3 link numbers - Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum
 
Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum  

Go Back   Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum > General Tech > General 4x4 Discussion
Notices

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-07-2019, 08:06 PM   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Member # 218571
Location: cottonwood CA
Posts: 596
3 link numbers

Would appreciate some input on the front 3 link numbers I've got right now before I fully weld anything. Center of gravity and weight I guessed on. It's a first gen Toyota Tacoma extra cab with tons and 40s, 25" frame height and will have an exo. I'd like decent street manners, don't plan on driving 500 miles on the freeway, but would like get groceries and swing into the mall occasionally





My lowers can move in or out at the frame for more or less triangulation. My upper is kind of up in the air right now. Not 100% sure it will clear driveshaft, hopefully have driveshaft in another week or two and know that for sure, if it doesn't ill move or to passenger side.

Thanks for any help.

The rear will end up being 4 linked if that changes anything
__________________
Coolest realtor in nor Cal Vertigo
http://www.PlacerCountyHomes4Sale.com
Valon5150 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-08-2019, 01:37 PM   #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Member # 481234
Posts: 1,037
Guidelines I followed and work exceptionally well for me

Lower triangulation is good, reduces roll steer. This keeps the axle when viewed from above perpendicular to the chassis during articulation. Avoids funky clearance issues when crawling, doesnít fight steering or cause under steer or over steer conditions.

Flat links. If itís not feasible for your build thatís ok, but you win when theyíre flat or as close as they can be. The upper link in my opinion is more critical to get level or even sloped upwards towards the axle. Without getting into terminology battles and keeping this about the calculator value boxes, your current link angles are giving you too high of an anti squat value. You want that number lower any way you can get it. You want the front axle to recess. Ride quality increases and youíre going to benefit when climbing walls. Itís not the end of the world as yours arenít horrifically steep. Theyíre probably just fine.

Upper link horizontal angle (viewed from top) Bad bad bad. In the depths of pirate in articles by Gordon, triaged, Haines and the likes had great explanations for the forces at play when the link is angled from the frame to the axle. The forces are different when mounted driver or passenger. Iirc from what I took away from those posts is the angled upper link is basically responsible for everything that has given the 3 link a bad reputation. Keep it dead parallel with the frame rail. Driver or passenger does not matter IMO only if it is straight. I donít believe in the corner dive myths. Closer to center is ideal but in most cases because of the engine, 1/3 of the axle width is best case scenario for upper link placement. Thatís what mine is and my nose squats dead level when I hit the jammers. Currently mine is passenger but will be moving to the driver side but only because Iím offsetting the engine to the passenger side. A neutral as described upper link doesnít inflict jacking under load or diving/corner dive when braking or cornering. My nose squats under load so I love climbing walls. It squats because of these link angles I described. In a front dig I can damn near get into my bump stops. No ghey suck down winch for me!

Roll center looks good. Higher offers more off camber stability but too high and you wonít feel the ďedgeĒ of the stability loss and flop. You mention rear links someday. Wish I had my notes. I canít remember the bias but you want one higher than the other. I designed mine this way and love it on the streets, go fast and crawling.

Opinion/theory of mine. Can you land the axle panhard mount dead-on with the passenger lower link mount? As in they intersect at the same points on the axle tube respectively on the front and rear of the axle tube? Can you picture it as a swing arm/A arm pivoting from the panhard frame mount and lower link frame mount? I donít have supporting info whether or not this is or not a critical attribute but I donít have any reason to do it any other way.

I notice your upper link shares the same vertical alignment as the lowers at the axle. Another preference of mine. Most people land it dead center above the axle tube C/L. I found better caster control by moving the mounting point behind the axle tube with the lower links or even a little behind them. Works great on my rig. I donít lose any caster when the suspension extends and I gain when it compresses.
Juicysluice is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Old 01-08-2019, 05:49 PM   #3 (permalink)
Wheeler
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Member # 502649
Location: nj
Posts: 159
Doesnít having triangulated lowers with a trac bar cause axle steer? As the axle moves side to side the links get longer/shorter. Roll steer is different I guess but wouldnt it still axle steer if the driver side body leans( assuming this is where frame side trac bar mount is) ? Donít mean to side track if I am, always love good link threads!
Twmdodge99 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-08-2019, 07:39 PM   #4 (permalink)
Granite Guru
 
gt1guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Member # 236179
Location: New Iberia, La.
Posts: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twmdodge99 View Post
Doesnít having triangulated lowers with a trac bar cause axle steer? As the axle moves side to side the links get longer/shorter. Roll steer is different I guess but wouldnt it still axle steer if the driver side body leans( assuming this is where frame side trac bar mount is) ? Donít mean to side track if I am, always love good link threads!
If you have enough triangulation in the lowers to laterally locate the axle, all the track bar will do is create a bind. It also makes the track bar redundant and not needed.
__________________
Kevin
gt1guy is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-08-2019, 07:55 PM   #5 (permalink)
Registered User
 
