3 link or radias arms?

[eatmc55]

ive been thinking of doing either a 3 link or a radias arm conversion on the front of my truck. i was thinking more along the lines of a radias arm because i havent seen a whole lot of that. also with my hydro assist right on top of the axle i think the 3 link bracket would get in the way. so if anyone can point me in the right direction that would be awesome. thanks

[Mace]

Early bronco, Landrover, 80 series are all radius arm suspensions from the factory.

If you do a RA suspension, plan on making the arms as flat as possible. Kinda hard sometimes.

I like true 3 links with a panhard bar myself. But it really depends on what you can fit in your rig.

articulation planned, tire size, how much cutting you are going to do.. Lots of questions before we can give you a good answer.

Also, what rig? (FJ62) and how hard do you plan on wheeling it? is this for road manners or for off road prowess?

[Tapage]

RA are not more job involved to get done compared with 3 link . ?

And I under the impresion that RA are more road and HW friendly than 3 link .. wrong ? or all depends ..

[eatmc55]

shes all trailer these days. i was also thinking like you mase, of a panhard bar 3 link. i guess i could build something so i can still use my hydro assist. i want as much flex as i can get. right now im running 37"s , but once i move back east i plan on 42"s. im going to cut out my fenders and make a small flat fender. maybe use airshocks insted of coilovers

[ats4x4dotcom]

control arms with an x link

[eatmc55]

Originally Posted by ats4x4dotcom

control arms with an x link

holy! thats bad ass, got any better and closer pics? maybe i could put my own touch on that. it looks so sweet

[OpTimuS]

i realise that this thread is over 6mths old but what is the proress with it???

I have some pics if you re interested??















hope that helps.

[Advent]

Doesn't that basically just hold the axle side to side by the joints binding?

[Z()LTAN]

nah, its still got the other 2 mounts on the RA on the diff

[Mace]

Originally Posted by Advent

Doesn't that basically just hold the axle side to side by the joints binding?

No, it still needs a panhard bar to locate the axle from side to side, what you are thinking of is a watts link. Which looks alot like this but is only designed for locating the axle itself..

The X link allows the axle to rotate during articulation to prevent bushing bind. It is similar to a wristed arm, Radius arm system. But from the looks of things should not have and many of the quirks of a wristed system.

It can be plenty strong, and function reasonably well from what I have seen.

I would not do one in the rear tho. Rears are much easier to 4 link.

[OpTimuS]

Mace You are correct however there is no panhard needed due to the 2 links on each radius arm

I understand that a 4-link is easy. But a 4-link is boring......... everyone has them. to those guys but, I am looking for any ideas here from people on how I can further this system.

What is a wristed arm setup?

[Pacer]

oh boy...

[Mace]

Originally Posted by OpTimuS

Mace You are correct however there is no panhard needed due to the 2 links on each radius arm

I understand that a 4-link is easy. But a 4-link is boring......... everyone has them. to those guys but, I am looking for any ideas here from people on how I can further this system.

What is a wristed arm setup?

Build it however you want.. but that uspension style will need a panhard bar.. What are you basing your thoughts on???


Wristed Radius Arms

[alkaline747trio]

I'm with mace, only way you're gonna get away without a panhard is with a Watts link/Z-link/triang. 4-link.

[Sputnik40]

This is like watching the 90's progression of MTB suspension ideas getting hashed out. There were tons of well meaning or potentially functional options running around, 90% of which were unrealistic due to excessive weight. I think the same applies here - good to see some different ideas, but in the end it's not weight that's gonna kill most of them - but simplicity. That being said - I think Mace is right: The rear 4-link is King due to simplicity. I for one am going that route - as I'm kinda slow skilled, can do anything, just takes forever .

Just my .02 cents - continue on .

[OpTimuS]

Originally Posted by Sputnik40

This is like watching the 90's progression of MTB suspension ideas getting hashed out. There were tons of well meaning or potentially functional options running around, 90% of which were unrealistic due to excessive weight. I think the same applies here - good to see some different ideas, but in the end it's not weight that's gonna kill most of them - but simplicity. That being said - I think Mace is right: The rear 4-link is King due to simplicity. I for one am going that route - as I'm kinda slow skilled, can do anything, just takes forever .

