3link wishbone or single Triangulated 4link rear? ideas, pics.

[ashmanjeepxj]

Im thinking 3 link wish bone, upper links seperated at 45 degrees welded together at the axle end, rubber bushings at the frame ends, one huge 1.25in Spherical bearing above the axle. Lowers would run outside the frame rails, have rubber at the frame ends and 3/4in Spherical bearings at the axle ends.

Besides having more adjustability, why would I want to do a upper trinagulated 4 link?

I know the wishbone top link will side load the big Spherical bearing but those are HUGE, any other issues between the two?

I got this junk for free and want to use it.
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=1699

[Beezil]

I got this junk for free and want to use it.
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=1699

funny!

but seriously, how long are you planning on ahving your links?

one ton and I have worked out a link geometry to include loonnng links....

what do you have room for?

[ashmanjeepxj]

funny!

but seriously, how long are you planning on ahving your links?

one ton and I have worked out a link geometry to include loonnng links....

what do you have room for?

Yea I noticed that after positng, No Im not gonna use those stock arms, but I do plan to use the "FREE" rubber bushings. Room? Tell me where to cut.

The upper links I want them to mount inside the frame rails and I want about 45 degrees between them. I havent measure yet but that pretty much determins the resulting length. There height is vearable, I can run them through the floor board. My X-brace is right there any ways, I could run a tube acrossed the bottom of my X to get a higher frame end mount for the upper arms. Would help with roll axis and all that jazz. These coils I plan to mount on top of the axle under the frame, should be about 5in taller then now so the upper link should never hit the raised gas tank. Rear axle in factory location.

The lower links length will depend on afew things. I give priority to clearance over rear steer (length issues). I was looking at yours and your lower links mount above mid axle. Thats good for clearance, and so is a bent lower link, but both would have higher stess on the links, over a shorter straight link setup that attaches flush with the bottom of the axle tube. I want to mount the lower links outside the frame, this helps clearance but hurts the angle and would cause more "lift". I dont want an anti swat war... :D

Those jeep coils will be fairly stiff, so antiswat is just about a non issue IMO. I helped do a single triangulated 4link on the back of my friends 4runner buggy, with XJ coils. We calculated a really high anti squat 110-120 range and it has no visable lift with these coils. Its has worlds more traction them my XJ leafs do :D



So why did you do a triangulated 4link over a 3 link wishbone? I see it costing me one more Spherical bearing, one more axle end mount to fabricate, one more bolt, and more varables to adjust.

[Kaczman]

The upper links I want them to mount inside the frame rails and I want about 45 degrees between them. I havent measure yet but that pretty much determins the resulting length. There height is vearable, I can run them through the floor board. My X-brace is right there any ways, I could run a tube acrossed the bottom of my X to get a higher frame end mount for the upper arms. Would help with roll axis and all that jazz. These coils I plan to mount on top of the axle under the frame, should be about 5in taller then now so the upper link should never hit the raised gas tank. Rear axle in factory location.

The uppers will be pretty short with an angle that steep. Pinion dive may be an issue with articulation.

The lower links length will depend on afew things. I give priority to clearance over rear steer (length issues). I was looking at yours and your lower links mount above mid axle. Thats good for clearance, and so is a bent lower link, but both would have higher stess on the links, over a shorter straight link setup that attaches flush with the bottom of the axle tube. I want to mount the lower links outside the frame, this helps clearance but hurts the angle and would cause more "lift". I dont want an anti swat war... :D


Link length will also affect roll axis and roll center. I know you do not want an AS debate, but by your description, your AS may be over 200%, which will cause the rear to hop, especially when cllimbing.


Those jeep coils will be fairly stiff, so antiswat is just about a non issue IMO. I helped do a single triangulated 4link on the back of my friends 4runner buggy, with XJ coils. We calculated a really high anti squat 110-120 range and it has no visable lift with these coils. Its has worlds more traction them my XJ leafs do :D

What coils are those? They appear to be stock TJ or XJ coils. I got over 12" of lift with stock XJ's and 11" with TJ's. Also, they may be a little softer than you think.


