Front Flex? (2 Viewers)

[Nay]

I'm thinking we're saying basically the same thing...no?

Chris

The number of links is not going to be what affects ride quality, which is a completely different factor than flex. If you want stock ride quality without sacrificing handling, I'll say again to get the FOR kit, because that is exactly what you get.

After I put the Gen II kit on last year and the new 37's we went to Moab and drove for four hours on the way home and commented that the 80 "is driving like a dream - it's close to the minivan" (said minivan happens to be a luxury model and also the one most designed for the driver - the Nissan Quest).

The issue is that the 80 rear suspension is pretty unhinged - it's where all the motion wants to occur onroad, which is why most 80 series kits have overbuilt rear suspensions that ride like crap unless you add a ton of weight.

This flexy rear is very much controlled by the front - I'm not saying that you can't unhinge the front and find a way to keep it all stable and I haven't tried it myself, but we all know that a lot of engineering has gone into trying to control the much lighter quad coil Jeeps at less than 6" of lift so assuming that adding a ton of sprung weight and having it all unhinged on a tall lift is to me a very big assumption that has absolutely nothing to do with ride quality.

I'm not saying any of this to be negative, but rather to spark some thinking about how to solve for both issues. You might talk to Dusty - he has 3 linked and raves about the offroad improvements but noted the deterioration of road performance.

The net observation from my web wheeling point of view is that the issue is not the 3-link. It's the 3-link paired up with the stock 4-link rear and how they want to work together. You change the one and it is pure assumption that it will be enough to leave the other alone.

 

[Walking Eagle]

The best handling/stable platforms on the road tend to be very harsh on their passengers as they are incredibly stiff setups.

Really? Cause one of my favorits is the 3 series BMW - not harsh at all - firm, well tuned, but then again, I find a LX450 that is in like new shape to ride very good for a 50K SUV - built 13 years ago. Better than any grand cherokee or floaty escalade.

People that don't know how to make a car handle without it being incredibly stiff, make incredibly stiff cars. It's only the american cars that think it's either stiff and performance or floaty and comfortable, there is such a thing as 'firm and forgiving'

 

[Ebag333]

Really? Cause one of my favorits is the 3 series BMW - not harsh at all - firm, well tuned, but then again, I find a LX450 that is in like new shape to ride very good for a 50K SUV - built 13 years ago. Better than any grand cherokee or floaty escalade.

People that don't know how to make a car handle without it being incredibly stiff, make incredibly stiff cars. It's only the american cars that think it's either stiff and performance or floaty and comfortable, there is such a thing as 'firm and forgiving'

Granted I'm painting with a very wide brush there, but as a general rule of thumb all else being equal a stiffer setup will equal better handling. When I was doing some research on Poly vs Rubber one thing I found was that lots of people with sporty cars ('Vette's, Mustangs, etc) were switching from factory rubber to aftermarket poly because the poly was stiffer, allowed less movement, and overall increased handling or at least "feel."

All anecdotal, but also consider that a lot of sporty cars have a "sport" option, as a package or even as a selectable switch. Often that's achieved by allowing less movement, and having a stiffer ride.

While vehicles can certainly be tuned so that good handling does not equal a harsh ride, it's generally true that in order to achieve better handling you will have a harsher ride.

I know for a fact that moving from the soft OME shocks to the much stiffer ProComps greatly increased my truck's handling, turning it from a wallowing pig to something that actually feels like it's holding the road. In exchange for improved handling/feel, the ride is stiffer and I definitely notice more bumps in the road.


As for the ride of the 80/450, it's not a bad ride by any stretch but--OEM--it's not what most of America would consider a "luxury" ride. The 80 series drives like a truck, not a car/minivan. That's a good thing in my book, but not what most people expect from a luxury SUV. Hence the move away from the solid front axle to IFS. Why else do you think Mr. T made that particular decision?

