- Thread starter
- #261
FJ62 Bob it? or extend the WB?
- Thread starter 88chevota
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Thread starter
- #262
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2006
- Threads
- 162
- Messages
- 4,044
- Location
- Hillsboro, OR
- Website
- www.cascadecruisers.com
nice man... that thing turned out really well!
- Thread starter
- #265
thank you!
Those pics from Rampart remind me of Hidden Valley Road (same area) where it goes to the quartz quarry. pretty fun area.
Very nice set up man. Just leave the rims that way for sure. I must of missed your axle ratios. 4.88?
- Thread starter
- #268
Thanks. Axle ratio is 3.54 for now. I will be changing it to 4.56 someday.
I like the rims and tires man, Why did you take off the front bumper? doing repairs? and looks like fun. i miss that
- Thread starter
- #270
I am going to make another one. It wasn't thick enough to handle the abuse. When you going to be back in CO?
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #271
updates
So here are some pics of the steering that I have yet to update. I moved the panhard arm to a much better location. I went with heims all around for the steering and put the draglink on top of the steering arm. Used a portion of the stock tie rod since it was solid steel. Sleeved the ends to allow for the heims and placed the steering stablizer behind the tie rod. That will be the location for my ram when I get it.
So here are some pics of the steering that I have yet to update. I moved the panhard arm to a much better location. I went with heims all around for the steering and put the draglink on top of the steering arm. Used a portion of the stock tie rod since it was solid steel. Sleeved the ends to allow for the heims and placed the steering stablizer behind the tie rod. That will be the location for my ram when I get it.
- Thread starter
- #272
radius arms rear
ok so I went and picked up some montero radius like I used for the front. 1st pic is what I used for front. I sleeved them with some tubing and welded in the threaded bung and attached the johnny joint. for the front they are mounted under the axle. I was thinking of mounting the rear on top of the axle (second photo-sketch) to keep them as level as possible to keep the squat issues to a minimum. and help with clearance.
thoughts?
ok so I went and picked up some montero radius like I used for the front. 1st pic is what I used for front. I sleeved them with some tubing and welded in the threaded bung and attached the johnny joint. for the front they are mounted under the axle. I was thinking of mounting the rear on top of the axle (second photo-sketch) to keep them as level as possible to keep the squat issues to a minimum. and help with clearance.
thoughts?
- Thread starter
- #273
ram
I will put the ram basically in place of the stabilizer.
I will put the ram basically in place of the stabilizer.
So you are going to go ahead and do the radius arm rear eh?
- Thread starter
- #275
I am. I tried to find all kinds of research to try to prove against the idea. it seems that as long as I keep them as flat as possible that will keep my anti-squat just about right. That is why I think I might put the radius arms on top of the axle. Would there be any good reason to place them on the bottom instead?
I dont really see how it would alter much by having them on top, but maybe I am missing something to how they may possibly arc different but I dont think so.
- Thread starter
- #277
In the rough drawing you can see that by mounting it on top it changes the angle in relation to the frame. the blue represents the radius arm mounted on top. the black represents mounting it under. the main reason is the way the radius arm is designed (see pic of radius arms a few post up) it will not mount centered over the axle tube. Is that what you were asking?
No no I get all that and why you did it.
I just meant the travel arch and how everything changes as the suspension cycles. But like I said I dont think it makes a difference if the arm is on top or bottom so long as the same level of angle is achieved.
I just meant the travel arch and how everything changes as the suspension cycles. But like I said I dont think it makes a difference if the arm is on top or bottom so long as the same level of angle is achieved.
- Thread starter
- #279
gotcha. It doesn't seem it would matter to me either. All the ones I have seen are mounted under the axle. Of course that is in stock form and it probably has something to do with the angle they want to achieve at stock height. What I am going for is clearly quite different than stock form so as long as it works as correctly and like I want it to it shouldn't matter right?
That is my thoughts.
