ROCK PICS: 4WD Toyota Owner/Man-A-Fre drop bracket kit
- Thread starter 4WD Toyota Owner Magazine
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
fj803fe said:
I've almost posted a thought on this a couple of times. While dropping the front arms will likely guarentee that the axle's alignment is in spec it also changes the path that the axle travels. With that rear point dropped, it now travels up and to the rear out of the wheel wells center.
Was the truck running stock rims? And where abouts was it rubbing?
Walking Eagle said:
I'm not seeing this at all. How can the path of the arm change if the hinge point remains the same.
landtank said:
you're in a different part of the arc. The least forward and aft movement is closest to the arm being horizontal - which is why stock it sits that way. The path w/ drop brackets is the same, it's just starts at a different place. Does this help?
I'm not real sure where the axle stops - if the non-drop stops before it becomes level - back from center (assuming that stock it's centered when the arms are level) - or not. need the dimensions to know for sure, I did this dwg to figure out what was going on with the caster through the cycle of each, and to show how much more for and aft movement you get the more the arms are not level.
Last edited:
At full compression with drop brackets the tire will be further back in the wheelwell. At ride height the wheelbase will be longer than a similar lift without the drop brackets (and will be at stock spec).
-Spike
-Spike
Nice drawing Walking Eagle, it shows my point nicely. At compression the axle will be out of position in relation to the wheel well and I thought that might lead to more rubbing.
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
- Threads
- 19
- Messages
- 229
what a soap opera.
This is really about break angle. There is a reason vehicles built for PRIMARILY off road use try and keep everthing in the MIDDLE of the vehicle (between the axles) equal to, or above the plane of the frame.
There is also a reason most rock buggies have belly pans/skids.
This discussion is really about where you wheel, and if you wheel. I live/wheel in the west/southwest, where it is mostly rock, and not mostly slick rock.
For 80%, the MAF will probably be fine.
This is really about break angle. There is a reason vehicles built for PRIMARILY off road use try and keep everthing in the MIDDLE of the vehicle (between the axles) equal to, or above the plane of the frame.
There is also a reason most rock buggies have belly pans/skids.
This discussion is really about where you wheel, and if you wheel. I live/wheel in the west/southwest, where it is mostly rock, and not mostly slick rock.
For 80%, the MAF will probably be fine.
landtank said:
Not necessarily. It depends. It looks like it from my dwg. but, my dwg doesn't tell what angle the axle is at full compression, cause I don't know what angle it is at! It certainly shows that there is more front to back movement with the arms at an angle (no drop). What if at full compression the non-dropped is actually in the middle position on the right? That's the part I don't know.
Course, as long as you're dropping the pivot point, you could move it forward as well to put the axle where you want to at full compression.
Let me help out here.
The front wheels travel up and down in an arc. Shock absorbers and bump stops determine the end points of the arc. The arc is the path the wheels travel in. With the length of the leading arms remaining constant, the only thing that is going to change the path is changing the pivot point where the arms mount to the frame.
Changing the bumpstops or shocks does not alter the path, only it's length. Unless the springs coil bind on compression before the shock or bumpstops bottom out, the spring has no effect on the wheel travel path or endpoints at all.
The front wheels travel up and down in an arc. Shock absorbers and bump stops determine the end points of the arc. The arc is the path the wheels travel in. With the length of the leading arms remaining constant, the only thing that is going to change the path is changing the pivot point where the arms mount to the frame.
Changing the bumpstops or shocks does not alter the path, only it's length. Unless the springs coil bind on compression before the shock or bumpstops bottom out, the spring has no effect on the wheel travel path or endpoints at all.
Necessarily. If the pivot point changes, the arc changes, in this case going down. At full compression, the top of the arc is further back, as in towards the rear of the wheelwell. The amount of movement back is minimal, but it's there. Full compression doesn't change relevant to the pivot point, it's a fixed amount. With the drop brackets, full compression happens farther up and back along the arc.
-Spike
-Spike
dont really want to join in but I couldn't resist. Anybody from here see the results of "Trail Masters" drop brackets for Jeep Cherokees a few (8) years back?
Let me just say....bent/ripped off brackets, cracked/bent frames. I know Cherokees are not built to the same specs as the 80, but the concept of increased leverage is the same. The drop brackets on the Cherokee made it drive better with lift for a while...untill the brackets broke off! I don't see the trail master lift offered any-more???? Most lifted Cherokees are now running Long Arm set ups. This is the route I would like to see offered. It works on Cherokees why not on the 80's. Lengthen the arms and move the brackts closer to the center of the truck so the arc becomes larger. This helps with both caster and ride quality.
I guess time will tell how the drop brackets/frame hold up on the 80
Let me just say....bent/ripped off brackets, cracked/bent frames. I know Cherokees are not built to the same specs as the 80, but the concept of increased leverage is the same. The drop brackets on the Cherokee made it drive better with lift for a while...untill the brackets broke off! I don't see the trail master lift offered any-more???? Most lifted Cherokees are now running Long Arm set ups. This is the route I would like to see offered. It works on Cherokees why not on the 80's. Lengthen the arms and move the brackts closer to the center of the truck so the arc becomes larger. This helps with both caster and ride quality.
I guess time will tell how the drop brackets/frame hold up on the 80
I checked 3 times and I'm not in Chat. Seems like it though. Would a mod please move this thread back to Chat?
-B-
-B-
Pics of David Hasseldork is 80 tech? I gotta sell the mall cruiser and get me a FJ45 like Junk. I'm sure those guys in the 40 Section don't think that's tech.
-B-
-B-
markt said:
I my opinion "long arms" are necessary for XJ's and ZJ's since the stock control arms were designed too short by AMC. They are only like 16 inches long. I used to have a ZJ with 4.5 inches of lift and it rode horribly. This was due to the fact that the arms were probably at a 30 degree angle. Every bump was directly transmitted into the cabin, thanks to the unibody construction. In fact I'm willing to bet that the unibody construction is why the TrailMaster brackets ripped off. Is it really considered a cracked frame when the truck doesn't even have a frame?
ZJ's (93-98 Grand Cherokees), XJ's (Cherokees), and WJ's (99-04? Grand Cherokees) are very different vehicles than 80 series Land Cruisers.