YotaAtieToo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Member # 25632
Location: Magalia, Jefferson State
Posts: 11,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
If you have enough triangulation in the lowers to laterally locate the axle, all the track bar will do is create a bind. It also makes the track bar redundant and not needed.
A 3 link with no track bar huh?
YotaAtieToo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-08-2019, 08:06 PM   #6 (permalink)
Custom User Title
 
Provience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Member # 138976
Location: Thurston County, WA
Posts: 28,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
If you have enough triangulation in the lowers to laterally locate the axle, all the track bar will do is create a bind. It also makes the track bar redundant and not needed.
https://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/gene...o-panhard.html

check out this thread for some reasons why you would want to run a track/panhard bar.

took a while to find that thread

as for the OP, i'm curious why the panhard/track bar is designed at a slight angle instead of perpendicular to the chassis. seems like it would be more likely to force things into an arc, but i dunno. i gave up on doing a 3 link for my front and am just going for a regular triag 4 link
__________________
up is difficult, down is dangerous

freedom of choice is what you have, freedom from choice is what you want

keep your head down, go to sleep to the rhythm of the war drums
Provience is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-08-2019, 08:14 PM   #7 (permalink)
Granite Guru
 
gt1guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Member # 236179
Location: New Iberia, La.
Posts: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by YotaAtieToo View Post
A 3 link with no track bar huh?
If the lowers are doing the job of laterally locating the axle (as in actually having enough triangulation to keep it from moving side to side), a track bar will only add bind. At that point you either add a second upper, or remove some of the convergence of the lowers, keep the track bar and the single upper.

I guess I should have been more clear. It sure looks like he's at a crossroads with his design.
__________________
Kevin
gt1guy is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-08-2019, 08:16 PM   #8 (permalink)
Custom User Title
 
Provience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Member # 138976
Location: Thurston County, WA
Posts: 28,440
yeah but the engine is also likely in the way of getting signifiacntly more angle out of the lowers
__________________
up is difficult, down is dangerous

freedom of choice is what you have, freedom from choice is what you want

keep your head down, go to sleep to the rhythm of the war drums
Provience is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-08-2019, 08:51 PM   #9 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Member # 218571
Location: cottonwood CA
Posts: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juicysluice View Post
Guidelines I followed and work exceptionally well for me

Lower triangulation is good, reduces roll steer. This keeps the axle when viewed from above perpendicular to the chassis during articulation. Avoids funky clearance issues when crawling, doesnít fight steering or cause under steer or over steer conditions.

Flat links. If itís not feasible for your build thatís ok, but you win when theyíre flat or as close as they can be. The upper link in my opinion is more critical to get level or even sloped upwards towards the axle. Without getting into terminology battles and keeping this about the calculator value boxes, your current link angles are giving you too high of an anti squat value. You want that number lower any way you can get it. You want the front axle to recess. Ride quality increases and youíre going to benefit when climbing walls. Itís not the end of the world as yours arenít horrifically steep. Theyíre probably just fine.

Upper link horizontal angle (viewed from top) Bad bad bad. In the depths of pirate in articles by Gordon, triaged, Haines and the likes had great explanations for the forces at play when the link is angled from the frame to the axle. The forces are different when mounted driver or passenger. Iirc from what I took away from those posts is the angled upper link is basically responsible for everything that has given the 3 link a bad reputation. Keep it dead parallel with the frame rail. Driver or passenger does not matter IMO only if it is straight. I donít believe in the corner dive myths. Closer to center is ideal but in most cases because of the engine, 1/3 of the axle width is best case scenario for upper link placement. Thatís what mine is and my nose squats dead level when I hit the jammers. Currently mine is passenger but will be moving to the driver side but only because Iím offsetting the engine to the passenger side. A neutral as described upper link doesnít inflict jacking under load or diving/corner dive when braking or cornering. My nose squats under load so I love climbing walls. It squats because of these link angles I described. In a front dig I can damn near get into my bump stops. No ghey suck down winch for me!

Roll center looks good. Higher offers more off camber stability but too high and you wonít feel the ďedgeĒ of the stability loss and flop. You mention rear links someday. Wish I had my notes. I canít remember the bias but you want one higher than the other. I designed mine this way and love it on the streets, go fast and crawling.