Just my .02 cents - continue on .

You are right dude.

-4-links are simple
-4-links are light

(but they are boring.)

I am hoping to be able to build me equipment that will be comparitive in weight to a 4-link system.

[OpTimuS]

Originally Posted by OpTimuS

You are right dude.

-4-links are simple
-4-links are light

(but they are boring.)

I am hoping to be able to build me equipment that will be comparitive in weight to a 4-link system.

oh I also plan on having 4 identical radius arms, that will give superior backward engineering when needed, and also 4 identical arms means I can fabricate identical triangulated upper and lower suspension mount positions front and rear.

[OpTimuS]

Originally Posted by Mace

Build it however you want.. but that uspension style will need a panhard bar.. What are you basing your thoughts on???


Wristed Radius Arms

cheers for the link.

I am basing my thoughts on the front suspension of the 80 series cruiser.

[Mace]

See that Red bar?

That is a panhard bar. It locates the axle laterally..

I have to ask. Have you done much research on linked suspensions yet?

4 links are not simple. No links are really "simple".

[Sputnik40]

I might have a different definition of simple than you - whereas for this topic mine is something that I can find the parts for, easily fab up and - for ideas and dimensions copy someone elses . So yeah, I know a bit of thought will be needed when it comes time for final measurements - but I've not seen other options that seem as "simple" to implement with average tools or materials, weld in bungs for heims/johnny's or other needed tabs.

Originally Posted by Mace

See that Red bar?

That is a panhard bar. It locates the axle laterally..

I have to ask. Have you done much research on linked suspensions yet?

4 links are not simple. No links are really "simple".

[OpTimuS]

didn't realise that the red bar was panhard. for what it is worth the radius arm design now becomes a complete waste of time and effort. will be much better off usiing a 3-link for the front and rear.

[Mace]

Originally Posted by OpTimuS

didn't realise that the red bar was panhard. for what it is worth the radius arm design now becomes a complete waste of time and effort. will be much better off usiing a 3-link for the front and rear.

Why?

You are all over the place.
That Z link is just fine in the front.

You talk like 4 links are a piece of cake but now want a 3 link ( wishbone, true???) which will most likely need a panhard bar as well (if that is the killer I am super confused)...


What are you trying to do?

[OpTimuS]

Originally Posted by Mace

Why?

You are all over the place.
That Z link is just fine in the front.

You talk like 4 links are a piece of cake but now want a 3 link ( wishbone, true???) which will most likely need a panhard bar as well (if that is the killer I am super confused)...

What are you trying to do?

alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll oooooooooover theeeeee pppppplllllllace......

I want to accomplish front and rear even travel, and better travel than my leaves which I have stated before.

I believe that the 4-links are a piece of cake to build and design. but you can get them terribly wrong and this results in bnding of joints, diff movement, and the pinion rotating through the movement of the diff.

The reason I would now not pursue a radius arm setup is because the radius arms are quite heavy but I would not have needed a panhard rod so there would have been a weight saving there. Now that I have done more rsearcha nd have found that I wiull require a panhard I might as well go with a 'true' 3-link.
Purely because it is simple, easy, light and effective.

I do like the trail-gear 3-link.

[Mace]

You realize that the only reason TG uses a three link on a mini is because the fuel tank gets in the way of a 4 link..


If 4 links are so easy, then do one. You are wasting your time on trying to be "novel".

[OpTimuS]

Originally Posted by Mace

You realize that the only reason TG uses a three link on a mini is because the fuel tank gets in the way of a 4 link..


If 4 links are so easy, then do one. You are wasting your time on trying to be "novel".

yes I am wasting my time.
I shuld be out there working on my truck.

and I did realise that TG only made the 3-link kit due to the fuel tank.
But it is a good kit (not that I would buy it, because it is over-priced to get the links sent oer to oz), and it gives one ideas.

[bustanutley]

weight savings on suspention = bad idea. Make that shit strong

[OpTimuS]

Originally Posted by bustanutley

weight savings on suspention = bad idea. Make that **** strong

busta, I am going to make this **** very strong . what I was saying is that uneccessary weight is bad.

[OpTimuS]

for example 2" DOM tubing..... that is some quality gear.