Anti-Wrap Q's (7 Viewers)

[74fj40ca]

Ok, so I'm building a new anti-wrap bar for my SOA'd '40, and have a few questions on what to use, or how to use it.

Standard Anti-Wrap bar uses a heim joint upfront, and 2 bushings in the rear, at the axle.

Here are some options I was tossing around.

Bushings in rear, heim up front. <--- I use this style
Bushing in rear, bushing up front
Heim joints in the rear, bushing up front
Heim joints in the rear, heim joint in the front

I was thinking of doing the option of using heim joints all around, any downside to doing it that way? Or should I just stick with what I have now?

 

[Fast Eddy]

Huge topic. IMO, most designs are wrong and will bind in one or more circumstances.

Read this: http://www.deckersonline.com/fj40_traction_bar

I don't think Decker's bar is perfect either, but there are lots of good points in his discussion. Much of my theory is based on his discussion.

Post up some drawings of your design.

Mine twists and telescopes and the front is mounted to a 3.5" shackle. All three connections use the same rubber-bushed joint. They are from fj80 lower suspension links. Pics and discussion in my 'after' thread.

 

[74fj40ca]

I'll post up some pics of a design I was playing with, once I get the '40 out of the garage.

I read the link, and I get the design, but in his design, you can see a few weak points with that design.

I'll check out your thread tomorrow when I get to work.

 

[Mace]

Decker's design is nice that it does not bind, but it also does not adequately control axle wrap either.

 

[chicago]

I've used the same design for two rigs and havent had an issue. Triangulated ladder bar w/ a heim up front and shackle bushings in the rear. Both have flexed great and not broken.
I used the ruff stuff "kit" and built the rest. Just watch the heat on the axle tube when you weld it cuz it can and WILL warp the housing.

 

[Fast Eddy]

Just because it works, doesn't mean it can't be better.

 

[Mace]

Just because it works, doesn't mean it can't be better.

So, how have you made it better? Or what do you suggest?

Deckers design works great in theory, and from discussions with people that I would trust. works great on a bronco rear suspension. However, I have seen multiple broken pinions due to his design.

 

[chicago]

Just because it works, doesn't mean it can't be better.

Meh....
Thing that makes me leery about "your design" is the amount of overhang (un supported) at the forward end of the wrap bar. Sure... It may swivel and move more freely, but I just don't think it's strong enough.

 

[74fj40ca]

I've used the same design for two rigs and havent had an issue. Triangulated ladder bar w/ a heim up front and shackle bushings in the rear. Both have flexed great and not broken.
I used the ruff stuff "kit" and built the rest. Just watch the heat on the axle tube when you weld it cuz it can and WILL warp the housing.

This is what I will most likely end up using. All though, my current setup, which is 2 heim joints in the rear, and a bushing up front, will be changed to probably all 3 joints being heim's. I don't see why this wouldn't work well.

Here is what my current setup looks like.

 

[BionicCruiser]

that looks nearly identical to mine. I do have all 3 as heims. just make sure you go big on the heims. my early design was not strong enough at the top rear heim and I broke it. upgraded the heims and then went to a LT1 motor and still haven't broken it. I centered the bar on the housing and it runs through an imaginary line between the front spring mounts. it flexes very well and have had compliments on the amount of flex many times. doesn't mean it's not binding some, but I haven't needed more flex.

 

[Mace]

You can get away with a bushing at the axle end, but for twisting forces, it's really a good idea to have a heim on the frame side.

It also is a good idea not to have the track bar attach to the stock crossmember. They are not all that strong to begin with, and if they have degraded at all, it's a time bomb.

 

[74fj40ca]

You can get away with a bushing at the axle end, but for twisting forces, it's really a good idea to have a heim on the frame side.

It also is a good idea not to have the track bar attach to the stock crossmember. They are not all that strong to begin with, and if they have degraded at all, it's a time bomb.

I didn't want to put the bar attached to the cross member, but I more or less needed to get it running.

I plan on re-doing it this winter, which is why I decided to do this thread.

My next anti-wrap bar will include all 3 joints being heim joints, and I'll end up doing a different mounting location for the baby shackle.

 

[cruiserjunkie]

I cut a piece of 1.75 inch .250 wall dom in half and formed it to the stock cross member with a hammer. welded my shackle mount to that half piece of tube which was easier to fully weld and then welded that to the stock cross member. I think that the added surface area and the shackle mount welded to thicker material have held together on my junk for more than a couple seasons now.

 

[74fj40ca]

When I did mine, I burned it in pretty good using a Millermatic 220. My cross member is in good condition, no rust or any cracks, etc...

 

[Enigma]

I have, well had, a Deckers on my 40. I like the simplicity, but removed mine after it tore loose from the cross tube behind the transfer case.
It will go back on one of these days, truck doesn't see any action these days tho.

Link to pics of the carnage, and farther down the page some other designs.

https://forum.ih8mud.com/ca-bc-coastal-cruisers/162687-awwwww-crap.html

 

[74fj40ca]

Damn, that sucks. Looking at that, I might need to re-think my forward mounting location,

 

[Fast Eddy]

I sleeved my x-member with a .120-wall tube that goes all the way over to the frame.

The decker bar ripped out because it doesn't telescope. Of course it can't telescope or it wouldn't do anything to control axle wrap.

The bar shown above with the shackle will lift the rear end if the weight is removed from the rear end. Jack it up from the frame and you will see. It can still articulate fine but will bind when weighting and unweighting.

It is my opinion that the shackle should point straight back at the axle at ride height and the tip of trac bar should be able to telescope. On acceleration, the bar will tip upwards and lengthen so the tip travels around the arc dictated by the shackle. The axle will wrap some, but it will be controlled by the length of the shackle. The resulting wrap will be within the limits of the u-joint as long as the shackle isn't too long.

When you unweight the rear end, the tip of the trac bar will want to drop straight down. Decker's diagrams are correct in this regard. The bar has to be able to telescope so that it can follow the arc dictated by the shackle in the downward direction.

Since the tip of the bar floats inside the main bar it can be a bushing. The whole tip rotates within the body of the bar.

The more I argue about this, the more I'm sure I'm right. I should get a patent.

 

[chicago]

Ed,
Post a pic of your set up.

 

[climber8483]

We need someone to build a Solid Works model with several of these different designs and then have it test them. That would at least give us the theory/ somewhat practical application side.

B

 

[climber8483]

Keith,
Click on the After link in his sig. It starts on page two towards the bottom. I believe he also posted up pictures in the last anti-wrap thread that seemed to be about 6 or 7 pages long.

B