I think this shows his current mind setSorry for hijack
Hmmm... That doesn't help me. I have a 15 mo old and wheel in the PNW (i.e. rain)...
I guess I will have to see where this LX leads!
i did it again ;)
- Thread starter js93cruiser
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Hmmm... That doesn't help me. I have a 15 mo old and wheel in the PNW (i.e. rain)...
I guess I will have to see where this LX leads!
Hmmm... That doesn't help me. I have a 15 mo old and wheel in the PNW (i.e. rain)...
Just have some warm apple pie, you won't care after that.
With what seperation at the axle? At the frame? What anti-squat?
fzjconvert
one hand, two ducks
Hmmm... That doesn't help me. I have a 15 mo old and wheel in the PNW (i.e. rain)...
got your wheels turning, I see!
- Thread starter
- #85
i got my ram assist today! i'm using a 1.5x6 inch ram i'm putting in the gears and the aussie this weekend
Just have some warm apple pie, you won't care after that.
Ha! That is probably true...
got your wheels turning, I see!
Oh the wheels are always turning... It's the lack of time and money that makes sure that nothing really happens!
Tapage
Club 4X4 Panamá
you should go a bit bigger something like 7" so you get good turning radius ..
- Thread starter
- #88
thats what i8 was thinking but i couldnt find one how will my turning be with the 6 inch ram?
ive posted build threads before on naxja.org because the black cherokee in the pic is mine
This is actually a large part of the context of my posts. The Cherokee is something of the inverse of the 80 - it gets it stability from a rear leaf spring suspension with a fairly unrestricted front end whereas the 80 is the opposite.
This is why XJ's are so easily to lift to 6"-7" whereas the quad coil Jeeps are not without introducing a lot of undesirable suspension characteristics. The Jeep aftermarket has spent years trying to perfect a long arm conversions and while I don't spend any time around Jeep mods any more my eyes tell me that most quad coil Jeeps are staying at 4" or so of lift for a very good reason, where XJ's are consistently seen at much taller lifts.
This all makes perfect sense on an XJ, because if you go to more of a mid-arm length you will retain the factory suspension design while improving link angles and overall geometry. In other words, a 3-link on an XJ can be designed within the factory geometry front to rear, and can improve strength, clearance, durability, and performance without any material impact to factory designed suspension characteristics. You can easily 3-link any Jeep, because the suspension was designed as a 4-link and the second upper link is always functionally redundant.
If you do a search on my name and "leaf spring", you will note that I have mused from time to time that an 80 could benefit tremendously from a rear leaf conversion while then freeing up the front via 3-link.
I say this because wagons, particularly as they gain weight and lift, generally need a suspension that is designed for stability on one end, and as many an XJ owner has learned, it is usually best to maximize the rear leaf suspension rather than try to replace it. I personally know people who rolled their XJ's on the street after rear coil conversions, and I know people who run the Hammers in 3-linked XJ's with a simple factory designed leaf spring suspension. (I was a founding member of NAXJA, and I see a lot of familiarity in 80's as to the emergence of XJ's - on XJ's it used to be said you couldn't lift more than 3" or run more than 32" tires, but you will find the 80 is harder to get out of the box than the XJ, but the box is much, much bigger. Spend some more time with it and see if you truly disagree.)
What you have done with the 3-link, no matter how you designed it, is more similar in principle to converting the rear leafs on an XJ than it is to 3-linking an XJ. I hope you keep the rig, keep it rubber side down, and spend a couple of years with it. I'd like to see you guys try a rear leaf conversion if you ultimately find the rig to be less stable than you want.
There is more to be done with these rigs, but I don't think it stops with the front suspension. That is just a little hunch of mine, though, and I don't want to guinea pig
I completely agree with what Nay has said. I use an EB or Classic Bronco for my hardcore rig. I have seen many of these rigs which are (factory coil front /leafspring rear) roll after the rear has been converted to a 3 or 4 link design. The reason why is loss of stability. The rear leafsprings stabilize the front coils as the truck articulates. After the rear has been linked, the rear suspesion follows what the front is doing instead of stabilizing the truck and they just roll over like a dog...
This is actually a large part of the context of my posts. The Cherokee is something of the inverse of the 80 - it gets it stability from a rear leaf spring suspension with a fairly unrestricted front end whereas the 80 is the opposite.
This is why XJ's are so easily to lift to 6"-7" whereas the quad coil Jeeps are not without introducing a lot of undesirable suspension characteristics. The Jeep aftermarket has spent years trying to perfect a long arm conversions and while I don't spend any time around Jeep mods any more my eyes tell me that most quad coil Jeeps are staying at 4" or so of lift for a very good reason, where XJ's are consistently seen at much taller lifts.
This all makes perfect sense on an XJ, because if you go to more of a mid-arm length you will retain the factory suspension design while improving link angles and overall geometry. In other words, a 3-link on an XJ can be designed within the factory geometry front to rear, and can improve strength, clearance, durability, and performance without any material impact to factory designed suspension characteristics. You can easily 3-link any Jeep, because the suspension was designed as a 4-link and the second upper link is always functionally redundant.