So why did you do a triangulated 4link over a 3 link wishbone? I see it costing me one more Spherical bearing, one more axle end mount to fabricate, one more bolt, and more varables to adjust.

A double tringulated 4 link will be easier to keep the roll axis flat, and lower AS. I only triangulated the uppers as well, with the lowers angled in 5" each. At full articulation, I have ~4" of axle steer. I hindsight, I would have done the full double triangulated links, primarily for the flatter roll axis. My calculated AS is around 85%. All four links are ~40". Let me know if you want more pics, but I'd look at Beezil's or One Ton's for a better way of linking.


http://www.crawltech.com/albums/Otis-Pics/Full_3.sized.jpg
-Jon

[ashmanjeepxj]

The uppers will be pretty short with an angle that steep. Pinion dive may be an issue with articulation.


Link length will also affect roll axis and roll center. I know you do not want an AS debate, but by your description, your AS may be over 200%, which will cause the rear to hop, especially when cllimbing.


What coils are those? They appear to be stock TJ or XJ coils. I got over 12" of lift with stock XJ's and 11" with TJ's. Also, they may be a little softer than you think.


A double tringulated 4 link will be easier to keep the roll axis flat, and lower AS. I only triangulated the uppers as well, with the lowers angled in 5" each. At full articulation, I have ~4" of axle steer. I hindsight, I would have done the full double triangulated links, primarily for the flatter roll axis. My calculated AS is around 85%. All four links are ~40". Let me know if you want more pics, but I'd look at Beezil's or One Ton's for a better way of linking.


http://www.crawltech.com/albums/Otis-Pics/Full_3.sized.jpg
-Jon

45 degrees between the links where they jointed at the axle, not 90 degrees if that what you were thinking.
How wide is the inside of the frame? like 31in? If the links are 45 degrees between them each link will be 40in long... 31/(2*sin(22.5)) 40in long uppers isnt that short.. Yea if they were 90 degrees apart like I think you were thinking they would only be 15.5in long, that would be the length of the stock ones pictured that is not the case and we agree those are short ass links. I wont go with less then 45degrees between the links. thats my logic.

I havent seen that side view of Beezil's, It looks like it is under the frame, and its really long.

I have TJ coils.

Here is a picture of about how long Id like to make my lower links. I would make it bent, and gusset it at the bend, It would be 1/4in thick tube due to the strange side loading the bent link would cause. The angle woudl be alot different after the lift the coils will give.

Im guessing this link would be aobut 8-10in shorter then Beezils in that pic.

So why do a single triangulated 4 link over a 3 link wishbone?
Id do a single triangulated 4 link over a double triangulated 4 link cuase Id rather mount the lower links out side the frame to provide better clearance. Thats my priority.

http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=1704

[Kaczman]

45 degrees between the links where they jointed at the axle, not 90 degrees if that what you were thinking.
How wide is the inside of the frame? like 31in? If the links are 45 degrees between them each link will be 40in long... 31/(2*sin(22.5)) 40in long uppers isnt that short.. Yea if they were 90 degrees apart like I think you were thinking they would only be 15.5in long, that would be the length of the stock ones pictured that is not the case and we agree those are short ass links. I wont go with less then 45degrees between the links. thats my logic.


Yup, brain fart. My lowers are 40" long are around 40 degrees.

-Jon

[XJoachim]

I just finished my rear coil conversion. I did a double triangulated 4 link with all links about 40" long. The lower meet the center of the axle tube. Drove it today and i'm very pleased. I used the 7.5" RE TJ rear coils and i net about 12 - 14" lift. I don't know how much exactly it is because there is no point to measure that hasn't changed over the years :rolleyes: but i think it's more like 12".

I can post some pics if you want.

[Danno]

please post pix as I'm designing my setup and could use some ideas. Thanks!