Opinion/theory of mine. Can you land the axle panhard mount dead-on with the passenger lower link mount? As in they intersect at the same points on the axle tube respectively on the front and rear of the axle tube? Can you picture it as a swing arm/A arm pivoting from the panhard frame mount and lower link frame mount? I donít have supporting info whether or not this is or not a critical attribute but I donít have any reason to do it any other way.

I notice your upper link shares the same vertical alignment as the lowers at the axle. Another preference of mine. Most people land it dead center above the axle tube C/L. I found better caster control by moving the mounting point behind the axle tube with the lower links or even a little behind them. Works great on my rig. I donít lose any caster when the suspension extends and I gain when it compresses.
Thanks very helpful info.

Just playing with the calculator the anti squat dropped to 65% by dropping my frame side lower mount 1.25"

With the way the c's are I can't move my panhard out any further on the axle, nor my lowers in any because of how far the diff is over to the driver's side. It's a super duty 60.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Provience View Post
https://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/gene...o-panhard.html

check out this thread for some reasons why you would want to run a track/panhard bar.

took a while to find that thread

as for the OP, i'm curious why the panhard/track bar is designed at a slight angle instead of perpendicular to the chassis. seems like it would be more likely to force things into an arc, but i dunno. i gave up on doing a 3 link for my front and am just going for a regular triag 4 link
I am using a 78/79 bronco forward swing steering box and the panhard is angled to just clear it while keeping it the same length as the drag link. I didn't move the axle side back to line it up because of oil pan clearance. I'm able to get a little more up travel by running the panhard along the front side of the axle tube, bending to conform to the pumpkin then slightly back once it gets past the oil pan. Hopefully that makes sense

The little bit of info I was able to find regarding a slightly angled panhard didn't seem to say it would cause negative effects. But I couldn't find much.
__________________
Coolest realtor in nor Cal Vertigo
http://www.PlacerCountyHomes4Sale.com
Valon5150 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 04:18 AM   #10 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Member # 149176
Location: Southbury CT
Posts: 1,090
I incorporated the C into my panhard mount.

When I played with my numbers.
I made it so during the travel my Anti squat numbers barely change like less than 5%. I think this helps with a predictable suspension.
What I found was moving my upper axle link back, yes making it shorter. I have a single joint front drive shaft so the shorter link works better for me.
Then I put in a multi hole upper frame mount, I found this mount made the biggest impact to anti-squat without out effect the other numbers as much.

But I only designed 1 link suspension system so keep that in mind.
But it works good I race it.

One more note.
Brace the ever living crap out of the pan hard bar mounts not kidding. Every race I found a crack. Kept adding tubes, eventually lost the front mount $$$. Then braced the crap out of it. If your only crawling probably not a big deal but pulling fast hard turns puts a lot of load on it.

In the end anything close will work.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



Sponsors:
Corbeau, Tom Wood, PSC, Polyperformance, Inner Air Lock, Miller Welds, Heavymetal Concepts, Clayton Offroad, Baileigh
customcreationsllc is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 06:44 AM   #11 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Member # 481234
Posts: 1,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twmdodge99 View Post
Doesnít having triangulated lowers with a trac bar cause axle steer? As the axle moves side to side the links get longer/shorter. Roll steer is different I guess but wouldnt it still axle steer if the driver side body leans( assuming this is where frame side trac bar mount is) ? Donít mean to side track if I am, always love good link threads!
I have always explained to people to hot glue 4 tooth picks together in a square. A pick to represent the axle, two straight links and the chassis. If you pinched the axle between your index and thumb and the chassis with the other and cycled it you would simulate the direct and combined effects of lower link angles in the Y and Z planes. Y= Horizontal viewed from top Z= Viewed from the side.
Straight/square AND triangulated links (Y) and level (Z) yields absolutely zero roll steer. However as the links increase in angle (Z) roll steer increases severely IF the links are straight however if you triangulate them (Y) and further increase such value you negate the roll steer effects of (Z) and potentially reduce the value to zero.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
If you have enough triangulation in the lowers to laterally locate the axle, all the track bar will do is create a bind. It also makes the track bar redundant and not needed.
That is incorrect. Horribly incorrect. You really need to do better homework. Youíre guessing. Quit guessing out loud and mucking up another suspension thread.

The OP is not at a cross roads. How could you possibly think that? Heís right on track to an otherwise typical/successful 3 link suspension design that is proven and effective.

