Bear80 said:
No need to center if you keep the panhard
Another custom arm thread :) sorta like Tools R us (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter FJBen
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
No need to center if you keep the panhard
Waggoner5
SILVER Star
I think its a cool idea, and I had big ideas for doing a real 3 link, but after Moab, I decided that it might help some, but not enough to justify all the work, posibility of only marginal on road habits, and compromised off road stability. My truck wheeled better than I expected, but more travel would not do anything that I didn't already do. I like the bolt on off the shelf parts also. Custom is cool, but no matter how trick the front suspension is, the truck will still be a 6k lb station wagon. My .02.
Gary
Gary
Bear80 said:
Right
Bear80 said:
You have a 4 link and panhard bar on the rear.
I want to get back to FJBen's idea.
Would you really gain much with the front bushing mount removeable over say stock arms/bushings with either the slee plates or maf drop brackets and the front bolt removed from the drivers side during 'wheeling? Or even doing the same thing with slee arms? I only point out the plates etc so that the stock rubber bushings can be used.
Would you really gain much with the front bushing mount removeable over say stock arms/bushings with either the slee plates or maf drop brackets and the front bolt removed from the drivers side during 'wheeling? Or even doing the same thing with slee arms? I only point out the plates etc so that the stock rubber bushings can be used.
Walking Eagle said:
And its real hard on the bushings if you have a lot of travel. If you have old/weak bushings on the rear it will follow if you have old/weak bushings on the front with a 4-link you will be hurding sheep.
Back to the original question,
Ben, the point at wich the bar is sleeved will be held in place by the the hitch pin, I get that, the issue is will the inner part of the tubing yoke out the outer part of the existing housing while driving on the road.
as it flexes while driving over uneven terrain it will try to roll and there is now nothing to stop it from rotating and yoking out the center of the bar.
Dave
Ben, the point at wich the bar is sleeved will be held in place by the the hitch pin, I get that, the issue is will the inner part of the tubing yoke out the outer part of the existing housing while driving on the road.
as it flexes while driving over uneven terrain it will try to roll and there is now nothing to stop it from rotating and yoking out the center of the bar.
Dave
Bear80 said:
The one big thing that Tools did is provided clearance between the arm and the bracket. If you use full width arms and pin the arm or remove a front bushing without additional clearance you run a good chance tearing off the bracket or breaking the control arm between the bushings.
Last edited:
FJBen
SILVER Star
- Thread starter
- #31
PHAEDRUS said:
I"m thinking if it's a fairly snug fit, it shouldn't be able to really yoke out the outer arm should it? I'm not sure how it's going to pull apart if it snugly fits in and then is held in that position by the front mount? we are talking a few inches of rod/tube inbetween the cut mark/where they meet.
I don't know how much it will really move on the road???? Can it move *that* much to yoke it out???
Again, I'm just throwing this out....
The reason I'm thinking of this way is that we have proven that if you remove the front bolt she will flex better, I'll *TRY* and get some test pics of that tonight. My thoughts are if I'm going to be using a setup like these arms to correct my caster, a nice benefit would be to have them also create a more flexible 3-link VERY easily with stuff I already have.
The other question is the width of the bushings and can the mounts take that without beefing up. I may need to "shave" the arms a-la Tools r us to take some of that stress off.
FJBen
SILVER Star
- Thread starter
- #32
Bear80 said:
The reason with using Slee's arms is becuase they are tube, it's what I have to use for my caster at the moment, and that would be the easiest to fab with.
I'll take some pics of the flex differences with the bolt removed. It does flex more, but then if you don't have a removeable piece like the one I'm thinking of, then you risk bashing that part that hangs down now.
Bear80 said:
I was just pointing out that the rear is 4 link with panhard, and it has alot more travel and articulation than the front. If you could get as much out of the front as the rear, it'd be a big step forward.
You can triangulate (center) the upper arms to delete the panhard bar, but I think you'll start running into engine parts - I'm guessing that's why most that have gone to links rather than radius arms have done a 3 link with panhard. Alternately, you could triangulate the lower arms, and it'd have the same effect. It doesn't matter if it's the top arms or the bottom arms that keep the axle from going side to side. Triangulating the lowers would also be easier since you could incorporate the angle into the brackets.
FJBen
SILVER Star
- Thread starter
- #34
Here's some pics that I just took...shows a bit of evidence...
Slee Arms: 23" around the bottom of the tire (very vauge measurement)
Slee Arms, front bolt removed: 27.5" again vague
How far the arm swung down:
I believe there is more travel available....the limiting factor at this point was my shocks...they looked all the way pulled out like the rears when they max out. It can't really swing "up" at moment to let the otherside drop because it will max out going up and hit on the bracket...thus wanting to remove that bracket.
It was close to 5" change with the swaybar attached which seems pretty decent...seems like with a shock change more droop could be attainable.
Slee Arms: 23" around the bottom of the tire (very vauge measurement)
Slee Arms, front bolt removed: 27.5" again vague
How far the arm swung down:
I believe there is more travel available....the limiting factor at this point was my shocks...they looked all the way pulled out like the rears when they max out. It can't really swing "up" at moment to let the otherside drop because it will max out going up and hit on the bracket...thus wanting to remove that bracket.
It was close to 5" change with the swaybar attached which seems pretty decent...seems like with a shock change more droop could be attainable.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,205
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
Looks like a nice gain, try driving up the ramp with the front tire, try each side to see if they differ? Watchout for tie rod to arm contact on the unbolted side.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,205
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
When it's on the ramp grab the creeper and check all of the bushings, brackets on the arms and panhard, look for bind, interference. The limiting factor probably isn't the shocks, probably the total spring rate will only allow that much angle on the axle.
FJBen, you are way over thinking this. I realise that the previous thread a while back had the hitch pin in the front bushing but it would be better served in the rear one.
On the DS of the axle the axle itself is small and round while the PS is a square box. Because the arms fit both sides there is a releif in the arm between the bushins. This releif will allow the arm to swing up on the DS quite a bit and wrap around the axle tube.
While this might fall slightly short of your idea you might want to ramp the truck with the rear bolt removed to see if it's worth the effort to go any further.
On the DS of the axle the axle itself is small and round while the PS is a square box. Because the arms fit both sides there is a releif in the arm between the bushins. This releif will allow the arm to swing up on the DS quite a bit and wrap around the axle tube.
While this might fall slightly short of your idea you might want to ramp the truck with the rear bolt removed to see if it's worth the effort to go any further.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,205
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
landtank said:
By running only the front bolt you will need much more the tie rod to arm clearance, there may not be enough built into the arms? I don't see any advantage to removing the rear bolt?