[JeepFreak21]

I just finished my rear coil conversion. I did a double triangulated 4 link with all links about 40" long. The lower meet the center of the axle tube. Drove it today and i'm very pleased. I used the 7.5" RE TJ rear coils and i net about 12 - 14" lift. I don't know how much exactly it is because there is no point to measure that hasn't changed over the years :rolleyes: but i think it's more like 12".

I can post some pics if you want.



Yeah man... let's see 'em!

[XJoachim]

OK, here ya go:

This is the custom built crossmember which holds all 4 links

http://www.countyline.de/images/1.jpg
http://www.countyline.de/images/3.jpg

Here you see (if you are able to see it, sorry) the axle attachment points and the hoop that holds the upper center link.

http://www.countyline.de/images/2.jpg
http://www.countyline.de/images/6.jpg

Here is a shot from the right rear, it is not already painted and the coil isolators are still not in.

http://www.countyline.de/images/5.jpg

[csudman]

How much harder would it have been to make the bridge heim a double sheer. Id hate for that thing to break on the road.

[JeepFreak21]

How much harder would it have been to make the bridge heim a double sheer. Id hate for that thing to break on the road.


What is double sheer again? When there is some sort of support on both sides of the heim?
Billy

[XJoachim]

I doubt that this thing will break. The links are 1.5" DOM 0.120" wall and the uppers are welded as one piece with the heim joint. The heims are rated 40.000 lbs and the bolts are all 12.9 strength which equals grade 8.

[csudman]

Well, I hope it works well for ya. I guess if it were me I'd would have done it differently. But hey, you did it and I havent yet. So go for it.

[csudman]

What is double sheer again? When there is some sort of support on both sides of the heim?
Billy

Prettu much, thats it. It allows the bolts load to be distributed through to surfaces rather than one.

[XJoachim]

You mean like the other heims are set up? I don't see that a 12.9 bolt should not hold that load. The hoop is 3/16" U-profile steel. But it's a good point, will think about it. :wave:

[ashmanjeepxj]

OK, here ya go:
http://www.countyline.de/images/6.jpg


A lot of good Ideas, but I dont like the hoop over the axle, and I dont like your bolt Idea. As stated its mounted single sheer. Not good. If anything fails it will be this bolt. Why didnt you mount this joint with the bolt parellel to the ground? This joint as you mounted it will use it's misalignment for up and down travel and articulation, if you mounted it with the bolt parellel to the ground on up and down travel the joint would pivot on the bolt, and would only use misalignment on articulation. The bolt mounted parellel to the ground would also be easier to mount double sheer. I guess you mounted it that way cause the load on the joint "for axle locating" will not side load the joint....

What is that little triangle patch piece on the axle hoop?
I would tie your Axle hoop into the top of your axle, weld or bolt it. As it sits your top spherical bearing has like 8-10in of leverage on the bottom welds of the hoop.

Those are all 1.25in Sperical bearings? (heims)

[BrettM]

first of all, that IS NOT a double-triagulated 4 link. that is a 3 link with a wishbone upper.

second, that rodend NEEDs to be in double-shear. it won't even be that hard, just do it.

third, the rodends on the lowers at the crossmember end are almost out of misalignment already, it will bind very quickly while flexing and possibly break the rodends

fourth, 1.5 .120wall will not hold up for the lowers if they EVER contact rocks

fifth, I can't tell for sure, but it looks like the wishbone is only connected at the very end, you really should but some more bracing in like an "A"

[BrettM]

A lot of good Ideas, but I dont like the hoop over the axle, and I dont like your bolt Idea. As stated its mounted single sheer. Not good. If anything fails it will be this bolt. Why didnt you mount this joint with the bolt parellel to the ground? This joint as you mounted it will use it's misalignment for up and down travel and articulation, if you mounted it with the bolt parellel to the ground on up and down travel the joint would pivot on the bolt, and would only use misalignment on articulation. The bolt mounted parellel to the ground would also be easier to mount double sheer.

