This is how the pissing match gets started.
Tntoy - instead of blurting out "ignore this" and then go on to spew some crap about nothing and then beat your chest and say that "Somebody prove me wrong, or STOP POSTING THIS. Please." What you should do is simply explain why keeping the links parallel is not the best way to go. If you carnt do that then just keep you mouth shut and let the good tech flow.
Now I agree with what ErikB has said. I do think that for sombody that doesent necessarily understand all the intricate ins and outs of anti squat, roll axis blah blah blah that this is the best way to try and build it.
So to say it again (cut and paste job here)-
- try to make your links parallel when veiwed from the side
- make them as long as you reasonably can
- make them as flat as you reasonably can
- make the roll axis as high as you reasonably can
- vertical separation should be 6" or more. More especially for more horsepower and/or bigger tires.
- make the triangulated portion 40 degrees or more for decent lateral control.
If you do this then you will end up with as little anti squat as possible and with the least body roll as possible and as the suspension cycles things will remain as stable as possible. Now IMHO this is the best place to start when building a link suspension - something that gets the power to the ground in the most stable way possible ..... meaning that it has the least possible chance of starting to hop on throttling climbs or walking a wheel undernieth on slow articulating climbs and it has the least chance of rolling you over on the off camber climbs.
If you do this you will have a linked setup that will be the most nicely behaved setup that you can produce - you will break less rear axles and diffs and you will roll over and flip over backwards the least.
Now if you find that your rear suspension doesent really hook up and bite into the rocks on the throttling climbs and it doesent hop at all then you can start to experiment with more anti squat. Easest way to do this is to lower the chassis mount of the upper links. If you are smart you will build this option into your links when you first build it so that you can play with it later. But IMO you are best to start with the least amount of antisquat as possible and then work your way towards more antisquat. Most people build links because their rigs hop and buck and generally behave really badly when the power comes on so IMO you are best to start with the other extreme.
In the majority of cases IMO you will still end up with more antisquat than a totally 100% neutrally handling rig. Just by running a lifted rig with big tyres will generally give more then enough anti squat even if you try to totally minimise it.
As a side note I just got a copy of the super crawl video from last year. Now if you watch it carefully you can look at the rigs that hop badly on the climbs, the rigs that hop a little bit and the rigs that dont hop at all. Now it is easy to see that the rigs that dont hop at all run the least amount of antisquat (by looking at the rear link angles) ... the ones that hop a little bit have a bit more antisquat and the ones that hop a lot run a lot of antisquat. Its that simple.
Land Rover SIIa, 302W, NP435, NP205, MOG404s, 42in Swamper TSLs, 112in WB
"An expert is somebody who learns more and more about less and less until one day they know absolutely everything about nothing."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- home of aussie rock crawling.