 

[Walking Eagle]

Granted I'm painting with a very wide brush there, but as a general rule of thumb all else being equal a stiffer setup will equal better handling. When I was doing some research on Poly vs Rubber one thing I found was that lots of people with sporty cars ('Vette's, Mustangs, etc) were switching from factory rubber to aftermarket poly because the poly was stiffer, allowed less movement, and overall increased handling or at least "feel."

Not real familiar with Vette’s, but Mustangs are hardly great handling cars, at least compared to my wife’s 350z. Changing from rubber to poly in the suspension mounts doesn’t really effect the spring rate and stiffness though. It allows the suspension pieces to flex less, so the suspension geometry changes less.

While vehicles can certainly be tuned so that good handling does not equal a harsh ride, it's generally true that in order to achieve better handling you will have a harsher ride.

It is generally true that if you take an existing platform, you will likely make it stiffer to make it handle better – but not always. Swaybars do little to make a ride more harsh, but much to achieve better handling. When you’re designing a suspension though, there are ways to not give a harsh ride and still give better handling. Last gen T/A handled great, about as good as a 3 series, maybe even a M3 of the same generation, but one of them was much more comfortable on the long road. Subaru is always an odd duck, long travel suspension (comparatively) on their RS, WRX ect. yet great handling. There is more than one way to skin the suspension cat, and some give more trade offs than others.

The more you limit yourself on what you change, the more tradeoffs and compromises you must make. If you lift a truck, any truck, and demand that it not sway on road, but limit yourself to shocks that mount on the pin to pin, limit yourself to stock mounting points, limit yourself to stock arm design, limit yourself to stock swaybars, or even swaybars that mount the same as stock, and determine that the only thing you are going to do to prevent sway is use stiffer springs – you’re making compromises – and it will ride and perform like you’ve made those compromises.

There is a reason JP’s go to long arm after a certain height. Beyond a certain point, the angle on the arms is just too much for stock mounts to function properly. There is also a reason the anti-rock is so well received. I would venture a guess (and it’d be nothing more than a guess) that part of the reason people are saying they can run without noticing issues with no front swaybar is cause the rest of the suspension is set such that it doesn’t make a difference anymore. If the springs are supper stiff, you probably won’t notice loosing the swaybar. You’ll also suffer the ride and articulation of supper stiff springs.

It is completely possible to get more out of a 80 series suspension at 6” (or even 4”) than what is generally done in the states. Longer arms, Y-radius arms – long ones, flipped arms, 5 link, x-link, SE arms, 3 link, larger swaybars, radius arm drops, torsion bar style swaybars, remote reservoir, coil-overs, progressive springs, air-bags, air-bumpstops, ect. ect. ect. There is more out there than what is currently available of the shelf in a kit, there is also much more out there than was available or known when Action Jackson did his 3 link, or FJBen before him. It’s just a matter of having the time and money and knowledge to do it, again and again, and keep experimenting until it’s done right. Since the market for a $7,000 suspension kit for a $5,000 truck that isn’t made anymore is pretty limited, you’re not likely going to see it from a vendor. Though didn’t cruiser outfitters offer a 3 link or 5 link at one time? Cost so much no one bought it if I recall. Heck, the market for 3 link on a Taco has to be 10 times that of a 80. Plus we’re all a bunch of cheap SOB’s who would just let the other guy do the development work, then do our own version at home

I know for a fact that moving from the soft OME shocks to the much stiffer ProComps greatly increased my truck's handling, turning it from a wallowing pig to something that actually feels like it's holding the road. In exchange for improved handling/feel, the ride is stiffer and I definitely notice more bumps in the road.

I usually don’t put a whole lot of faith in new shocks performing so much better than the model of the old shocks, unless those were also new. I had OME L’s on, and they worked like crap, but they were mostly junk the day I put them on (used). You could also go for some velocity sensitive shocks – which will give a softer ride as long as the bumps are slow, and then stiff’n up as the wheel movement speeds up. I’m think’n Rancho RSX’s are ‘supposed to’ perform this way.

As for the ride of the 80/450, it's not a bad ride by any stretch but--OEM--it's not what most of America would consider a "luxury" ride. The 80 series drives like a truck, not a car/minivan. That's a good thing in my book, but not what most people expect from a luxury SUV. Hence the move away from the solid front axle to IFS. Why else do you think Mr. T made that particular decision?

If you define most of America as everyone but anyone who owns a BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, or Infinity Luxury vehicle, and as an expectation of a floaty boat – sure, the LX450 is a solid European luxury ride, not a floaty caddy luxury ride.

I find it really interesting that there has been so much more done with our trucks down under. They certainly are not affraid to go outside the box.

 

[Ebag333]

I usually don’t put a whole lot of faith in new shocks performing so much better than the model of the old shocks, unless those were also new. I had OME L’s on, and they worked like crap, but they were mostly junk the day I put them on (used). You could also go for some velocity sensitive shocks which will give a softer ride as long as the bumps are slow, and then stiff’n up as the wheel movement speeds up. I’m think’n Rancho RSX’s are ‘supposed to’ perform this way.

While my OME L's were used, they didn't have that many miles on them.

The comparison is between what appears to be OEM shocks with unknown mileage on them (on the wife's truck), some generic cheapie OEM replacements (Gabriel IIRC) on my truck (pre-lift), the OME standard shocks (some mileage, but should have been functioning same as new), and the Pro Comp's.

The Pro Comps are a velocity sensitive shock.

The Pro Comp ES9000 is the ultimate nitrogen gas charged shock absorber. With its twin tube design and 10 stage velocity sensitive valving, the ES9000 delivers not only a smooth, comfortable highway ride, but it also enhances off road handling and performance. Engineered for those driving enthusiasts demanding optimum capacity for heavy loads as well as the most demanding driving conditions.

In my experience the ES9000's are far stiffer at every stage than the OME's. Heck, even OME stiffened up their shocks when they released their new sport line, which indicates to me that even they found it too soft.

If you define most of America as everyone but anyone who owns a BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, or Infinity Luxury vehicle, and as an expectation of a floaty boat sure, the LX450 is a solid European luxury ride, not a floaty caddy luxury ride.

I can only go by my experience and impressions. Most people who have ridden or driven my truck feel that it drives like a truck, not a luxury SUV (or a sports car). Including people who own BMW/Lexus/etc.

Also, OEM, a huge complaint about the LX450 is the ride. The shocks are too soft, while the springs are fairly stiff, so you get a rocking motion as you drive (as the shocks don't dampen the body roll). This is not an issue (or less of one at least) on the Land Cruiser model as it comes with stiffer shocks.

You're kinda comparing apples to oranges anyway here. It's hardly fair to compare a full sized SUV to an M3. Might as well compare that M3 to an F1 racer. Compare the way that the 100 series drives, feels, and handles to an 80. An 80 is as stable (if not more so), but the 100 series is just more comfortable to drive (and ride in ).

I find it really interesting that there has been so much more done with our trucks down under. They certainly are not affraid to go outside the box.

Agreed.

 

[Walking Eagle]

While my OME L's were used, they didn't have that many miles on them.

The comparison is between what appears to be OEM shocks with unknown mileage on them (on the wife's truck), some generic cheapie OEM replacements (Gabriel IIRC) on my truck (pre-lift), the OME standard shocks (some mileage, but should have been functioning same as new), and the Pro Comp's.

The Pro Comps are a velocity sensitive shock.



In my experience the ES9000's are far stiffer at every stage than the OME's. Heck, even OME stiffened up their shocks when they released their new sport line, which indicates to me that even they found it too soft.

Now see that tells me more about the condition of each shock, and therefore tells me more about the legitimacy of the comparison - Also like that you found ES9000's firm, cuase I think I need to replace some damaged RS9000XL's. I had some ES9000's on my 40, but it was such a hodge podge of parts that just happened to work REALLY well, I wasn't sure how they'd be on the back of the 80.

You're kinda comparing apples to oranges anyway here. It's hardly fair to compare a full sized SUV to an M3. Might as well compare that M3 to an F1 racer. Compare the way that the 100 series drives, feels, and handles to an 80. An 80 is as stable (if not more so), but the 100 series is just more comfortable to drive (and ride in ).

You misunderstand my comparison, I'm comparing a 3 series to a caddilac, a 350Z to a Mustang and a LX450 to an Escalade. Any SUV I can drive at 90-100mph from Billings, MT to Sheridan, WY without my mom and dad in the back seat freak'n out about how I'm driving their car, is OK in my book.

I have a preference for firm and controled - as opposed to soft and floaty, or stiff and harsh. 3 series, S-class, I like much better than Elderado (though I still have a soft spot for friends '72 fleetwood)

 

[ravencr]

How about we talk about 3-linking the front end and how to increase flex?

Chris

 

[Nay]

How about we talk about 3-linking the front end and how to increase flex?

Chris

Just do it - you can always fix the rear if she likes to move her hips too much.

Oh, and a too stiff suspension is usually caused by using relatively cheap components to over compensate in one part of the system. Like having to shock valve the s*** out of it to deal with the fact that your down under suspension company builds their springs in Malaysia in a one size fits all model

 

[ravencr]

k, been reading a bunch on pirate, and this is what I've concluded so far: There's way too many opinions of how to do it...lol.

Seriously, though, considering first trying stock lca's with 30" eye to eye length using stock mounting locations, and relocating the tie rod to the front. Upper would be 21-22.5" in length with it being roughly 4-5" above the top of the pumpkin and not sure of the separation at the frame yet.

So, roughly 70-75% of the lower's length for the upper. Thoughts?

Chris

 

[Nay]

k, been reading a bunch on pirate, and this is what I've concluded so far: There's way too many opinions of how to do it...lol.

Seriously, though, considering first trying stock lca's with 30" eye to eye length using stock mounting locations, and relocating the tie rod to the front. Upper would be 21-22.5" in length with it being roughly 4-5" above the top of the pumpkin and not sure of the separation at the frame yet.

So, roughly 70-75% of the lower's length for the upper. Thoughts?

Chris

I like the measurements at 75% with keeping the arms parallel, but I would do johnny joints because you gain the rigidity of the spherical bushing and can use them on every mount on the frame and axle because a 3-link does not need bushing deflection in the system.

Frankly, if you are going to use rubber, I would do a four link and keep the benefit of the extra upper arm. It's not like the rear four link doesn't flex like crazy and you'd basically just be replicating this up front.

But I wouldn't want to add larger rubber bushings to the front - on trailing arms you aren't going to feel a lot of impact deflection because the axle moves up and away from impacts, but the front is the opposite and you want to get rubber out of a 3-link, not into it.

 

[Dusty]

my 3 link was stable till i pointed the pinion at the tcase to get rid of vibes. it is still very stable it just wanders a bit

first off you cant expect to run more than 38s on an 80 without breaking stuff unless no rocks or lockers are involved . the 8" pinion cant handle it.

leave the rear alone

anything you do to the front of an 80 will make it a better wheeler with little change in driving characteristics if the caster is right and the dshaft angles are good. take your pic as they all work:

3 link or a better radius. length of links wont make much diff. just build it

 

[ravencr]

Sounds good guys...Ordering up joints today.

Chris

 

[sleeoffroad]

Oh, and a too stiff suspension is usually caused by using relatively cheap components to over compensate in one part of the system. Like having to shock valve the s*** out of it to deal with the fact that your down under suspension company builds their springs in Malaysia in a one size fits all model

There you go again. What proof of facts do you have that those springs are bad or made from bad materials. Also where is the fact coming from that they build one spring for all models when OME has the largest range of springs for the 80 out there?

I remember the early days when the FOR springs was touted as the one all and end all and one only needed this one spring, and now there are multiple spring rates and it seems the progressive rate has completely been abandoned for the higher spring rates.

 

[sleeoffroad]

Chris, listed to Dusty. He has been there and I have said it repeatedly. There is no reason to make the 80 front end work better with the existing axle in there. If you can not do the trails that the axle allows you to do with a lift and 35" tires then you are stepping in to the world of serious rock crawling and you are going to hate it to redo those links again on a better axle once you start breaking the parts. I would suggest you start a poll and see how many people that have 3 linked their trucks still own it? I would bet very few.

The 80's limit is not the suspension, it is it's weight and link mounts in the rear that stop you time and time again. I feel that the Shortbus wheeled about as good as it got for an 80. The rear weight was gone and that made a bigger difference than any suspension mod you can make. The next step in that truck's life would have been larger axles if I kept it.

I see this on a daily basis, people want to build the truck to a level that if way more than what they are prepared to take the body of the truck into. Ask Dusty, he once had a pretty truck with no sheet metal damage. Now, not so much. I have wheeled with him. The truck is awesome, but that comes from having axles under it that he can romp on when needed. His suspension works but I would venture to say that if he left the 80 axles under it, he would have been frustrated by now. The suspension allows him to go more places, but the axles allow him to get out of it.

 

[Walking Eagle]

Thoughts?

Chris

Honestly my 1st thought is it'd be cheaper and easier (relatively) to go with a rubicon express long arm kit Since you don't have to worry about multiple links, it's less likely you'll screw it up.

https://forum.ih8mud.com/80-series-tech/294260-jodo-97-lx450-coilover-project.html

YouTube - SEMA 2007 Rubicon Express Long Arm Kit Interview

Second thought is if you're going to go 3-link, use a kit that is already out there and save some time and effort.

Trail-Gear Inc > Trail-Link Suspension

Poly Performance Inc. :: Suspension Kits/Parts :: Universal Suspension Systems :: Poly Performance Universal 3-Link Weld-On Front Kit - Jeep JK Synergy Suspension Systems, Fox Racing Shox, Beard, CTM, Johnny Joints®, Currie Enterprises, Edelbrock, Pi

GenRight 3 Link Front Link Suspension Kit

Third thought is plan on doing something different with the swaybars - anti-rock? - cause your stock ones aren't going to be up to the task if you have a reasonable spring rate.

Fourth thought is start a new thread on doing a 3-link that is clean of all the other options.

 

[ravencr]

Good points for sure...this is why I'm likely going to stick with 37's and just free up the binding in the front utilizing stock geometry for the most part. I could go crazy and redesign all the mounting locations, etc, but as you mention, I'd be building up a pig...lol.

Chris

 

[Walking Eagle]

balistic has some really nice brackets for 3 linking or doing alternative radius arms

Adjustable Inner Frame Bracket

Dual frame link mount

 

[ravencr]

Yepper, going to use the adjustable one I believe...just need to get some measurements off the frame today and to see if I need some angle to it or 0 degree one.

Chris

 

[Walking Eagle]

I don't know Slee - I can't say that I agree that the number of people who have 3-linked their 80 and then sold it really says anything about 3 linking. I think it probably says more about building. There are alot of people who build to a point and then say screw it, I'm going buggy. Or they're just the type of people who are gonna build a truck to a point, tire of it, and start building another, and another and another.

I think there are two groups of people here too, and the arguments for or against any of the mods is different depending on the group.


