Yet ANOTHER anti-wrap bar question...

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

leaf me alone:p
DSC_0256.jpg
DSC_0258.jpg
 
Pics of the bar in the same 40.
Don's design has the T-bar above the front shackle and the drawing in post #1 shows the bar below.
Is one design better than the other? I have seen it done both ways.
Cheers,
Brian
 
I was doing some research on building a traction bar a while back. I posted a thread similar to this and got all the same responses and arguing. I still haven't decided which way to go, however after asking if anybody had seen a single link version like the decker design fail and hearing only crickets I am leaning that way. If anybody has had problems with the single link version, in real world use, not drawings and jargon, please post up.
 
I have seen multiple single link bars fail. One came in right before SNT just a month ago. We installed one of our bars. No complaints since. Eddie knows the cruiser; belongs to a friend of ours and fellow mudder.

Single link bars in general do not work properly and end up breaking because by design, they can not deal with articulation. They work great in a "straight up and down" application. But when articulation comes into play, they quickly reach their mechanical limits.

Georg
 
Don's design has the T-bar above the front shackle and the drawing in post #1 shows the bar below.
Is one design better than the other? I have seen it done both ways.
Cheers,
Brian

I'm interested in this too as I'll be building one soon.
 
I just wanted to add, that my bar is a variation of the Breeze bar, which a friend runs on a long wheelbase Samuria. But I run a balanced 351W, and made the bolts which attach to the axle housing my weak link. They sheared once when I slid backwards down a really steep, slippery snow covered trail, and stopped suddenly. It was what I wanted, replaced the bolts, no damage to anything else.
 
Don's design has the T-bar above the front shackle and the drawing in post #1 shows the bar below.
Is one design better than the other? I have seen it done both ways.
Cheers,
Brian

I'm interested in this too as I'll be building one soon.

Fast Eddy likes the shackle pointing straight back at the axle so the bar can tip upwards or downwards.

the bolts which attach to the axle housing my weak link. They sheared once when I slid backwards down a really steep, slippery snow covered trail, and stopped suddenly. It was what I wanted, replaced the bolts, no damage to anything else.

My bar would push the shackle up or down and cause no stress to the bolts in this case.

Springs are springy and the normal anti-wrap bar design is very rigid. :bang:
 
Fast Eddy likes the shackle pointing straight back at the axle so the bar can tip upwards or downwards.

That is different..... I have normally seen the shackle pointing up like the picture posted by orangefj45 or down like the drawing in the original post. Has anyone else tried the straight back shackle? Seems like it could work.....
 
If the shackle is laying down horizontal then how could it possibly keep the pinion from rotating up?! :confused:

Georg
 
If the shackle is laying down horizontal then how could it possibly keep the pinion from rotating up?! :confused:

It will still rotate up a little, but not beyond the limits of the u-joint. It makes the whole system very flexible, as it should be. The bar helps the springs keep the pinion from rotating up. It doesn't have to keep it perfectly rigid. 3" at the front of the bar equates to a change in pinion angle of about 4 degrees.
 
Last edited:
Don's design has the T-bar above the front shackle and the drawing in post #1 shows the bar below.
Is one design better than the other? I have seen it done both ways.
Cheers,
Brian

i like having the pivot ( fixed end ) of the shackle on the bottom so when the pinion tries to rotate up, it pulls on the shackle vs trying to compress it. both ways work, but i like the bottom end being fixed better.


georg
 
It will still rotate up a little, but not beyond the limits of the u-joint. It makes the whole system very flexible, as it should be. The bar helps the springs keep the pinion from rotating up. It doesn't have to keep it perfectly rigid. 3" at the front of the bar equates to a change in pinion angle of about 4 degrees.

WHAT?!


So it's not even a proper "traction bar" or "anti-wrap bar", but an over-engineered limiting strap of sorts! :lol:



i see two major issues with this design, and they're both caused by the fact that it allows the pinion to rotate:

1) letting the pinion rotate ( even if it can't exceed the woa [ working operating angle ] of the u-joint ) will eventually cause your leaf springs to "S" bend. give it a little time.......

2) by allowing the pinion to rotate up ( and down !!!!!!! ) you're allowing more pressure to build up, so when you loose traction, it'll snap back the other way which will trigger a very unwanted oscillation from up and down travel of the pinion. that in turn can and will eventually lead to pinion breakage or axle shaft failure.


georg
 
if you put a short tower on axle and again cycle for wrap, the tower moves front to back, while the axle moves up and down,totally separating the forces
now we can focus on keeping that tower upright.
A single link, horizontally forward to a point near the dshaft pivot will keep the top of tower vertical, yet allow the axle to move up and easily
I merely welded a HD shackle on my skidplate
the antiwrap bar will dictate the angle of the pinion, it changes slightly while cycling, but nowhere near as much as it could without, and always is within working angles



kina, can you post a pic or draw one? i'd like to check that out.


georg
 
one of these days I will build a link setup.....
that little buggy is inspiring
yours is cool too georg
when is the special on for the atlas?:D



thanks. we took that pic the day before little sluice was filled in. yes, a cruiser was officially the last rig thru the sluice. :steer:



georg
 
Sorry. I just don't agree. Leaf springs are meant to flex. Maybe they'll eventually have an s-curve in them, but I don't think that 4 degrees is past the point of elasticity. We'll see. Remember that I'm running a 2f too, not a big block.

I don't see how allowing the pinion to move is any more force on it than not allowing it to move when you break traction. On the contrary, allowing it to flex will put some of the twisting forces into the springs, taking them away from the trac bar mounts and the axle shafts.

Worst case is a couple years from now I need to head over to Stockton with a few benjamins for a used pair of fj60 springs and a new bar. Best case is that a couple years from now everyone on PBB is running a "Fast Eddy Bar". The journey is the destination.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom