[mr.green]

Fatzook wrote:

mr.green wrote:

bakerboy wrote:

flex looks good

you think so?

Chick you picked up at the local?

pretty little thing, aint she?
sorry about that, i couldn't resist. back to topic

[troopy]

My truggy had issues with the rear having alot more travel than the front so I played around with different swaybars to try and induce more roll stiffness in the rear and it has worked perfectly so that now it is very balanced.

[31zook]

I would just 4-link+panhard the front, you have gone thus far, so why not use i winch pull down on the front and rear, as well as running bump stops and well proportioned/valved shocks. Then i would sway bar both ends and start getting things leveled out. Im guessing that a motor will be another 80kgs, and people and stuff in the zook will be another 120kgs. so you can pretty much get your weights accurate to what they will be when she id done.

If you can get both front and rear to flex more then you want you can always limit it, but if your limit is something in the make up of the suspension then that will probs drive your nuts.

[SuziBlu]

Fatzook wrote:

SuziBlu wrote:

Peter, ok, yes articulation is the wrong word here, wheel travel is what I like.

A vehicle that has say 15" of travel, with good springs and shock valving will land a lot softer than one with 7" of travel, good spring rates and shock valving. Simply because the travel allows for slower stops.

By taking things on faster, dirt roads, horrendous corrugations, lumps bumps, pot holes, a vehicle with long travel will tend to get up and float over this where one with less travel will bounce. Smash down hard.

I can go faster than most where I play, and so, get further, simply because i have longer, softer travel, and, because of speed, am able to get where others cannot. Other who try and keep up, get the shit shaken out of them and very quickly drop off speed, and then have to back off altogether.

Some rocks you need speed, a long travel set up can hit a rock at 3ks, walking speed, and a short travel is reduced to 1k or it will smash its front right off the ground and lose steering and traction, the long travel will "travel" over it. Also figure the harshness of the short travel and breakages.


My lil girl is fine at around 80-90k on road, after that she is a real hand full to keep her from wandering. I can do this off road where others way down on that.

I really want YJ suspension so that I can have even longer wheel travel.

Thats all good. I wasn't having a go at your comprehension, just eluding to the fact that there is more contributing to a vehicles handling under the above mentioned conditions than just how much travel the vehicle has.

I didn't for a sec think you were having a go mate.

I love faster stuff, and for me, faster stuff and long wheel travel go hand in hand.

[Gwagensteve]

Mr Green - it's not really a flex issue (it sort of is, but not really) it's a mismatched roll stiffness issue. Most Patrols/cruisers/rangies etc have the same issue. They counter it by running a rear swaybar.

You could 4 link/panhard the front, but get ready for a huge headache with very zero front roll stiffness, antidive/squat, packaging and bushing life. Without a front swaybar, It will wobble like a mofo, which is what Wranglers do with the swaybar pulled.... then it will all be about adding roll stiffness with a custom swaybar to get the drivability back... creating another packaging nightmare.

Pull one bolt out of one radius arm axle bracket, then ramp the car. Then you'll know how much of the effect is due to spring rate and how much is roll stiffness. ( I reckon it's a bit of both in your car currently)

Once the springing is sorted, I'd experiement with a rear swaybar to force the front to work, and/or holey bushes.

Flex isn't underated, but balance is massively underrated.

I'm doing something similar to you, but I'm using Rangie arms, and on the front they will will angle inwards at the chassis end (because I want them inside the chassis rails rather than under them for a low overall ride height and smooth chassis) and this will lower the roll stiffness - kind of creating an almost "one link" or A arm- which have no roll stiffness at all.

A stock sierra has a lower front roll stiffness than the rear stock, and a MUCH lower front roll stiffness than stock with RUF. I like the predictability of a car with lower front roll stiffness than rear. Setup as you are now, you'll be forever hiking front wheels in the air when climbing and that gets spooky.

Hell, even Joeblow and I agree on using radius arms on the front of a sierra based coil car, even though I wouldn't touch his coil/jimny arms with a barge pole.

Steve.

[Fatzook]

Gwagensteve wrote:

Hell, even Joeblow and I agree on using radius arms on the front of a sierra based coil car, even though I wouldn't touch his coil/jimny arms with a barge pole. Steve.

HIS coily /Jimny arms? Or just OEM coily / jimny arms?

[Gwagensteve]

AFAIK Joe's using OEM Coil/jimny arms for his radius arm front ends.

They're a bit light and short for my liking.

Steve.

[Fatzook]

Gwagensteve wrote:

AFAIK Joe's using OEM Coil/jimny arms for his radius arm front ends.

They're a bit light and short for my liking.

Steve.

Fair enough. I don't mind short arms (480mm), but with 3" uptravel and 7 down, I don't need a whole lot more arm length anyways.

