| auszookers.com https://auszookers.com/forum/ |
|
| Ruf help inverting shackle https://auszookers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=32020 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Daves4wd [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Ruf help inverting shackle |
 So I've put my standard rears with my lifted front springs in the front redrilled my rear spring mounts 25mm back and and the springs aren't holding the weight to well what can I do to fix this?? It's all the same as Suzukikids setup except no extended shackles could this be the cause of it?? Thanks for the help |
|
| Author: | want33s [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Fit extended shackles OR move the front mount further forward. |
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
BINGO! The springs are holding the weight fine. How far have you extended your bumpstops? This will dictate how short you car run your shackle or whether the setup you have can ever be resolved. I've never tried a 25mm extension with stock shackles. The smallest I've gone is 35mm extension with 100mm shackles, and that's effective with almost no bumpstop spacing. Steve. |
|
| Author: | Daves4wd [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Ahh ok well I'm goig to borrow a set off Salih then when I get mine I'll do it all thanks want33s for the help Nah the bump stops are standard for now the rear spring perch is 25mm further back same as a mates one I'm getting 2 inch extended shackles to hopefully fix it if it and I'll extend my bump stops 25mm and see how it works out thanks for the help gwagonsteve |
|
| Author: | suzukikid [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
shackles fixed it! really didnt think they would make that much difference! we went for a quick wheel.... its all good! cheers for ya help guys.... thought i had another zook in the driveway for a few days! haha |
|
| Author: | Red89 [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
It may still invert when hard landing offroad, make sure your bumpstops are low enough. |
|
| Author: | Daves4wd [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Yer I'll be fixing the bump stops during the week and getting longer shocks to they max out before I get the full drop of the spring so I think I'll be getting heaps more flex out of it thanks for the help now just need to work out if te hiace/commo shocks will be good enuff for it or if I get something better suited to off road any suggestions on what's good?? Cheers |
|
| Author: | 2stroker [ Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Mate in the end the distance between the mounts on the chassis is too short. You all know the rear springs are are 75mm longer so why on earth would you think that extending the front mount spacing by 25mm is all you need. Why are your shackles inverting? because your front spring mount spacing is too short, simple. Extending shackles or bump stops to overcome the problem is fixing one problem while creating other problems. |
|
| Author: | 607CHA [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
I had mine chassis extended 40mm and used 2inch longer shackles |
|
| Author: | SierraDan [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Mines 60mm |
|
| Author: | Highway-Star [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
I posted the below linked thread ages ago for reasons like this....... viewtopic.php?f=5&t=20709 Its really quite a simple thing!!! |
|
| Author: | JrZook [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 5:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
^^ this guy! |
|
| Author: | want33s [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 5:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Don't worry about the shackles... What that car needs is more Zip Clips 
|
|
| Author: | Daves4wd [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
I was doing it the way my mates is done but it's all worked out now sorry for the that and the zip ties are only on there for now till I've finished mucking around with the bar I didn't want to do a chassis extension as I can't get my hands on a welder the only time I can get one is once in blue moon and even still my skills aren't that good hahah thanks for the help |
|
| Author: | Gwagensteve [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
2stroker wrote: Mate in the end the distance between the mounts on the chassis is too short. You all know the rear springs are are 75mm longer so why on earth would you think that extending the front mount spacing by 25mm is all you need. Why are your shackles inverting? because your front spring mount spacing is too short, simple. Extending shackles or bump stops to overcome the problem is fixing one problem while creating other problems. I'm going to disagree with this. I forget how many cars I've RUF'd, and I started with the reasoning that the mount should come forward the same amount that the spring is longer. For us, it was a terrible outcome. Notice how the rear shackles on lift-spring equipped sierras tend to sit vertical? That's what we had with long extensions and RUF. Whilst it's clear that Daves setup was wrong, I'd suggest that implying that bumpstop spacers or extended shackles aren't critical factors in RUF setup is a bit misleading. If a car is setup for RUF with no spacers and stock shackles it's going to be giving up a lot of droop if bumpstop spacers are subsequently added. It's no different in the rear - add bumpstop spacing and the shackle hanger really needs to come forward to retain travel. I'd say, 2stroker, if the focus of the ruf was maximum compression travel and lift with the shortest shackle, your comments are sound. there's more than one way to set a car up though, and if minimum lift and maximum tyre size are priorities, then a shorter extension, longer shackle and bumpstop spacing need to be considered right from the outset. Steve. |
