[matfan]

Hey all,

I've being doing a little thinking about the whole RUF idea for my zook. Can anyone fill be in on what might be the issues with making a no weld RUF solution. My very very very basic thoughts are well... a picture tells a thousand words....

[sogone]

After all that effort why wouldn't ya give it a bit of hot metal to hold it together?

[matfan]

sogone wrote:

After all that effort why wouldn't ya give it a bit of hot metal to hold it together?

I was thinking about an easily reversible option

[zooky08]

even having crush tube in there i reckon it would still wont be strong enough, dont forget about all the weight in the front

[sogone]

Grind the welds out?

[rpmwrx]

With a chassis extension for RUF the bump stop mounts need to be moved forward aswell... something to think about...

[matfan]

rpmwrx wrote:

With a chassis extension for RUF the bump stop mounts need to be moved forward aswell... something to think about...

Cheers for the reminder! Luckily that's not such a hard issue to tackle.

[rpmwrx]

matfan wrote:

rpmwrx wrote:

With a chassis extension for RUF the bump stop mounts need to be moved forward aswell... something to think about...

Cheers for the reminder! Luckily that's not such a hard issue to tackle.

You'll need a front driveshaft spacer as well...

[atari4x4]

all that leverage on 4 pissy bolts...

[matfan]

It's been a long time since I was sat down in Mr O'Neill's physics class but I figured that the load would be on the inner sleeve and not the bolts....

.....I would bet money that I'm wrong though....

[Fatzook]

I think you should draw the shackle hanger aswell. You may find that they need to occupy the same space.

[JrZook]

zooky08 wrote:

even having crush tube in there i reckon it would still wont be strong enough, dont forget about all the weight in the front

All 'that' weight hey?? Seriously how much weight do you reckon is in the front end?

[shep]

JrZook wrote:

zooky08 wrote:

even having crush tube in there i reckon it would still wont be strong enough, dont forget about all the weight in the front

All 'that' weight hey?? Seriously how much weight do you reckon is in the front end?

i reckon that a pothole at 100kph would be a reasonable shock load.

[zooky08]

JrZook wrote:

zooky08 wrote:

even having crush tube in there i reckon it would still wont be strong enough, dont forget about all the weight in the front

All 'that' weight hey?? Seriously how much weight do you reckon is in the front end?

less then 150kg mabby. im not sure really but still alot of weight on 4 bolts

[Fatzook]

zooky08 wrote:

JrZook wrote:

zooky08 wrote:

even having crush tube in there i reckon it would still wont be strong enough, dont forget about all the weight in the front

All 'that' weight hey?? Seriously how much weight do you reckon is in the front end?

less then 150kg mabby. im not sure really but still alot of weight on 4 bolts

Well really its the front half of the car.... There is alot of force on that shackle hanger. Without getting into vectors and transfering forces, lets just say that continued loading of the above design MAY fail. It probably wouldn't happen for a while, but its probably not a bad arrangement. If the 'socket' extended into the rails a little further, and was 5mm wall thickness, it may do quite well. The further in it went, the less 'work' the bolts would have to do.

[JrZook]

Fatzook wrote:

zooky08 wrote:

JrZook wrote:

zooky08 wrote:

even having crush tube in there i reckon it would still wont be strong enough, dont forget about all the weight in the front

All 'that' weight hey?? Seriously how much weight do you reckon is in the front end?

less then 150kg mabby. im not sure really but still alot of weight on 4 bolts

Well really its the front half of the car.... There is alot of force on that shackle hanger. Without getting into vectors and transfering forces, lets just say that continued loading of the above design MAY fail. It probably wouldn't happen for a while, but its probably not a bad arrangement. If the 'socket' extended into the rails a little further, and was 5mm wall thickness, it may do quite well. The further in it went, the less 'work' the bolts would have to do.

This and maybe vertical crush tubes and bolts.

[matfan]

Fatzook wrote:

I think you should draw the shackle hanger aswell. You may find that they need to occupy the same space.

These are just some models I drew up at work, I'll check it out properly when I get home but I am hopeful that it won't be an issue as I aim to have the shackle no more than vertical at full droop and the spring should in retard theory not foul on the original hanger while compressed.... but like I said, I'd bet I'm wrong

JrZook wrote:

This and maybe vertical crush tubes and bolts.

I was trying to avoid any sort of drilling, welding, grinding etc. Basically the goal is that you would only require a socket set.

[royce]

I would reckon that where the bolts pass through the chassis rail would over time flog out from the repeated back and forward levering placed on them, not to mention the sideways movement when turning, maybe adding something that also attaches to teh stock shackle hanger would help, AKA Calmini shackle reversal

I dont think you could produce something that is a snug enough fit to get around that given the chassis are rarely square

[royce]

Oh and fix whatever is allowing a spammer to log into your email or delete me from your address book

[matfan]

royce wrote:

Oh and fix whatever is allowing a spammer to log into your email or delete me from your address book

Bloody Yahoo was compromised....

...on the plus side, now you know where to buy cheap Viagra in Canada!