Furthermore, as general discussion, panhard bars provide lateral control and dictate the roll center height only. They really donít have much more responsibility than that. Not in this discussion.
Juicysluice is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 07:04 AM   #12 (permalink)
mj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Member # 1919
Location: BC Canada
Posts: 9,272
100% antisquat on the suspension seems excessive
mj is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 08:11 AM   #13 (permalink)
Granite Guru
 
gt1guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Member # 236179
Location: New Iberia, La.
Posts: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juicysluice View Post
I have always explained to people to hot glue 4 tooth picks together in a square. A pick to represent the axle, two straight links and the chassis. If you pinched the axle between your index and thumb and the chassis with the other and cycled it you would simulate the direct and combined effects of lower link angles in the Y and Z planes. Y= Horizontal viewed from top Z= Viewed from the side.
Straight/square AND triangulated links (Y) and level (Z) yields absolutely zero roll steer. However as the links increase in angle (Z) roll steer increases severely IF the links are straight however if you triangulate them (Y) and further increase such value you negate the roll steer effects of (Z) and potentially reduce the value to zero.



That is incorrect. Horribly incorrect. You really need to do better homework. Youíre guessing. Quit guessing out loud and mucking up another suspension thread.

The OP is not at a cross roads. How could you possibly think that? Heís right on track to an otherwise typical/successful 3 link suspension design that is proven and effective.

Furthermore, as general discussion, panhard bars provide lateral control and dictate the roll center height only. They really donít have much more responsibility than that. Not in this discussion.
What's the axle going to do when the track bar wants to travel in an arc and the converging lowers don't?

Not talking about hot glue and toothpicks.
__________________
Kevin
gt1guy is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 08:12 AM   #14 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Member # 218571
Location: cottonwood CA
Posts: 596
I played real quick with numbers this morning. Changed lowers height both axle and frame ends to get flatter. Messed with upper link a little bit and it helped drop anti squat some more. If it interferes with driveshaft I can move it to passenger side and fairly confidently mirror what it is set at now.



__________________
Coolest realtor in nor Cal Vertigo
http://www.PlacerCountyHomes4Sale.com
Valon5150 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 08:25 AM   #15 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196897
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 94
Nobody seems concerned about link seperation? 7.5" is not terrible at the axle but on a 3 link I would want a bit more. It is the front though and does not see the stresses of the rear.

I would also move the upper frame above the lower mount if you can.
How far are your frame mounts from your output? I like to take driveline angles into account when placing mounts.
thedirtman is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 09:18 AM   #16 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Member # 218571
Location: cottonwood CA
Posts: 596
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedirtman View Post
Nobody seems concerned about link seperation? 7.5" is not terrible at the axle but on a 3 link I would want a bit more. It is the front though and does not see the stresses of the rear.

I would also move the upper frame above the lower mount if you can.
How far are your frame mounts from your output? I like to take driveline angles into account when placing mounts.
I was playing with that and thought it odd the more seperation I have at the axle the higher the anti-squat is. As in 1" more would jump it close to 20%. Originally I had started out with about 9" separation.

So you're saying lengthen the upper to pretty much the same length as the lower links? I do not have room to mount the upper that far back and high up.

Output of tcase? Lowers are almost directly underneath and upper is probably about 8-10" forward of it)
__________________
Coolest realtor in nor Cal Vertigo
http://www.PlacerCountyHomes4Sale.com
Valon5150 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 09:33 AM   #17 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Member # 196897
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 94
If you only raise the axle end it will raise the as, the tighter the triangle the more anti squat you typically get and is due to the lack of separation at the frame side. You could raise the upper axle 1.5" to the 9" you were taking about to get a good flat upper link but you would need to drop the frame side lower a bit to get lower AS numbers. Building around a factory vehicle has its limitations and you have to do what is best for you and builds often vary from the original plan.
thedirtman is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 09:55 AM   #18 (permalink)
Wheeler
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Member # 502649
Location: nj
Posts: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
What's the axle going to do when the track bar wants to travel in an arc and the converging lowers don't?

Not talking about hot glue and toothpicks.
The lowers being triangled any amount doesn’t do anything for lateral stability without 2 uppers. With a single upper link and track bar and triangulated lowers the axle simply “ steers”, moving in relationship to being perpendicular to the chassis. As soon as you put another upper link in the axle can no longer “steer” or move side to side because the uppers would have to get longer and shorter to allow it. This is where bind comes in. Often called a 5 link (4 link with trac bar) this is why people with radius arms drop one of the top arms on the trail for better flex, and why 5 links always have poly bushings somewhere in the links to have give. Without 2 upper links in a triangulated link suspension the axle will not have any lateral support, just ask anyone one who’s ever lost a link during a race. I have a 3 link with some triangulation on lowers and it doesn’t bind at all.