|
| Author: | ajsr [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 8:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
SierraDan wrote: Mines 60mm mines 17 mm |
|
| Author: | GRPABT1 [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Gwagensteve wrote: 2stroker wrote: Mate in the end the distance between the mounts on the chassis is too short. You all know the rear springs are are 75mm longer so why on earth would you think that extending the front mount spacing by 25mm is all you need. Why are your shackles inverting? because your front spring mount spacing is too short, simple. Extending shackles or bump stops to overcome the problem is fixing one problem while creating other problems. I'm going to disagree with this. I forget how many cars I've RUF'd, and I started with the reasoning that the mount should come forward the same amount that the spring is longer. For us, it was a terrible outcome. Notice how the rear shackles on lift-spring equipped sierras tend to sit vertical? That's what we had with long extensions and RUF. Whilst it's clear that Daves setup was wrong, I'd suggest that implying that bumpstop spacers or extended shackles aren't critical factors in RUF setup is a bit misleading. If a car is setup for RUF with no spacers and stock shackles it's going to be giving up a lot of droop if bumpstop spacers are subsequently added. It's no different in the rear - add bumpstop spacing and the shackle hanger really needs to come forward to retain travel. I'd say, 2stroker, if the focus of the ruf was maximum compression travel and lift with the shortest shackle, your comments are sound. there's more than one way to set a car up though, and if minimum lift and maximum tyre size are priorities, then a shorter extension, longer shackle and bumpstop spacing need to be considered right from the outset. Steve. I'm going to agree with 2stroker on this one but I get what you're saying Steve. I think that while perhaps not the full 75mm extension may be needed to obtain a good shackle angle with RUF and stock shackles without inversion I think that a setup without bump stop spacers can be created that will give just as much travel, and a more even droop/compression ratio. Tyre size and real estate within the wheel wells becomes the limiting factor though. I'm not sure shackle inversion should be the reasoning for bump stop spacers is all. I am a fan of bump stop spacers and use them and they have many justifiable uses including fitting bigger tyres and leverage but I think if designing a suspension setup then it's those factors which require the thought of including bump stops and relying on them to stop shackle inversion should be avoided if possible. I've had similar dramas when setting up my 3/4 elliptic setup and found that bump stops with very little compression room weren't the best solution. I think the calculations highway star did in the thread he linked are the best solution, doing the math and checking it twice will let you know what you will achieve before even making a tack weld. If the calculations don't work based on your required needs without bump stop spacing factored in then so be it. It is a way of doing it but not the ideal way I believe. |
|
| Author: | SierraDan [ Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
ajsr wrote: SierraDan wrote: Mines 60mm mines 17 mm I'm guessing it's how you use it? 
|
|
| Author: | 2stroker [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
Yeah Steve I can totally understand your reasoning, where we differ with this is that firstly it is not raised springs that people are fitting they are talking about used rears, I have not said that you need to go 75mm longer, I have said that the springs are 75mm longer so 25mm is not enough. I do each RUF depending on the spring that I am using, however the new distance usually come out around the 60mmlonger. Secondly I prefer not to use extended shackles because I like the vehicles suspension to remain stock looking and I think they affect handling too much. I do understand why people use of extended bumpstops and the reasoning behind it, I would prefer body lift or virtual lift to clear tyres rather than limiting my upward spring travel, however I am not trying to cater for 32's or 33's like some of you guys are and that is the difference. |
|
| Author: | 2stroker [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
ajsr wrote: SierraDan wrote: Mines 60mm mines 17 mm Are you saying that you are using a 75mm longer spring and have only extended the front by 17mm, if so can you post a pic of your shackles |
|
| Author: | ajsr [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
|
|
| Author: | JrZook [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
ajsr wrote: yep pics in my build thread. 17 mm IMO is the absolute limit of possilitys here and in hindsight if done again I'd aim at about 25mm as the difference is really marginal. and yes the shackles are long, but it all works and works brilliantly. A bit loose feeling on the road but the road is not this cars aim. my old red car ran a 30 mm extension I'm a little on the fence in this argument. yes mine is built similar to gwagens, but if done this way your not really ruf'ing the front more building a new suspension system. 2 strokers way is fine for someone either not able to or not confident do all the work reqired gwagens way. but like steve I belive you lose a massive amount of the cars potential if you just use the suzuki spacing on the rear. IMO the suzuki spacing on the rear is incorrect for the spring lenght, so much so I changed my rear spacing by 10-15mm shorter First point depends on what you wanna do with the vehicle. Mine is a daily, I wanted it nice and tight on the road as well as work decently off road without the cop magnet extended shackles hanging off the front. It handles well and still has a significant amount of flex over the stock setup. For the second point, with what springs? Stock and short leafs like OME using std shackles yes the spacing is too far apart. EFS length mains or custom the spacing is pretty much spot on. Saying 'spring length' is a moot point as they are all different. Dan |
