Josh and I have been tossing theories and ideas around about suspensions.
Has anyone done a 3 link, using long lower arms kinda like on the front of an 80, with coils at all 4 corners?
We were thinking of using 2'2 heavy square tubing, with a giant heim at the frame end, and clamping them to axles, then a panhard rod to keep the axles centered under the rig.
We even thought of using stock car upper coil plates with an adjustable rod to be able to set ride height.
Thoughts?
I was thinking in theory at least, you would want to make the arms to attach to the frame at about the same area as the driveshafts, correct?
Butch

Sounds kinda similar to Scott's 2 link idea.
Get a hold of him at rockstomper.com and ask him about it..

Peter Straub's Tippy FJ60 might be set up similar to what you are describing. I cannot remember if it was 3 or 4 link. You might post to the LCML and ask him.

My friend did something like that on his zuki-buggy...

one big joint under the t-case, with 2 bars going out to the axle. Also had upper links, and a panhard. He abandoned it after the lower link bent and folded on a rock at the big dogs' run. Course, it wasn't butch-built...

It was a neat idea though... worked well enough till it collapsed.

Butch,

This sounds similar to the set up that W’ at Over the Hill 4x4 uses on some of his suspensions. The lower arms are welded in place to the outer ends of the axel and taper to a “v” mounting at one centerd location on the frame. The mounting point is a large 2 7/8” hitch ball with two cups machined (3D milled, like a mold) to encase the hitch ball. (Bolts hold the two half’s together). The front end then has a BEEFY panhard bar to keep the axel on track. The suspension is then added in by use of air bags or coils on pads. Right now there a two trucks running one set up of each (another one just as a frame in their shop). W’s personal pig has this set up on both ends with air bags at all four corners. The system has crazy articulation!

I 've seen the type that you are talking about Mark, however we were going to run the arms parrallell to the frame, or taper in slightly.......very much like the 80's front, only with longer arms. Those SOB's work...
Tippy's rear is a 5 link, (article in TT), don't know about the front.
Butch

Butch,

Why the square tubing?

CK

Originally posted by fj40charles
Butch,

Why the square tubing?

CK

Strength and the ease to use square u bolts and clamp them onto existing spring pads, it would be very easy to tweak and get them up out of the rocks, or for pinion angle, nother reason is simply open the top half and drill for the lower shock mounts.
Butch

Originally posted by texican
I 've seen the type that you are talking about Mark, however we were going to run the arms parrallell to the frame, or taper in slightly.......very much like the 80's front, only with longer arms. Those SOB's work...
Tippy's rear is a 5 link, (article in TT), don't know about the front.
Butch

Hmm… got ya. Yup they must work well, the 80’s seam to go places they shouldn’t for a mall hauler. I have been thinking three link with Racerunner springs/shocks for my front end. Kind of spendy so it might be awhile!

So I take it you and Josh are going to build a buggy? Good to hear you're wanting to go with 3 or 4 link. You know some people have been preaching this all along....:D :D :D

CK

tex there have been quite a few similar susp. done, let me think, the long travel susp on the TJ's is like that, cant remember name, but its the same type 3 link with coils. umm oh maybe year before last there was a rig in one of the off road rags with an interesting similar idea, he had a long, big square rear that bolted right onto the spring pads and then at the frame and he had i think airbags.
than there are the 80 series and rovers which are that way. i know i'm forgetting a few, but your right, they do work well.

I think you'd need to allow at least a little movement (bushings)at the axle side of the ams, otherwise I fear the thing won't articulate well. Far too many hyperstatic degrees left I believe...

You need to figure out the coils locations too : under/ inside/ outside/ of the frame. The latter would be my setup of choice, but could be tricky with the narrow 40 series front diff. What would you use as a front axles ?

I have a slightly different idea for the axles mounts for the links...
Why not...
I really think the solid mount is not such a good idea...
----------
= $0.02

me and my partner did a JEEP i know death too jeeps but it paid the bills, with a inverted y 3 link no track bar one with 4 in tj frt coils one w 2in tj coils both very big 44 and 38's solid bushings top johnny joints on e axle works very wellhttp://www.outbackoffroad.net/galleries/aarons%20yj/FrameSet.htm www.outbackoffroad.net 066t-bone@usa.net (06t-bone@usa.net) e-mail me if you got any ? i can tell you more

The setup you described sounds basically like a Ford radius arm/ panhard bar suspension. The only reason that they can articulate is that there is give in the c-bushings where the radius arms mount to the axle. Without this "give" the whole axle housing would have to twist along its length in order for the suspension to articulate. That is why some Broncos run the wristed radius arms, so that on one side there is nothing to keep the housing from twisting.

