articulation?

[John Witherspoon]

OK,
I usually post about a project, but this is about my 98 Disco...right now the suspension is still stock. I've read over on the Dweb that some OME susp. setups will decrease the amount of articulation. I'd really like to beef up the amount of articulation that I have and I wonder what's the best way to go about it? Are drop cones an option? Do you need to upgrade everything else to do those? I've been looking at doing OME heavy duty in front/rear (think its 751/762?) Would I need upgraded shocks as well to run cones? Are they worth it? I've been planning the spring upgrade, but I'm not sure what else to do...opinions? I've tried searching about drop cones, but didn't come up with anything definitive!

Thanks.
spoon

[GRNRVR]

Well I don't know much about the OME setup but, I do know that the shocks are what limits your down travel. The use of cones allows you to use longer shocks therefore giving you more down travel.. You could use the OME springs, with some Rovertym shock mounts and drop cones and then get Rancho (or some other long travel shocks)..

I would just go with Rovertym springs as well and just get one of his setups but, that is just what I would do..

Does that help at all?

[John Witherspoon]

yep, that's what I'm looking for...I have looked at RTE stuff and like what I see. Drop cones worry me a little bit...seem a little unstable, being unretained. I don't know. I'd like info from those who use them, have seen them in use, hate them, etc. Just to get a feel...would longer shocks enable more travel on the stock setup?

spoon

[Way]

Cones are not good in off camber situations. Just keep them retained and run some RTE springs mated with a his long travel shock mounts. I installed this super nice kit from John. Everything fit perfectly and he is a great guy to deal with. I have had an OME suspension kit prior to my homeade kit and it lacked travel big time. I can post some pics if you want to see the difference. It is a BIG difference. I haven't been able to lift a rear tire since this mod. Hindsight is 20/20 and I wish I would have purchased more products from the beginning from John. You just can't go wrong.

Adam Way

[John Witherspoon]

So what you're saying is, the RTE stuff is OK...:


Yeah, if you have pics and could post them, I'd appreciate it. I have heard that the OME kits don't offer world-shattering articulation. Thanks for the help!

spoon

[GRNRVR]

Yes, RTE is the way to go..

[RVR OVR]

I think all this talk about cones not being good is Discoweb and EE nonsense. I have run the same trails in both coned and non-coned setups keeping everything the same. To me, retaining the springs gave an impression of stability because the rear end wasn't flexing as much. However, in reality, the angle of the body of the truck was pretty much the same.

Tom

[Way]

With old man emu suspension. Next two picture with homeade lift kit.

As to the person who gave the example of no difference and that it was a bunch of discoweb BS, I would get into the sprung vs. Unsprung weight debate, but it sounds like you have your mind made up. I guess the bottom line is what kind of wheeling you do. I go on off-camber trails and do not like unretained springs. It has just been my experience. I think that having a tire dangle by a spring acts as a fulcrum and increases stability, but to each his own (opinion). Hope you enjoy the three pictures.

Way

[Way]

Pic 2

[Way]

Pic 3 Under view pic

[RVR OVR]

adam, my tires does dangle by something, just not by a spring. the fully extended shock is what it dangles by (that being good or bad is another chat). i guess on the pull-down theory, you just have a variable rate of pull down pressue, depending on how the spring is.

I do a lot of off-camber stuff, too, but then again, we would probably all say we do, and who knows who does more, anyway.

As an aside, your retained flex looks pretty damn close to my non-retained in the back, so you'd have no reason for a cone. In the front, well, I don't even come close to that $G setup.

Tom

[Old Scout]

Originally posted by RVR OVR
I think all this talk about cones not being good is Discoweb and EE nonsense.

[RVR OVR]

i wish i were here longer to know how to interpret that string of icons...

tom

[Old Scout]

Originally posted by RVR OVR
i wish i were here longer to know how to interpret that string of icons...

tom

Lets see :
4 laughing = a good belly laugh. 5 of them is rare!
1 smiley face = making fun of some of the non sence on Dweb and EE makes me smile.
one vader = Wecome to the dark side

[evilfij]

I think the thing being left out is that some springs (either by design or not) are more suited to cones and some are more suited to retainers.

John @RTE has the SP springs which are for retained and the others which are probably better with cones.