[mr.green]

hey steve, i'm glad you chimed in. i don't mind reading your suspension talk..
i like what your saying about roll stiffness, i'm just a bit worried that i just don't have enough movement in the front. i will pull a bolt and take another pic over the weekend. my guess is it will change considerably. the problem being that the arms can not rotate around the diff housing in the opposite direction as one side in going down as the other comes up.
both up or both down it had all the movement you need. doing a stationary bounce in the front is quite easy as i think the springs are soft enough.

so, i'll pull one bolt from the arm, swap the springs front to rear ( put the kings in the back and the stock vit rears in the front) and have another look.

i was thinking i would use the higher spring rate in the front to compensate for the motor.


HOLY BUSHES- are you thinking of trying to find a bush from something else and fit? i have a few different control arms laying around but nothing is close enough.... i did contemplate taking to the bushed with the drill to try and knock some of the bulk out of them????


my arms are also angled in a bit to accommodate the lux pumpkin and the chassis end is under the rail. this was to maintain full steering with the 35s but it is a big ugly bracket on the chassis
i think these arms are too long really. a shorter arm would be able to mount to the chassis where the rails rise up and not have such an anchor for a bracket.

how long are the rover arms steve? i might look around for something a bit shorter with better bushes before i abandon the radius arm idea

[shakes]

The bushes steve is talking about have slots cut/moulded into the top and bottom. wear out alot quicker but softer offroad.

Close to the bottom of the page is some of g-mans ramblings and a good photo example of bolt in v bolt out. http://auszookers.com/index.php?name=Fo ... 39&start=0

I'd try a sway bar on the rear before totally re-designing the front.

This is what happens when the rear moves and the front doesnt... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73ljDXHMRm8

[BlueSuzy]

The rover arms are similar length, but not straight like the paj.

[jonno_racing]

atari4x4 wrote:

I wouldn't even fark that with Buzzy's weiner.

i wouldnt even poke that with your facebook

[Brett]

sorry if its been covered (i didn't read the whole tread) but it looks like your rear end springs are to soft so your maxing out your rear set up before it starts to make your front end work.

easy fit is to put softer springs (like a ruf in a leaf sierra) or stiffer in the back

[atari4x4]

jonno_racing wrote:

atari4x4 wrote:

I wouldn't even fark that with Buzzy's weiner.

i wouldnt even poke that with your facebook

lame joke BTW.... noticed i didn't mention you Phil

[Gwagensteve]

Brett wrote:

sorry if its been covered (i didn't read the whole tread) but it looks like your rear end springs are to soft so your maxing out your rear set up before it starts to make your front end work.

easy fit is to put softer springs (like a ruf in a leaf sierra) or stiffer in the back

The reason the back works before the front is because of the roll stiffness of the front end, and that's due to the bushing bind inherent in radius arm designs. It's actually "designed in" to make the car handle.

In fact, with the front springs removed altogether, the result would be much the same.

The answer is not connected to spring choice at all. It's either to lower front roll stiffness (thereby balancing roll stiffness front to rear) or raise rear roll stiffness by adding a rear sway bar.

The first option would make for a high travel by wobbly car. The second would result in limited travel but much better handling.

I prefer higher roll stiffness in the rear than the front, which is exactly how a stock sierra with the swaybar pulled works.

Steve.

[mr.green]

well thats the plan then... i can't see softer springs in the front being very successful. as you said steve, it will do little for roll stiffness and also will be banging the bumps.

so i'll sway bar the rear, retain the coils and have another look.... kinda funny that to evaluate the front i have to finish the back but thats how it is.
thanks for the help all,

[SuziBlu]

Going thru my bookmarks searching for a site, saw this, had forgotten about it till just then.

May help, may not, worth a read but.

[mr.green]

radius arms for the win!!!!! thanks auszookers for the pointers


in this pic the only thing i have done differently to the last was put a strap around the r/h/r and a chock in the l/h/r, almost eliminating rear suspension.. almost, by the time i took the photo i could have played a tune on the strap and the rear may have moved a couple of inches.....


at this point in jacking it up, the tyres is about 10mm off the corner of the front guard and then i noticed how much my bodgy- fab top coil mount was eating into my new tyre so this is as far as i have gone for the moment.

just great to see that it can move after adequate roll stiffness has been applied to the back. i think i will be happy with this setup over a flop machine but its still early days yet,

will post another pic after i have tidied up the coil mounts and they let me keep my tyres

[31zook]

how the hell is that wheel staying up?

[SierraDan]

31zook wrote:

:crazy: how the hell is that wheel staying up?

My head is hurting too

[mr.green]

31zook wrote:

:crazy: how the hell is that wheel staying up?

see the red milk crate???

no, there is a strap through the rim, hiding behind the orange strap. i'm actually using 2x 2.5 tonne ratchet straps to the roof of the shed to lift it.