What is that little triangle patch piece on the axle hoop?
I would tie your Axle hoop into the top of your axle, weld or bolt it. As it sits your top spherical bearing has like 8-10in of leverage on the bottom welds of the hoop.

Those are all 1.25in Sperical bearings? (heims)

the hoop worries me as well, but he does have the rodend in the right orientation, you want the bolt verticle on a 3 link because the rodend is controlling lateral movement of the axle and if the bolt is horizontal it places a side-load on the rodend that it is not at all designed for.

edit: still needs to be double-shear, though.

[ashmanjeepxj]

the hoop worries me as well, but he does have the rodend in the right orientation, you want the bolt verticle on a 3 link because the rodend is controlling lateral movement of the axle and if the bolt is horizontal it places a side-load on the rodend that it is not at all designed for.

edit: still needs to be double-shear, though.

yea I was still kinda "editing" my thoughs on that... makes sense.

[JeepFreak21]

first of all, that IS NOT a double-triagulated 4 link. that is a 3 link with a wishbone upper.


Wouldn't it be a wishbone 3 link with triangulated lowers?
Billy

[BrettM]

yes, but a 3 link nonetheless, not a 4 link.

[ashmanjeepxj]

Im really liking the double triangulated 3 link idea.

I like how the lower links triangulated inwards, it gives good tire clearance. A normal wishbone 3link with the lower links outside the frame rails would have to have bent links or the rocks would hit the links before the rear tires climbs the rock. The lower links also protect the drive shaft better when triangulated. It also prevents rear steer.

I like it.

[JeepFreak21]

Im really liking the double triangulated 3 link idea.

I like how the lower links triangulated inwards, it gives good tire clearance. A normal wishbone 3link with the lower links outside the frame rails would have to have bent links or the rocks would hit the links before the rear tires climbs the rock. The lower links also protect the drive shaft better when triangulated. It also prevents rear steer.

I like it.



Wouldn't the lowers be described correctly as triangulating outward since they are wider at the axle then at the crossmember? I could be wrong...
Billy

[BrettM]

depends on if you're standing at the front or back :laugh3:

[4ward]

I've only got crappy shots of my double tri 4 link during build. May have some more after this weekend though.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226826_backview.jpg
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226619_sideview_top_rt.jpg
This was where I thought it would be, but I ended up dropping the body 1" lower which made the lowers almost dead level.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226685_sideview_rt.jpg
It doesn't matter to me whether you have a 3 or 4 link, just make sure you can have some adjustment so that you can actually play with it without having to hack apart the whole thing.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226730_rtside_4_link.jpg
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226759_ltside_4_link.jpg
I wouldn't be too worried about a 1" bore heim no matter what way you have the bolt axis facing. I have this one on my front 3 link and the bolt axis is parallel to the ground. I don't see it ever having a problem. That's a 5/8-3/4 next to it for comparison.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226794_heim.jpg

[BrettM]

his sure look like 3/4" rodends to me

do you have full-hydro up front? if not, I would definitely reccomend turning that rodend 90*. If you do it will probably be fine, but why risk it? It's generally not that much more work to run it the other way.

[4ward]

I used to run a 3/4-3/4 heim in its place. I broke 2 of them after A LOT of abuse. Rating on them was around 12,000lbs.- the 1-1.25 is rated at 60,000lbs. I'll never even wear this thing out, let alone break it. I'd like to know what experience you have with these rod ends to say that it'd be too weak.

[ashmanjeepxj]

I've only got crappy shots of my double tri 4 link during build. May have some more after this weekend though.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226826_backview.jpg
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226619_sideview_top_rt.jpg
This was where I thought it would be, but I ended up dropping the body 1" lower which made the lowers almost dead level.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226685_sideview_rt.jpg
It doesn't matter to me whether you have a 3 or 4 link, just make sure you can have some adjustment so that you can actually play with it without having to hack apart the whole thing.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226730_rtside_4_link.jpg
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226759_ltside_4_link.jpg
I wouldn't be too worried about a 1" bore heim no matter what way you have the bolt axis facing. I have this one on my front 3 link and the bolt axis is parallel to the ground. I don't see it ever having a problem. That's a 5/8-3/4 next to it for comparison.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226794_heim.jpg

SICK! I love it.