The first group is people like Kelly and Myself. We've found certain cituations in our wheeling environment that would be better served with a LITTLE more freedom in the front suspension. This group is likely well served with something that gives the amount of freedom that a hitch pin mod and front sway disconnects provides. We may want to gain that freedom through a different manner to get away from the drawbacks of the hitch pin mod (bending brackets). We're interested in stuff like the SE arms that provide an incremental gain without going whole hog into a trail only machine. Anything we do, we'd like to be reversable in case it doesn't work out - that's why Kelly and I both have extra sets of arms. We're also likely sticking with stock axles and 37's and smaller for the forseeable future.

The second group are the Dusty's and Action Jacksons. These are the guys that are going to push their rig to the next level no matter what level they are already at. These are the guys willing to totally redo the suspension. Out comes the plasma cutter, and they're gonna get this puppy to flex. They're gonna end up with bigger axles, cause 37's just aren't enough once you've gone this far. X-links, 3 links, long arm radius arms, coil over shocks, this is what this group wants, and as long as it's managable on the street, the trade off for taking the hard line through the rocks is worth it. These guys don't make excusses about driving like pansies cause their wives are watching.


Lots in common between these groups, both drive'n 80's, both want more than what is currently on the market, but how much more and what they're willing to sacrifice to get it is what makes them different.

 

[sleeoffroad]

I don't know Slee - I can't say that I agree that the number of people who have 3-linked their 80 and then sold it really says anything about 3 linking. I think it probably says more about building. There are alot of people who build to a point and then say screw it, I'm going buggy. Or they're just the type of people who are gonna build a truck to a point, tire of it, and start building another, and another and another.

I think you are leaving one other factor out. They bought a 80 since it drives well on the road and can wheel relatively difficult trails. Now they changed the truck so much that they lost the whole reason they went to an 80 in the first place. They then either go back to square one, or they go buggy. I talk to a lot of people that got caught up in the hardcore wheeling that is now going back to exploring, family friendly back country recreation.

I think there are two groups of people here too, and the arguments for or against any of the mods is different depending on the group.

The first group is people like Kelly and Myself. We've found certain cituations in our wheeling environment that would be better served with a LITTLE more freedom in the front suspension. This group is likely well served with something that gives the amount of freedom that a hitch pin mod and front sway disconnects provides. We may want to gain that freedom through a different manner to get away from the drawbacks of the hitch pin mod (bending brackets). We're interested in stuff like the SE arms that provide an incremental gain without going whole hog into a trail only machine. Anything we do, we'd like to be reversable in case it doesn't work out - that's why Kelly and I both have extra sets of arms. We're also likely sticking with stock axles and 37's and smaller for the forseeable future.

Yes, I can see those, but other than SE I have not really seen any commercially available systems, mostly due to the market size. I remember in 06 when Carl from Outback Off-Road did UA with us. He had a slinky dinky 4Runner and when he was done with the event got hooked up with a 80 and was going to offer a bolt on three link because as he thought, the 80 needed a better suspension up front as well. There was much debate on here about it, and for some reason it went nowhere. Why I do not know, but I am pretty sure the size of the market has something to do with it.

These forums are great for people sharing ideas and for people to think outside of the box, however I always caution people that just get an 80 and then want to completely redesign it since it does not work, based on experiences they had in their previous vehicle. This is normally people that come from IFS trucks that now wants gobs of travel since they never had it before. They end up disappointed in the 80's flex. Instead of first wheeling the truck and getting used to it, they want to redo the truck and build it into something it was never intended to be.

The second group are the Dusty's and Action Jacksons. These are the guys that are going to push their rig to the next level no matter what level they are already at. These are the guys willing to totally redo the suspension. Out comes the plasma cutter, and they're gonna get this puppy to flex. They're gonna end up with bigger axles, cause 37's just aren't enough once you've gone this far. X-links, 3 links, long arm radius arms, coil over shocks, this is what this group wants, and as long as it's managable on the street, the trade off for taking the hard line through the rocks is worth it. These guys don't make excusses about driving like pansies cause their wives are watching.

Those are probably the people that sell them first and buy or build a buggy when they realize an 80 is not a buggy. Just like me.