Narrower arms don't matter unless you are also removing one axle mount, e.g. poor man's 3-link. In the stock bushing configuration, the binding is enough that arm to bracket contact is not an issue.
Custom Radius Arms (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ebag333
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Narrower arms don't matter unless you are also removing one axle mount, e.g. poor man's 3-link. In the stock bushing configuration, the binding is enough that arm to bracket contact is not an issue.
"Standard disclaimer terms apply" kind of thing...
The stock arms are steel, not iron, not sure if they are cast or forged.
The biggest issue that I have with making arms for others/sale is liability, US lawyers. One of my customers was a steel foundry, talked about making some, when they found out what they were and would be driven on the street, ended that deal. When a pic like this and the ones of the bus load of now dead nuns, lands on your attorneys desk, better have good insurance!
What exactly is happening in that pic?
Absolutely if you 3-link. Completely worthless with stock axle mounts, which prevent far more rotation than the stock rubber frame bushing could handle.
Axle rotated 'cause the radius arms broke, would be my guess.
That's what I thought, I would like to hear some back story on that one
I still think the tube y-radius arms like the ones jodo used are probably the easiest / most cost effective way of changing the radiuis arms in a meaninful way.
- Thread starter
- #29
That's the advantage to casting, it becomes an economy of scale. Of course if you only cast two then it becomes an economy of very very expensive.
Tools has used that pic before. IIRC (and I may not, please chime in Tools) he didn't know the history or what exactly happened. His guess was cheap homemade arms that were way undersized and failed in a predictable fashion.
Besides a 3 link, I think this is the next best alternative from the reading that I have done
Even though it is a radius arm setup, the placement of the axle mounts allows for less binding
Plus I think the key to the Y setup is running much longer arms and getting them more parallel to the ground which helps with better suspension movement from what I have read
If you don't go to a different tech (links, etc) the slee radius arms and anything similar will work fine with 37s. Ran them on my 80 for years and they were perfect on road and nice off (same limits on flex as stock).
Having run Y-link radius arms as a conversion on a Jeep XJ, I'd agree that there is no question that this design can retain a radius arm while enabling the type of flex you see in the rear suspension of the 80. Having said this, the concept of 'meaningful way' is important as it comes with negatives, too.
A 36" long arm, if an off-the-shelf Jeep aftermarket product was utilized as Jodo did (Rubicon Express), will definitely impact clearance and that arm style does not 'slide' the way the 80 arms do, both due to shape and construction design. This is one major reason why 3-links gained a lot of favor over radius arm conversions for people who wanted more offroad performance.
Personally, I would 3-link before going down the road of a major radius arm conversion that increases the length of the arms using the larger Jeep bushings on the axle end to get the increased flex. Those bushings are a lot sloppier than the 80 series bushings, and it shows up nicely (scarily) driving over things like highway expansion joints.
This is again why I like those SE arms. Mitigating the rough offroad ride and restriction of the front end without losing all the good things in the 80's radius arm design is compelling. Too bad the Australian economy is in high gear and the USD/AUD exchange rate is no longer favorable.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,233
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
The arms broke, axle rotated with braking force, ripping a bunch of stuff up. The insurance/court argument was over whether it happened in the accident or happened causing the accident.
The originals are forged, low carbon alloy steel and the forging process adds significantly to the tensile strength and ductility. Forging aligns and controls the size of the grain structure. You could make them with some other process like casting, but they would need to be larger to meet the same specs. Consult a mechanical engineer about the adequacy of the design.
Somewhere in internet land there is a Amigo (or rodeo maybe?) that is running an 80 series front axle and the owner made some really cool radius arms - think it was flat stock vertically cut to the shape he needed then wraped it with more flat stock to form an I beam sort of like stock ones. Course I think he went over the top of the axle too, but the basic construction would work over or under and was pretty cool.
- Thread starter
- #37
If we went this route mechanical engineers would be involved. I know my limitations enough to know I'm not up to designing an arm.
They have designed load bearing parts for semi-trucks, so they have some experience with this sort of thing.
Sounds like Tool's radius arms.
Yup...
Tools are not over the axle
- Thread starter
- #40
So if the arms were designed moving the front bushing to above the axle, would there be any benefit in keeping the front bushing for on road manners? Same basics as the hitch pin mod, a pin you can pull to eliminate that link. Basically making it a 5 link on road, and a 4 link (in two planes) off.
Think the additional stiffness would assist in handling, enough to make it worth while?
Also, is it better to move the front link on one of the arms above the axle, or the rear link? For additional flex would you want the two links closer together or further apart?
Think the additional stiffness would assist in handling, enough to make it worth while?
Also, is it better to move the front link on one of the arms above the axle, or the rear link? For additional flex would you want the two links closer together or further apart?