Those angles look good.

[BrettM]

I used to run a 3/4-3/4 heim in its place. I broke 2 of them after A LOT of abuse. Rating on them was around 12,000lbs.- the 1-1.25 is rated at 60,000lbs. I'll never even wear this thing out, let alone break it. I'd like to know what experience you have with these rod ends to say that it'd be too weak.

I have never broken a rodend, so I guess I don't have the experience to say it's too weak. Of course I've also always used GOOD rodends setup PROPERLY, so there has been no reason to break one. I doubt you would have broken GOOD 3/4" rodends, good ones are rated over over 30,000lbs (aurora PRM12T: 34,319lbs).

The fact is that rodends ARE NOT designed to have a sideload on them. Why use them improperly if it takes an extra 10 minutes to do it right with no downsides?

[Luis]

XJoachim, from the pics, and maybe I didnt read your post thoroughly I must give my .0005 cents. Having the rear coils sit under the frame like that is not a good idea. I mean, if its not resting on some sort of reinforced crossmember, or square tubing (and maybe it is and i didnt catch it), your frame MAY get "distorted". We built 2 XJ's rear coils like that once and both of them's rear frames got bent from having the coil rest on the bare frame without much reinforcing. In other words, the coils basically got driven into the frame, nice big dent/hole, not a very serviceable misshap. Thats why we had to change the design by reinforcing the frame where the coil sits.
I could be wrong, but you may want to check the area or get others advice.

Peace.

[4ward]

Well Max, I'm gonna have to disagree with you(multiple opinions, that's the beauty of these forums). I've bent 2 of those aroura bearings, and they were mounted "prooperly. They're way too expensive to be doing that too often. The 2 that I broke were the next step down, 16,000lbs I think. How many times do we use tools and parts in ways that they weren't designed, and yet the perform admirably?

I was going to mount that big sucker in your "proper" axis, but it would have meant another ENTIRE day of fabrication. So, it's not always that easy to make things fit. If your links can't be made to keep too keep pinion rotation to a minumum, you can easily max out the misalignment of a heim, even with the right spacers. There's no way I could have done it like that on my first edition of my front 3 link. Things aren't always as cut and dry as we'd like them to be.

[BrettM]

fair enough

I still see it like using .25 wall tubing on a cage to make up for design flaws, which if that's what ya gotta do, then that's what ya gotta do. Of course the weight of a 1.25" rodend isn't really comparable to many feet of .25 wall tubing, but the cost is somewhat prohibitive as well.

I can't imagine you having any real problems with that Overkill rodend, but I like to encourage people to do things the right way first, then if it just can't be done; throw more steel and money at it.

his link setup still scares me though, glad he's in Germany. I can't imagine that single-shear bolt lasting at all, especially if it's only through 3/16s. As also mentioned, the rodends on the crossmember end of the lowers are already near maxed out, and if he flexes it hard they will bind, then bend, then break.

[ashmanjeepxj]

fair enough

I still see it like using .25 wall tubing on a cage to make up for design flaws, which if that's what ya gotta do, then that's what ya gotta do. Of course the weight of a 1.25" rodend isn't really comparable to many feet of .25 wall tubing, but the cost is somewhat prohibitive as well.

I can't imagine you having any real problems with that Overkill rodend, but I like to encourage people to do things the right way first, then if it just can't be done; throw more steel and money at it.

his link setup still scares me though, glad he's in Germany. I can't imagine that single-shear bolt lasting at all, especially if it's only through 3/16s. As also mentioned, the rodends on the crossmember end of the lowers are already near maxed out, and if he flexes it hard they will bind, then bend, then break.

mad maXJ, CHIL OUT... your hoseing up the whole thread.