Last edited by Twmdodge99; 01-09-2019 at 10:23 AM.
Twmdodge99 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 01:35 PM   #19 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Member # 481234
Posts: 1,037
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
What's the axle going to do when the track bar wants to travel in an arc and the converging lowers don't?

Not talking about hot glue and toothpicks.
What do you mean the converging (triangulated?) lowers donít? Donít what? Travel in an arc? Everything travels in an arc in a suspension however properly understanding each plane and each specific component can be difficult to imagine to some.


Arts and crafts or steel links, the principles remain the same. Much easier for someone to grasp the geometry in a disposable manner. The model and explanation isolates the lower links and simply explained roll axis angle or roll steer and the effects or manipulation to the link angles and triangulation values.

Letís isolate the panhard. Itís function is to laterally locate the axle but taking a further look, yes, it can affect roll steer. BUT due to particular link geometry, the physical profile of the axle housing and steering components/considerations it is less desirable to dial in ď0Ē roll steer with the panhard alone. Manipulating panhard (X) viewed from above and (Z) viewed from the front (roll center height) will affect the roll axis angle or roll steer typically at the undesirable cost of un-feasible full bump packaging and/or lowering the roll center height (body roll or off camber stability) Iím not sure if I want to or should explain what ideal panhard geometry would be. Too many variables and preferences. I should say tuning roll axis angle specifically with the panhard is worthless because it unfavorably offsets much more critical characteristics in the end.

Itís a delicate balance and an art to consider all of these effects and package it taking into account the material/component size, axle profile, axle travel, shock size, frame width, engine placement, steering, intended use, etc. Thatís the fun part to me.
Juicysluice is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 05:22 PM   #20 (permalink)
Granite Guru
 
gt1guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Member # 236179
Location: New Iberia, La.
Posts: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juicysluice View Post
What do you mean the converging (triangulated?) lowers donít? Donít what? Travel in an arc? Everything travels in an arc in a suspension however properly understanding each plane and each specific component can be difficult to imagine to some.


Arts and crafts or steel links, the principles remain the same. Much easier for someone to grasp the geometry in a disposable manner. The model and explanation isolates the lower links and simply explained roll axis angle or roll steer and the effects or manipulation to the link angles and triangulation values.

Letís isolate the panhard. Itís function is to laterally locate the axle but taking a further look, yes, it can affect roll steer. BUT due to particular link geometry, the physical profile of the axle housing and steering components/considerations it is less desirable to dial in ď0Ē roll steer with the panhard alone. Manipulating panhard (X) viewed from above and (Z) viewed from the front (roll center height) will affect the roll axis angle or roll steer typically at the undesirable cost of un-feasible full bump packaging and/or lowering the roll center height (body roll or off camber stability) Iím not sure if I want to or should explain what ideal panhard geometry would be. Too many variables and preferences. I should say tuning roll axis angle specifically with the panhard is worthless because it unfavorably offsets much more critical characteristics in the end.

Itís a delicate balance and an art to consider all of these effects and package it taking into account the material/component size, axle profile, axle travel, shock size, frame width, engine placement, steering, intended use, etc. Thatís the fun part to me.
As I was coming up with a reply, something wasn't making sense until I realized, I was way off. You're right, not sure what the fuck I was thinking of, but, it wasn't correct. Brain fart or maybe I just needed to take a shit, who knows.
__________________
Kevin
gt1guy is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 08:42 PM   #21 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Member # 548137
Location: E Texas
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
As I was coming up with a reply, something wasn't making sense until I realized, I was way off. You're right, not sure what the fuck I was thinking of, but, it wasn't correct. Brain fart or maybe I just needed to take a shit, who knows.
Nice recovery

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
denverd1 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-09-2019, 10:22 PM   #22 (permalink)
Granite Guru
 
gt1guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Member # 236179
Location: New Iberia, La.
Posts: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by denverd1 View Post
Nice recovery

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Well, got to admit it when you're wrong. I was conflating two different things and that usually doesn't end well. And it didn't.
__________________
Kevin
gt1guy is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-10-2019, 08:05 AM   #23 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Member # 548137
Location: E Texas
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1guy View Post
Well, got to admit it when you're wrong. I was conflating two different things and that usually doesn't end well. And it didn't.
Shits not easy to sort out. Thanks to sluice and a few others, starting to make sense

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
denverd1 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-10-2019, 10:40 AM   #24 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Member # 481234
Posts: 1,037
It can be overwhelming imagining imaginary lines!

Juicysluice is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Pirate4x4.Com : 4x4 and Off-Road Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

** A VERIFICATION EMAIL IS SENT TO THIS ADDRESS TO COMPLETE REGISTRATION!! **

Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.