[Gwagensteve]

So I've started a RUF thread. I'm not sure there's really a dedicated thread about doing it. This is in response to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=57314 where seanzook06 has touched on RUF bracketry as part of bar design.

Please chime in with any RUF experience/build photos etc you have, let's build a bit of a resource.

Much like a recovery point, RUF is a super critical modification as failure will result in loss of control of the vehicle. It's why engineers pay a lot of attention to chassis welding and design when you discuss RUF and want it legal.

These aren't the only way to do RUF or are any of them the "right" way - they are just what the owner or engineer demanded

This is Gregc's build from 2004/2005. This was a 100% road legal, (other than tyres) engineered build. RUF/narrow tracked spring width, 2"BL, bump stop spacing, massive guard work to run 35's, pinched nose. It was a very thorough build and took 2 years of concerted effort.

Here is the extension. I can't recall exactly how big we made it, maybe 70mm over standard, too much by today's standards, but it doesn't matter if the extension is 10mm or 300mm, it has to be done the same way because you're extending a chassis.

The engineer insisted on doubling plates, fitted internally and extending at least 300mm and plug welded to the existing chassis 300mm wasn't possible due to the shape of the chassis, so it was agreed to make them as long as possible. The cut had to be at 45˚ External doubling plates are possible but in this instance they would sit over the chassis number, mess with radiator mounts, steering box etc. All steel could not be more than 50% thicker than the standard chassis. it's all 3mm in this case (stock chassis is 2.5mm)



We moved the steering box forward (this is a Vitara power steering box)

Here is the steering box doubling plate and crush tubes



and here it is loose fitted



and the passenger side, which was much easier with no steering box of chassis number.



ready to weld to the car. The. new crossmember is 1.75" CDS roll cage tube.



Fully welded out



and on it's wheels in January 2005



You can also see we narrow tracked the front spring spacing so the shackle was under the chassis like on an SJ40/SJ50 up to 1987. This helps tyre clearance and lowers roll stiffness, but it also makes the RUF look so much cleaner.

This car is still setup like this and it's been 100% trouble free for all those years. Yes, it was a lot of work but for it to be perfect 17 years later is nice.

[/quote]


Here is a quick and dirty RUF not he Trolley Tug, actually done at the same time but very quickly and without engineering approval to get the car on Adventure Tour 2005 (I think) This car still exists and is now owned by someone else, but is now an off-road car only.

(Actually, here's the two cars side by side in early 2005)



The body mount was worked into the bar work due to the intended tyre size (Q78 - 35.5") because that area always gets messed up with big tyres.



This extension was far too long which has always made the car sit too tall.



You can see the original bumper holes in the end of the chassis, and the old front crossmember hole. This is doubling plated inside on both sides and outside on the top and the bottom. It's much messier to put the springs outboard but we weren't flipping the chassis upside down to move the spring hangers inboard.

apart from being too long, it's been completely solid, but we didn't take enough car designing it for barwork/winch - everything was just welded to the front of the car (We were always in a hurry working on the trolley tug) - you can see we didn't move the steering box forwards.

Problems with this setup were all down to not enough time thinking it through and not enough time to spend on the car. The bar work was a pain as it was all welded in place. Strong, but a pain. it sits too tall. the wide track spring spacing means the rim offset needed to be huge to clear the springs, so the car was too wide, had too much steering kick back and was (*is) hard work to steer as we never spent the time to go power steering. we never put a recovery point on it and whilst it should have taken a winch, we never really tried. Here it was on it's last trip



And here's Jinxy, the car that breaks the internet. (hOw DoEs iT sTeEr It MuSt HaVe No FlEx) This was not engineer approved but again, ran around for years. it ended up looking like a piece of screwed up tinfoil after many, many hard trips and was eventually parted out.



This car was built very very quickly and the build wasn't really photographed. I have just found some photos of it from 2010 when it was being built. That's why the build photos look like they were taken with a potato.

This was designed to have the shortest extension possible, which I think ended up at something like 17mm. This requires a long shackle and that combination makes the car sit very low. This is about the best photo of the configuration. There are some tricks here. The original front crossmember was removed entirely and a new tube was fitted behind the original location, under the radiator. This was so the steering box (Vitara power steer) could be moved well forwards to clear the tie rod at full compression, with no bump stop spacing and with a vitara drop pitman arm. the springs were inboarded. The chassis wasn't extended at all, new shackle hangers were made up that sat the shackle hanger about centred on the end of the original chassis. Bumpstops were vitara.

This is with OME rear springs, 2" shackles with the stock shackle hanger location. The suspension can't work like this - the shackles will invert, but this sort of ride height was our goal (if not lower)



Here is the car on stock WT spring spacing but the new crossmember is going in



If you look at this photo, you can see how short the "extension" is - it's just a little triangular plate to slide the shackle hanger forward. (look at the passenger side hanger)



and here it is testing.



and on a trip



Would I recommend this? no, not really, I think it would be better with a panhard rod as the flatter the shackles get the more the steering will push the axle side to side (a significant problem with Sierras) but it worked. The car was daily driven on 31's for ages and ages with this setup.

[Gwagensteve]

I've done a heap of other cars but generally, they were some variation of what you see here.

CJ's Sierra was done the same as Gregc's as it was for engineering approval but was already narrow track and after learning from my mistakes made the extension a little shorter and added a pintle pattern to the front crossmember along with the hawse mount for the rear mounted winch.