Remined me not to ever ask you these questions:
Can pipe be used for a cage?
Can Full hydraulic steering be used on the street?
Can Heims be used instead of tie rodends?
What is better more Anti-squat or less?


If you want some never ending debates, search for those threads:D

[BrettM]

mad maXJ, CHIL OUT... your hoseing up the whole thread.

Remined me not to ever ask you these questions:
Can pipe be used for a cage?
Can Full hydraulic steering be used on the street?
Can Heims be used instead of tie rodends?
What is better more Anti-squat or less?


If you want some never ending debates, search for those threads:D

I really don't care all that much, not trying to get anyone worked up. Sorry your thread got hijacked. But I do have a genuine concern about the safety of XJoachim's 3 link.

that bolt is through only 3/16" of steel, and has a HUGE load being placed on it from 2 inches above that 3/16s steel. It simply will not last, and could be very dangerous when it goes.

have you ever seen a traction bar bend or rip off of an axle? or leaf-springs turn into "S"s? That's how much rotational force the axle is putting on that one bolt mounted on one side through 3/16s. Scary.



Remined me not to ever ask you these questions:
Can pipe be used for a cage?
Can Full hydraulic steering be used on the street?
Can Heims be used instead of tie rodends?
What is better more Anti-squat or less?

-Yes (with good pipe, bent properly)
-Yes
-Yes
-Depends on terrain and personal preference
:laugh3:




Now to hopefully give you some help with your project and the original intention of the post;

your original question was why 3 link or 4 link? they can be made to essentially have the same suspension characteristics, but people usually make double-triagulated 4 links with a higher, flatter roll-axis/center. The same can be done on a 3 link as you can see with XJoachim. Never seen it, and i've heard people argue both sides, but supposedly you can drive (limp) with one link missing on a 4 link. theoretically it makes sense, but would require a lot of rigidity and strength that most likely is not there. One of the big reasons to do a 4 link is that you can carry one spare link for all, if you make them all equal length. RudeZuk (Shane) over on PBB had 8 equal length links for his front and rear 4 links on his competition buggy, so they were totally interchangeable. One major advantage of a 3 link is the upper wishbone can be offset, so if you have a gas-tank or something on one side underneath you can still run your wishbone on the other side. This is what i'm going to do on my MJ so I can leave the gas tank in stock position.

If you haven't already, read through these:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7503
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168577
and a 3-link vs. 4-link thread:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=195397

[MaXJohnson]

You may or may not want to limp home on it, but think of the damage a busted wishbone could cause to the other links, brackets, u-joints, shocks, blah, blah, blah. Ask WanderingWilly how ugly it can get.

Having two triangulated links vs a wishbone eliminates a single point of failure. That's the short answer.

Not much difference in geometry.

[ashmanjeepxj]

If you haven't already, read through these:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7503
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=168577
and a 3-link vs. 4-link thread:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=195397

Originally posted by Booger Weldz
youll end up with soooooo may comments from fawkin morons that dont know shit, youll have to filter through it all. i had to read forever through all the posts to slowly figure out who the hell was a genuine person with some worthy knowledge and who was some jackass pulling his ass inards out and smearing it on the internet....good luck, youll love wheeling without axle wrap and hopping:D

LOL.. Classic.

[Fullsizexj]

ashmanjeepxj,
I am using a wishbone 3-link on the rear of mine, C-roc supplied me with the design for it and it works awesome, I would pm him and pick his brain about them. He has been using it for a long time now and has not had any problems, I only had one thing go wrong with mine and that is only because I did not get a good enough weld but 3 Batteries and some rods at the trail fixed that.

[XJoachim]

Lots of posts, thanks for all the input you give me. :)

First of all the heims are 1" chromoly, they will hold up to anything that comes up. The double sheer will be the next thing i will do on the hoop mount point and the hoop will be bolted to the pumpkin at the pinion part of it.

