/socket joint came from a road mantainer/blade/grader/Du-all (same thingy, just depends on what part of the country you're in)

They use them to mount the leveling blade/ring, and they are mad strong.

I'd be hesitent to use that suspension on anything heavier then a jeep, but it looks killer. I'd sure go w/ a regular panhard bar, rather then that rod thingy, though.

drawing a blank whats the name......:confused:
Doesn't wann the older production tube buggies run this type of suspension the scorpion or whatever.

I like the idea of the skid plate protecting the driveshaft.
Couldn't the vere so popular x 4 link setup a lot of people are running these days be somewhat adapted to run a skid plate that on swivel type mounts so the links can still move seperately.
sounds like a bit of work but it'd be the best of set up all around.

Thanks for all the feedback and pics guys, its great to see other people pushing the envelope...
From the info in your replys it shows that it can be done successfully, i suppose that is why the basic principle (radius arms of sort) are used in so many vehicles ( landrover disco, land cruiser front & bundera, bronco.........). Although i am only loading the vehicle at 1 point it is further forward and closer to the center of the rig, therefore the torque plane is much better than most factory radius arm vehicles.

thanks again guys...

Greg..

All I can say is find out about antisquat before you start cutting.

Sam

Ok front 2 link will give varying degrees of anti-dive on braking and will squat under accel

rear 2 link gives varying anti-squat (lift) under accel and squats under braking.

Run links to low under vehicle centre of mass and minimal effects.

Yup jacking could still occur due to the arc the axle travels through.

Off topic,
Did Walker Evans trailing arm front setup jack badly under accel?

Originally posted by zukipuke
Glad im not the only one that thinks this set up is cool with many side benefits !!!

Got any close ups of your front pivot?

I should have built mine stronger like your setup... Lightweight is good only to a point.....

thanks -yag http://www.phnet.fi/public/mika.jussilainen/kuvat/gaz/gaz%20alusta%202.jpg

Here is one. the "pivot" is from big hydraulik sylinder.you can replase the center ball if it brakes and it haves a grease fitting.......

i`m very happy off this setup it works very fine in all conditions, exept when runnin wast, i mean over 80 km/h.

never had any bad jumpin effect.

was just talking to a mate that works on earthmoving equipment and he said the bins are made of bizalloy, very strong yet brittle, he thinks in suspension when it wears and fatigues it will crack.


anyone?


NICK

correct nic - bisalloy is strong but when hit hard enough will crack - eg brittle

Originally posted by NIC
was just talking to a mate that works on earthmoving equipment and he said the bins are made of bizalloy, very strong yet brittle, he thinks in suspension when it wears and fatigues it will crack.


anyone?


NICK
"BINS" Do you mean the balljoint housing.:confused:
my balljoints have been under my gaz for 2 years and never had any failure..........:D

Remember the big impliment stuff is made for equipment that weighs 3-4 even 10 times what our trucks weigh and are made to survive Billy Joe Bob's thoughts on "I can do it!". There are a lot of big heavy trucks running the proposed set up most of which when you look at them you say no way will this work, but the do and do it well. You can scutinize things until its a bad idea, I don't care what kind of suspention you build. If you don't mind trying something more than once try it that's how we learn what works and what doesn't, the worst you have to do is cut it off and try again. And besides what doesn't work for one truck or driver may kick your butt by another truck or driver.

there is a member of my club (John Loyd) who runs a similar setup... Seems to work quite well, and he competes in ProRock with it...