If you do a search on my name and "leaf spring", you will note that I have mused from time to time that an 80 could benefit tremendously from a rear leaf conversion while then freeing up the front via 3-link.
I say this because wagons, particularly as they gain weight and lift, generally need a suspension that is designed for stability on one end, and as many an XJ owner has learned, it is usually best to maximize the rear leaf suspension rather than try to replace it. I personally know people who rolled their XJ's on the street after rear coil conversions, and I know people who run the Hammers in 3-linked XJ's with a simple factory designed leaf spring suspension. (I was a founding member of NAXJA, and I see a lot of familiarity in 80's as to the emergence of XJ's - on XJ's it used to be said you couldn't lift more than 3" or run more than 32" tires, but you will find the 80 is harder to get out of the box than the XJ, but the box is much, much bigger. Spend some more time with it and see if you truly disagree.)
What you have done with the 3-link, no matter how you designed it, is more similar in principle to converting the rear leafs on an XJ than it is to 3-linking an XJ. I hope you keep the rig, keep it rubber side down, and spend a couple of years with it. I'd like to see you guys try a rear leaf conversion if you ultimately find the rig to be less stable than you want.
There is more to be done with these rigs, but I don't think it stops with the front suspension. That is just a little hunch of mine, though, and I don't want to guinea pig
SOOOOOO not true. cherokees are always the smallest of the group with the occasional large ones. wranlger tjs are always seen on 35s or larger. Grand cherokees are also hitting the larger suspension scene. A wrangler tjs stability is far worse then an 80 do to its tiny wheel base. I understand what your saying but people do the same link set ups on grand cherokee which is the same basic design but smaller.
You guys should keep arguing. The more you argue, the more the rest of us learn. Who cares if someone comes off as arrogant as long as good information is presented. I have learned a bunch about suspension from this thread and I thought that was the purpose of the forum!
You have to expect to get flamed when you roll your rig, immediately buy another one and start making similar mods. With that said, never making mistakes means you aren't doing anything.....and everyone on this site was 21 once.
Most of the comments I have seen have been designed to potentially save the vehicle.....or save a life! From the photos of the roll accident, I wouldn't want to bet on surviving that twice.
You have to expect to get flamed when you roll your rig, immediately buy another one and start making similar mods. With that said, never making mistakes means you aren't doing anything.....and everyone on this site was 21 once.
Most of the comments I have seen have been designed to potentially save the vehicle.....or save a life! From the photos of the roll accident, I wouldn't want to bet on surviving that twice.
I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with. The context of the post is not "my jeep is bigger than your jeep". Nay is talking about the undesirable suspension characteristics that go along with lifting a quad coil. And there are some very good points there. I don't want to discourage independent thought, but it would be unwise to ignore wisdom.
I'll disagree with Nay on a couple of points.
Nay's theory is to have one end tight and one end loose. I don't agree with that theory, I prefure it to be balanced and controled with a level body, not loose on one end and tight on the other so the average gives control. But he is free to aproach building his trucks however he wishes.
I also disagree with the theory that leafs are providing more control than coils on the back of an XJ. That all depends on the coils and the leaves. My 40 was very well balanced, very flexy, and all on leaves. It would max out 14" travel shocks front and rear, and still run down the hwy at 75mph w/o swaying. That was as much luck as skill, as the springs were just thrown together, but the results were great. If there are XJ's converting to coils and then rolling them on the street, I"d stay it's not intrinsic to the coils, but only to how they were applied to that heap. I'll bet I could get Nay's truck to roll by putting on springs with half the spring rate he has and making no other changes.
What is interesting is the desire of some people to go 3 link a 4 link or radius arm design, and then there are people taking 4 links back to radius arm - both front and rear. For those not wanting to take the 3 link risk, this is a valid option and has proven to really free up the front end.
Nay's theory is to have one end tight and one end loose. I don't agree with that theory, I prefure it to be balanced and controled with a level body, not loose on one end and tight on the other so the average gives control. But he is free to aproach building his trucks however he wishes.
I also disagree with the theory that leafs are providing more control than coils on the back of an XJ. That all depends on the coils and the leaves. My 40 was very well balanced, very flexy, and all on leaves. It would max out 14" travel shocks front and rear, and still run down the hwy at 75mph w/o swaying. That was as much luck as skill, as the springs were just thrown together, but the results were great. If there are XJ's converting to coils and then rolling them on the street, I"d stay it's not intrinsic to the coils, but only to how they were applied to that heap. I'll bet I could get Nay's truck to roll by putting on springs with half the spring rate he has and making no other changes.
What is interesting is the desire of some people to go 3 link a 4 link or radius arm design, and then there are people taking 4 links back to radius arm - both front and rear. For those not wanting to take the 3 link risk, this is a valid option and has proven to really free up the front end.