|
| Author: | 2stroker [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
ajsr I have no idea why you would say "2 strokers way is fine for someone either not able to or not confident do all the work reqired gwagens way" I would say it is the exact opposite to what you have just said, the reason that most people (like the guy who started this thread) do it your way or gwagens way is that they are not confident to do what I do. With the way that you describe you are basicly drilling a hole in the rear hanger to gain 17 or 25 mm, bolting on a very long set of shackles and bolting on an extended bump stop to overcome upward travel. In comparison to this I extend the chassis and fabricate a new front mount, cut off the shock towers and weld longer ones on further forward so that the correct alignement of top and bottom shock mounting points is retained and the shock does not bottom out, I move the bumpstop forward so they are in the correct allignment for the new diff position. Depending on what the owner wants I will either move the whole rear mount backwards and reweld it on to ensure that the track rod and drag link don't bind due to the forward movement of the diff or I retain the original position of the rear mount and use a jimny steering box with shorter pitman arm, either way I ensure the springs travel through a full range of motion both up and down without any binding or adverse stresses on steering arms or any side loads on shock absorbers due to incorrect alignement. The BIG difference here is that the way I do it the Suzuki is still an all rounder, it can be driven comfortably on the road without any ill effect on stability, it can crawl around the bush with much better than standard wheel travel and comfort, it can be driven at speed over the rough, you can jump it if you are that way inclined and it will land without bouncing you off the track, you can turn it into a rough rutted corner in the bush at 60kph if you like and it will handle it in safety. My RUF experience has come from trial and error and admittedly from an offroad racing/ rally perspective rather than a rock crawling perspective. What you guys are talking about is a suspension set up that will work well for you because of the kind of driving you do, my guess is that you don't drive hard over rough ground, your vehicles are more for a weekend use purpose and that most of your wheeling is slow technical stuff where you also rely a fir bit on diff locks. |
|
| Author: | zooky08 [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
On my sierra I moved my rear perch back 35mm and my front foreword 40mm, using ome 2" springs and standard shackles. Shackle angle was pretty good. |
|
| Author: | ajsr [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=21321&hilit=how+to+ruf |
|
| Author: | 2stroker [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
What are you talking about mate, why do you think that it is less fab work to use suzuki rear measurements on the front, I just explained what is involved and then you posted basicly a repeat of what I said and say it's how you do it. As I have already said the only reason you can get away with such a short mounting distance is because you are using those long shackles and limiting your uptravel. All good and well for what you use it for but not too good as an all rounder. |
|
| Author: | ajsr [ Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
yep your right as usual, its just a shame you dont seen to be able to visualise anthing but your own way of doing things. I think its about time I join shep and steky as I getting sick of trying to help peple who either know it all even after they ask for help, or who are unable to take off their blinders and see someones elses ideas/point of view or read a post properly |
|
| Author: | GRPABT1 [ Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
For what it's worth ajsr your post was confusing and seemed contradicting, I think there's been a communication break down not an actual disagreement here. Pretty sure you're both trying to say the same thing as each other :/ |
|
| Author: | 2stroker [ Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
GRPABT1 wrote: For what it's worth ajsr your post was confusing and seemed contradicting, I think there's been a communication break down not an actual disagreement here. Pretty sure you're both trying to say the same thing as each other :/ Exactly right GRPABT1, I am actually agreeing with you ajsr not having a crack at you, you are doing RUF exactly the way I am doing it, I explained what I do, then you explained what you do which is exactly the same. The differences in our setups (length of shackles and length of bumpstops) is because of our intended vehicle applications, that does not make either wrong. You and I both agree that he shouldn't be just drilling the mount back 35mm like he did, you and I both agree that the chassis needed to be extended etc, etc. I don't see a conflict of ideas at all. As for not reading the post properly I did read it properly, you have since edited what you posted. No need to get upset about it mate itsall good debate that is helpfull to people who have never done it. |
|
| Author: | SierraDan [ Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Ruf help inverting shackle |
I like my setup with the rear mount in stock position. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 9:30 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|