Traction bar shackle (1 Viewer)

[mtweller]

Everyone seems to "hang" their trac bar shackle. Can anyone think of a reason, provided I have room to do so, not to mount it so the shackle is above the rear crossmember? I am not using the factory crossmember, instead a t-case support/skidplate/rear xmember combo. The rear is 2" 1/4 wall tube and that is what I'll hang (or mount) the shackle to.

Thanks,

Ramon Weller

 

[Senor Aguas]

Nope, no reason not to. Works the same either way. Your shackle should just be perpendicular to the line between the end of your trac bar and the axle to get the most effect.

 

[TBIFJ40]

my shackle is upside down; bar above the crossmember, works awesome.

 

[jimhendrixx]

How about a photo friend?

 

[lcwizard]

a traction bar works better with the shackle going up. The T-bar is always in tension under accelleration
in that position. The shackle pointing down does get the job done, you just won't impress the picky
engineers

 

[xjnation]

I just built mine with the shackles above the rear crossmember. Haven't gotten to try it out yet, but it should work fine. 1/4 wall sq. tube, and the shackles are the same length as the rear shackles. Oughta be good to go. Tim

 

[bustanutley]

a traction bar works better with the shackle going up. The T-bar is always in tension under accelleration
in that position. The shackle pointing down does get the job done, you just won't impress the picky
engineers

Yes tension is a better way to load the shackle, but, you introduce much worse antisquat characteristics with the bar mounted in this fashion. From the suspension design aspect, the better way it to mount the top of the shackle to the frame and the bar to the bottom end. This will mount the effective instant center much lower.

picky engineer signing off

 

[xjnation]

Yes tension is a better way to load the shackle, but, you introduce much worse antisquat characteristics with the bar mounted in this fashion. From the suspension design aspect, the better way to mount the frame end is with the bar on the bottom end of the shackle since you mount the effective instant center much lower.

picky engineer signing off

Is this really an issue on leaf sprung rigs?? I'm sure it is a bit, but enough to worry about???

soon to be picky engineer signing off

 

[bustanutley]

Yes it really is, almost all of the rotational load from your axle is transferred thru this bar to your chassis. My truck climbs very well because I have observed these ‘rules’.

 

[inkpot]

I prefer the shacke-down method. It allows me to have my traction bar parallel to, and about 3 or 4 inches lower than, my DS. Hopefully, I will land on the tracbar before I kiss the DS on the rocks. John

 

[Mace]

Yes tension is a better way to load the shackle, but, you introduce much worse antisquat characteristics with the bar mounted in this fashion. From the suspension design aspect, the better way to mount the frame end is with the bar on the bottom end of the shackle since you mount the effective instant center much lower.

picky engineer signing off

Ding Ding ding..

It makes a huge difference.

 

[xjnation]

Ding Ding ding..

It makes a huge difference.

If only this thread were started 2 weeks ago......

 

[lucky 13]

How about a photo friend?

i agree, i want to see a few pictures so i can get this right, and not regret building something wrong.

 

[lucky 13]

is this not correct?

New Page 1

 

[joeyg1973]

Wow that is just fxxxing pretty.

 

[inkpot]

Howdy! Looks really nice. Is the bottom of the shackle fixed or does it pivot? It might not make much difference, but I would use a Heim joint on the shackle end instead of the axle end. They can't really move laterally when the axles start to twist up. John

 

[Sputnik40]

Someday I hope to have a setup that looks like the post above - beautiful!

Mine's gone thru several different versions due to different suspension setups (SUA, SOA, flipped springs, etc.) - with the last tweak from when I put Orion HD in. Plan to tackle it once more to get the shackle just right. Would rather have a 4 link and coilovers - but this does the job, and there's little to no binding while flexing.

 

[lcwizard]

I think that's what I tried to say, traction bar end above the frame mount. The shackle fixed at the frame on the bottom, the traction bar at the top of the shackle. Or do you prefer the opposite

Yes tension is a better way to load the shackle, but, you introduce much worse antisquat characteristics with the bar mounted in this fashion. From the suspension design aspect, the better way to mount the frame end is with the bar on the bottom end of the shackle since you mount the effective instant center much lower.

picky engineer signing off

 

[bustanutley]

I think that's what I tried to say, traction bar end above the frame mount. The shackle fixed at the frame on the bottom, the traction bar at the top of the shackle. Or do you prefer the opposite

No I am saying it is much better to do the opposite, sorry my post you quoted is unintelligible, my bad. The opposite of of what lucky 13 and sputnik posted, wrap bar at bottom of shackle. The lower the relative instant center the better, and the longer the bar the better as well. Trust me, it really makes a world of difference to the climbing ability of the truck.

 

[D'Animal]

This picture was taken before the traction bar was completed by FC Fabrication.

is this not correct?

New Page 1