Great comments, keep 'em coming, I know the Ford front end with the c bushings well, and have done some of the link style radius arms, they even make one that has a pin that you remove that goes on the passenger side, lets it hinge.
The 80's and the Rover, however use a solid connection, and these will still flex like crazy, in my mind, the only way this is possible, is the axle tube twisting?
Kling on , damn that Jeep on 44's is frickin' tall, I want mine low, and wide, kinda like Nolen's rig, no rear tub, and no front fenders so it won't have to clear shit.
Butch

Butch,

The 80s and rovers aren't really solid, there are bushings in there.
Much easier to compress poly or rubber bushings than to twist or bend a link or the axle housing itself. Put bushings somewhere at the axle end, otherwise it'll just suck.

Bye,

yea he wants to cross rivers and fall out :beer: :beer: :beer: the coils are mounted under the frame in it the red one there mounted "tuckedup" in the frame with a lower axle mount.the one thing i would say for sure is keep the lower mounts in front of the axle light the red one is on the rear and has alot of wrap. but the inverted y keep the axle centerd real well. and by the way all the "solid" mount rig your talkin about still have bushings at the axle ... stange mounts... i think johny joints from currie and polly bushing using pipe to mach the polly bushings would be easyer to make. but that might just be me:D

klingon, what type tubing do you use for the links, medusa, is using sched 80 pipe for his, do you make the links threaded and adjustable or just weld the joints in?
I guess if I'm going to put bushings at the axles, which after thinking about it the 80's do have 2 small spring type bushings (although I would swerar the Rovers are solid...but I've only ben under a couple) I may as well use round tubing.
Butch

On a purpose built off road competition motor I built using the very narrow Daihatsu FJ70 axles ( Taft in the US ? ) I located the back axle using parralel arms each side, 36" long x 1" box & heim joints - nuthin fancy. And an "A" frame to tha centre of the axle, same construction.
The springs were Volvo station wagon rears set into the chassis using short sections of 5" tube, this got the springs inset to give clearance when articulating.
LandRover 90" shocks finished the job.

And it worked, I had that much articulation I had to restrict it with straps.

I reckoned that Volvo's carry so much crap they should be strong enough for competitive trials !

Dave

yeah the three link has been a popular conversion for the front of rovers specifically d-90s. Works pretty well, but if you make the arms long enough you can actually get the flex of a three link without the instability of a three link. On my truck the arms are lengthened about 16" in the front and about 12" in the rear to heim joints mounts on the bottom of the frame. I would recommend againt mounting them there because I have bent all of my links several times. I would run the links about 2" above the bottom of the frame line if I were to do it over again. I must say it's nice not to drag shackles with the coils in the front and rear. On my 40 it still has the leaves front and rear but I am serious considering converting the front to rover springs (have a couple sets sitting around) to get rid of the front approach angle problem. yeah I know a spring over would also alleviate that, but I really like the coils on my rover. There are several different types of three links on rovers that people on running. I would say the most common is the safari gard which has the third link mounted on top of the tie rod. I personaly don't like this setup because it is a real pain is anything breaks in the frontend (have to disassemble the majority of the three link to work on it) There are a couple of people running three links on the top of the axle and I think this is the most effective although it is tough to do because of clearance issues. If you are building a buggy though you can mount the motor wherever you choose and you don't have to worry about clearance. You can check out several pics of three linked trucks flexing out at safarigard.com and at defender90.com Yes a beefy panhard is neccessary but luckily those come standard on LRNA vehicles. Best of luck on the project. I can probably find some pics of my truck somewhere to show you what I did on my truck but I think that you are pretty much swayed towards a three link which is slightly better off-road although nowhere near as stable on road as an extended radius arm vehicle. By the way as stated above rovers like broncos are not solidly mounted to the axle they use rubber bushing connected to a bracket in two places on the axle. Another way to gain articulation without sacraficing on road performance is by moving the brackets closer together. best of luck on the project.

-ben

pm me if you want some more details

I'm thinking 80 control arms might just be the way to go. Strong, I beam aluminum, with bushings in both ends already.
There's a boneyard close that has a pair of each front and rear. But if I go there I think why not just use 80 axles and from there why not just use an 80 frame and then I need an FZE motor.

Hell, I just need another 80 I can cut the body off of. :D