Personally I am on the retainer side (homemade, not EE) but to each his own. I have a couple variations on the same theme on the RR and the disco.

my new favorite icon



Ron

[road1will]

well on the range rover i would love to run retained, but with the relatively short length of a 764 retained top and bottom, its hard to get the full travel of the 9005 shock without blowing out the wimpy retainers.

need some softer springs

[Way]

Tom,

When I was thinking of unretained springs, I was assuming that you ran long travel shocks (12 or 14"). Since your travel seems reasonably limited, I think that we are talking about the same thing. I guess the issue in question is what you stated: whether or not a shock is strong enough in the long run to consistantly limit down travel. Ideally I guess a limiting strap would be the best, but there is no argument that a spring is stronger. They are a lot less noisy as well. I know that anyone who visited the last twist off noticed that retained springs were the suspension set up of choice. I know that a few contestants chose to hinder their ramp score slightly by running retained springs, for the benefit of stability on the off road course. But I guess the bottom line is what type of mods you have going. I personally have too much flex in the rear as is. In the picture above I still have 5" of downward shock travel left on my 14" travel shocks. Not to mention another 1.5" of up travel! When I really get the back end to flex, it out performs the front by a large margin. I am a firm believer in a relatively balanced suspension. Expect to see some limiting straps on my rear Dana 60 in the not to distant future.

Oh yeah lets not forget about the retained safarigard reverse pring action gizmo that they have to increase wheel travel. I would go that route over a convention drop spring guide. On second thought I probably would just recommend coil overs on a D90.

Way

[RVR OVR]

As Ron stated, some springs are good for a retained setup, and some are not. I have one of the original RTE 3" spring lifts, before he had the HD and MD or whatever he is calling the different setups. So, I think they are pretty much very H on the HD side. They don't extend much at all. When I retained, I lost way to much articulation. Sure, it was more "even" but I don't think the even amount that was obtained was more beneficial than having the rear flex. I would rather increase the front to match the rear, rather than vice versa.

As far as shocks, I have the 9005, so I have plenty of travel there (12"), and I do hit the ends of the shocks. Of course, it is more than the front, but like I said, I don't want to kill the rear just because the front is lousy. There is probably merit to the "keep all articulation even" stuff, but on a rover, w/out some real effort in the front end, that would mean having it be lousy in the rear.

Tom

[RVR OVR]

Scout - Thanks, I love this new BBS we get to chat on. Actually some free thinking and people taking things to the next level. I like discoweb and will still continue to hang out there as well, but the dark side is strong in this one, it is.

Tom

[merv]

Originally posted by Way
Pic 3 Under view pic

Hey Way!

Dont those brake lines look a little tight?

[Way]

Yep, That was my trail run of my home made lift kit. Ended up putting different ones in later. I cycled the suspension prior to this run and they appeared long enough. Ended up not being long enough though. Good eye.

Way

[Diesel Jim]

Adam.... on the picture of your front axle, is this with a SG setup?

how do you get your front springs back into place? i can't see anything on the bottom that will relocate them?

and (last one...honest...) is the lower front shock mount the one that you were telling me about? centrally mounted in the spring?

PS....cool articulation!


Jamie

[Way]

Yes, that is my stock Land Rover axle housing with a very slightly modified 3-link. The springs are not part of any kit nor are the shocks. To answer the question fully, this was a prototype tun to see how my homeade lift kit and custom wound springs flexed. I used a few spring formulas (Iknow I am a nerd) to try and guess a good spring rate. Local field testing showed me that I wouldn't have enough articualtion to let the spring leave the spring perch plate. So I retained the tops with hose clamps and left the bottoms as is. At the same time, I figured theat the brake lines would be long enough assuming that the spring didn't leave the perch. I was big time wrong and almost tore my brake lines off. They ended up getting super stretched out. I flexed the spring out of place 4 times that day on different obstacles. I ended u p making a cheap fix. I will attach a pic. Ended up having to push the springs back in physically.

To answer your second question, yes those are the Rubicon Express stud to eye conversion mounts. They cost 20$. It would have taken me a long time to make those babies and for the price I was happy buying them. I reccommend them to everyone. Notice the way in which they are mounted though. It allows the shock to pivot laterally on the mount. If I would have run stud style shocks they would have broke or bent. In fact on my OME kit with stock control arms I bent those mounts??? Here is another pic. Also notice the mounts to the right of the spring. the former owner used those for coil overs, I will end up using the brackets as a mount for limiting straps. Anyone running limiting straps right now?? Experiences??

Way

[Rover Addiction]

FWIW, I'm thinking about limiting straps on my suspension, but I'm only going to do it in the center to limit total droop, not flex. I need to do this because I'm over extending my CV joints at the transfer case end and crushing the roller bearings in the individual u-joints. I've seen this done on Brendan Lovejoy's rig along with his coilovers and it seems to work quite well.

-John

[Serious One]

Hey Adam,

I'm running limiting straps on the back of the Serious One. If I didn't I would have like WAAAAY too much travel in the rear and end up chewing up my tub/tires etc...and I didn't want to trim more than I did.

With the longer trailing arms and adjusted rear pinion I was getting out of control on the rear travel and wanted to tame things out a bit. I haven't ramped the truck yet but initial tests are putting the check straps at full pull just before I want the axle to REALLY stop moving down.

Mine are made out of stainless steel cable.

Later,

Michael

PS I can send a pic if you want.