Go back earlier though I was really throwing stuff together. Yes, I could weld OK and the idea was sound, but these were often pretty quick builds. The earliest RUF I did I no longer have photos of , it was on Grimbo's car in about 1999-2000. He had the idea after seeing Glenn Wakefields "zukini" in Moab at the easter jeep safari. We threw some OME springs in the front in the carpark at Suziparts (as it was then, now Suziworld) and immediately inverted the shackles. He drove it home on the bump stops and then we welded two bits of 50X50 stacked in front of the chassis to make 100X50 (all flux core welded ) at his place to make a 100mm extension which was far too long, but I think it stayed in the car right up to about 5 years ago when the owner in WA coiled it, I think. Here is a photo of it when it was with it's second owner.



Gregc's first car was done quick and rough with big plates and a second front crossmember intended to take a winch plate welded to it. This was something like 2003. It wasn't pretty.



It looked better once the winch was fitted and the little bar ends went on. (March 2004) At this point I wasn't confident enough I could make a winch mount that wouldn't fail so Greg had a forklift mechanic weld the winch plate on.



Critta

This had a short buttwelded extension done when the car was converted from SPOA back to SPUA. worked fine. (Circa 2003 or something judging from the car we owned at the time)

I just found a photo of it on line which I must have posted somewhere and subsequently lost of it in progress. As you can see, a new tube crossmember was fitted forward of the old one. It was doubling plated underneath from memory.






but then the bug bit and we ended up putting MQ patrol axles and springs under it with hangers just welded to the front of the chassis.



So, as you can see, there are lots of ways of doing RUF from neat and legal to hack. My opinion is take the time to do it properly - there is no magic formula - Use, tyre size, spring choice, shock length/choice etc will change measurements and technique. If you have any doubts about your ability to fabricate or weld, don't do it - stick to non-critical work. Back in the day I had parts fail because I did't doubling plate the chassis, for example. Messy to fix.

[seanzook06]

I am liking this thread, already has shown me good ways to do it, and ways not to do it

[Beery]

Yaas! great thread.

It's nice to see some examples of what an engineer would expect - they're quite different to a lot of the examples I've seen that aren't going to be engineered.

I really like CJ's tray back. the front looks like it works really well. the lower shock mounts on top of the diff is a nice touch too.

Do you find spring life an issue with RUF and no bump spacing? I notice a lot of these cars run bump stop spacing, which would help. But do the springs get over compressed/inverted too much without bump stop spacing, causing them to sag greatly, as a rear spring has more camber compared to a front spring, so I assume it's well out of its normal working range. My understanding is to basically set the shackle position up as flat as possible when the spring is at its longest point, without the shackle inverting. This gives the most available travel (droop), gives a low ride height, and also lessens the inverting effect, but is it enough/acceptable?

[Beery]

Also, did the cars that were engineered have to perform a swerve/brake test? Or is it not needed due to no major lift or tyre increase. Is there any issues with engineering if a front swaybar is not fitted? I've never driven a RUF car, but i'm curious if they end up a bit too soft or "floaty" on the road for an engineers liking, due to the lower spring rate and no swaybar.

[Gwagensteve]

Gregc's car was driven in stock form and then when complete by the engineer and he was satisfied. Ride height stayed under the requirement for swerve testing and it was certed on stock tyres. CJ's car would have been the same but was never completed (it's now changed hands and and being worked on) although as it was a 16" wheel car the aim was to cert it on 31's.

They can be as soft and floaty or a stiff as you want really. Many years ago after a run in with a canary, Greg put new springs in his car, stock shackles and did a whole lot of stuff to stiffen it up due to an overly picky RWC guy. More recently he's put a panhard rod in the front and he's over the moon with the feel of the front end now. he's running it a bit stiffer than he was and it doesn't seem to have sagged too badly.

I think in the early days we were running the front ends too soft and doing everything possible to make them as flexy at the expense of handling and road feel. Three leaf packs, no spring clamps, long shackles with no centre bars etc. I'd say that was a bigger impediment to spring life than over compressing the springs. You'll also notice that we run the bump stops under the chassis and now outboard, to maximise the fulcrum effect and help increase travel. That is fairly hard on the springs although to be honest most "normal" cars have the bumps inline with the spring and not outboard.

Likewise, using a stiffer shock than an N76 or 160/70 Bilstein would go a long way to make the front feel crisper.

I don't believe Greg's car was certed with a swaybar in it. I know he did subsequently refit one in the process of pleasing said overly picky RWC guy but It's gone now. CJ's car, as a 1.0, didn't have a swaybar stock.

I'd say with a quality spring with adequate rate spring life is fine.

[Beery]

Interestingly, the guy who drove my car for its last RWC said the front was very soft (it's completley stock) and I agree (a good thing though, I like how it drives, although some more compression travel would be nice) so I can imagine with RUF, some RWC guys would be picky. It's hard to say without driving one, or attempting the job, but i think I would lean towards a stiffer setup.

Panhard rod sounds like a winner. Ever since I fitted power steering, it's like the first quarter turn of the wheel is just compressing/taking the "play" out of everything, (shackles, bushes, springs) then it finally gets stiff enough and you get some feel through the wheel, then it starts to turn. It was never as noticeable with manual steering.

I plan to RUF my tray back and get it engineered, so this is great info. Thanks for the write up.

[Brenno]

Panhard rod completely transforms the car, mine drives like an absolute dream with it in, the steering is so precise.