[alien]

Damo wrote:

That means that the more wheel travel you have (more travel = more spring twist) the more the higher the spring rate becomes.

It has nothing to do with the spring rate in a braking situation.

yeah, so you have a non-linear spring rate when flexing, but a more linear spring rate under brakes - and the non-twisting motion of braking requires less force to compress the leaf than when you're flexing it up offroad, right?

add to that a softer leaf pack is more prone to wrapping, so under the load of braking the diff is more likely to wrap the leaves.

what would be interesting is to also measure your vehicles instant center on the front axle, and see how much weight is acutally over the front wheels under braking.

[Damo]

alien wrote:

Damo wrote:

That means that the more wheel travel you have (more travel = more spring twist) the more the higher the spring rate becomes.

It has nothing to do with the spring rate in a braking situation.

yeah, so you have a non-linear spring rate when flexing, but a more linear spring rate under brakes - and the non-twisting motion of braking requires less force to compress the leaf than when you're flexing it up offroad, right?

Yeah that's right. Leaf springs by design are still rising rate though, so it will be harder to compress the spring the more it is compressed, and that's not going to change just because you put the shackle on the other end.

[alien]

yeah i agree with that... like i added to my post above though, it would be good to see how the instant center is affected with the angle change in the spring caused by the shackle reversal and how that affects it.

the point i made above about flat spring vs. arched spring in a SR situation still applies though. If you run a dead flat leaf in SR arrangement you'd have less dive under braking as the diff will move forward under compression vs. the same setup in normal 'shackle in front' configuration.

what would be a factor also is the angle of the leaves - if you're running them on an upward angle the deflection under braking would also make them less prone to wrapping: ( / vs __ with a backwards load.)

[Fatzook]

Damo wrote:

ajsr wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

Damo wrote:

Better approach angle

Not unless you cut the perches off your diff and rotate them.

To achieve the same castor as you have now, you will need to have fixed hangers that are as long as your shackles are.

The Calamari kit has some massive fangs hanging down to achieve this.

X2
It looks like a pretty shit idea for serious wheeling.
It might make it drive better on the road however.

Yeah I think keeping the spring flat-ish would help, that shackle mount that in Alien's pic, that would help too.

Just a visual observation based on nothing really....

But having a 'high clearance' front spring hanger, a shackle mount passing through the chassis; rather than under it, and flat springs, it will be VERY low in the front end. VERY low!

[alien]

could be fixed by going SPOA and/or a HUGE guard chop =P

that or do the same treatment on the rear so it rides evenly.

[Damo]

Fatzook wrote:

Damo wrote:

ajsr wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

Damo wrote:

Better approach angle

Not unless you cut the perches off your diff and rotate them.

To achieve the same castor as you have now, you will need to have fixed hangers that are as long as your shackles are.

The Calamari kit has some massive fangs hanging down to achieve this.

X2
It looks like a pretty shit idea for serious wheeling.
It might make it drive better on the road however.

Yeah I think keeping the spring flat-ish would help, that shackle mount that in Alien's pic, that would help too.

Just a visual observation based on nothing really....

But having a 'high clearance' front spring hanger, a shackle mount passing through the chassis; rather than under it, and flat springs, it will be VERY low in the front end. VERY low!

Get down low and go, go, go!

I do predict some "massaging" of the body will be required.

EDIT: one thing that has been worrying me is bumpstop clearance, and if they are moved up, chassis clearance. And sump clearance.

[Fatzook]

Damo wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

Damo wrote:

ajsr wrote:

Fatzook wrote:

Damo wrote:

Better approach angle

Not unless you cut the perches off your diff and rotate them.

To achieve the same castor as you have now, you will need to have fixed hangers that are as long as your shackles are.

The Calamari kit has some massive fangs hanging down to achieve this.

X2
It looks like a pretty shit idea for serious wheeling.
It might make it drive better on the road however.

Yeah I think keeping the spring flat-ish would help, that shackle mount that in Alien's pic, that would help too.

Just a visual observation based on nothing really....

But having a 'high clearance' front spring hanger, a shackle mount passing through the chassis; rather than under it, and flat springs, it will be VERY low in the front end. VERY low!

Get down low and go, go, go!

I do predict some "massaging" of the body will be required.

Yeah but I think you would struggle to get the rear to the same height.

It sounds cool on paper ( or in this case, the interwebs) but I think the practicle advantages of SR are outweighed by the packaging issues, and workload required to make a successful setup.

Although you could lower the rear to match by notching the rear fixed hangers up into the chassis rail, and running a shackle sleeve through the rail just like the SR up front. But with your 32's this would require some epic guard chopping

Do it

EDIT: this would be harder to do it you are running WT spring spacings

[Damo]

Fatzook wrote:

Yeah but I think you would struggle to get the rear to the same height.

It sounds cool on paper ( or in this case, the interwebs) but I think the practicle advantages of SR are outweighed by the packaging issues, and workload required to make a successful setup.

Although you could lower the rear to match by notching the rear fixed hangers up into the chassis rail, and running a shackle sleeve through the rail just like the SR up front. But with your 32's this would require some epic guard chopping

Do it

EDIT: this would be harder to do it you are running WT spring spacings

As you say, I think packaging is going to be the problem. As for ride height, if I try to keep it about the same as it is with stock springs it should work. I've been messing around with a spare chassis and the springs and I can't see why I can't get it to that height. Of course that all might change once I start cutting shit, but we'll see.

I was actually thinking that I should put stock springs in the front and sort the rear end out first.

[JrZook]

Damo get that thing out of the shed!! Whats your grand tally of non web wheeling events for 2010?

[Damo]

JrZook wrote:

Damo get that thing out of the shed!! Whats your grand tally of non web wheeling events for 2010?

I dunno why you guys think this thing is always in the shed, i drive it to work every friggin week!!!

That kinda makes major chop sessions difficult, but dammit I've got angle grinder fever!!

I wheeled twice, I didn't think that was too bad. Get back to me when you got 2 kids

[tanshi]

get back to me when you have 3 cars to break

[neofitou]

my limited 2c is I think SR would be good in a zook if you were setting it up for rally hurtling along rough roads at high speed it would be way better than stock, but I would rather IFS in that case. match the lowness at the rear, put on 215 or 225s and stick in a gti motor, roll cage and seats and go for fun!

Otherwise there would be no way I would consider it for me, but I'm no expert. It I wanted crazy suspension for rocks I would be looking at coils!