The heims of the lower links at the crossmember still have plenty of misalignment left. We lifted one rear tire about 5 feet from the ground while testing it and there still was enough misalignment available.

This was sort of a quick mod. We were sitting there and talking about the rear suspension and the next thing i remember were my leafs lying on the floor. :wierd: As my rear axle is still a bit located too much to the front i will remake the links in a 1.5" tube with 0.250" wall that i also have here.

The frame is reinforced at the coil rest with 3/16 u-profile.

Thanks for all your opinions as they help me make my rig better. I appreciate every sort of opinions. :)

[BrettM]

Lots of posts, thanks for all the input you give me. :)

First of all the heims are 1" chromoly, they will hold up to anything that comes up. The double sheer will be the next thing i will do on the hoop mount point and the hoop will be bolted to the pumpkin at the pinion part of it.



good to hear! all it takes is taking a littl bit of plate or box tubing to the top side, shouldn't take more than 1/2 hour and well worth the peace of mind

The heims of the lower links at the crossmember still have plenty of misalignment left. We lifted one rear tire about 5 feet from the ground while testing it and there still was enough misalignment available.



really?? sure doesn't look like it, but hey if you say so, cool

This was sort of a quick mod. We were sitting there and talking about the rear suspension and the next thing i remember were my leafs lying on the floor. :wierd: As my rear axle is still a bit located too much to the front i will remake the links in a 1.5" tube with 0.250" wall that i also have here.



:D I've been about an inch away from doing that about 10 times :D

[ashmanjeepxj]

ashmanjeepxj,
I am using a wishbone 3-link on the rear of mine, C-roc supplied me with the design for it and it works awesome, I would pm him and pick his brain about them. He has been using it for a long time now and has not had any problems, I only had one thing go wrong with mine and that is only because I did not get a good enough weld but 3 Batteries and some rods at the trail fixed that.

Im doing the Hydro assist this weekend. Just need the 1/4in npt to -6AN fittings, should be able to get that tomarrow morning from the hotrod shop.

Ill show you guys pics when I get around to starting the rear.. Havent bought joint yet...

[BrettM]

be sure to post some pics of that hydro assist also! i think I'm going to get the same cylinder.

have you checked out the Jimmy Joints from PolyPerformance(.com)? They're pretty similar to an 1.25" heim, but rebuildable and I think more misallignment, and supposedly cheaper once you factor in the spacers and stuff you need for the heim. they're in the vendor's section on PBB.

[Matt]

I doubt that this thing will break. The links are 1.5" DOM 0.120" wall and the uppers are welded as one piece with the heim joint. The heims are rated 40.000 lbs and the bolts are all 12.9 strength which equals grade 8.


I would really urge you to A: mount that joint in double shear and B: increase the size (EDIT: if they are 1" bore you should be OK there)

I have personally broken heim joint in the front end of my triangulated 3 link and trust me the heim failure is not big problem - the collatoral damage is. The carnage was massive and it is a pain in the butt to get the axle rotated 90 degrees back to its original location on the trail - rig a fix and deal with the driveline carnage, brake line failure, bent links and other damaged items (it will likely fubar your t-case if your are really talented)

It would take you a couple of hours; spend the time to box in that bolt atop the diff- also my preferance is to position the heims so there are at zero misalignment at static height - limits possible binding

I ended up going to a bushing to solve my issues and with an inner sleeve and an outer collar the set up has lived happily for close to 18 months now... I eats the bushing from time to time but you do not have total failure like a heim...

I also run a clevis back up in case it really goes bad the axle cannot flop around much:

http://home.off-road.com/~wanderingwillys/xjpics/safety_link2.JPG

Matt

[XJoachim]

Thanks Matt, the clevis is a great idea, will fab something similar that catches the axle in case something breaks. Right, they are 1" bore heims with 1" tread.

I also fabbed a center limiting strap that will also catch the axle in case of breakage. I know it will not hold up to drive out of an obstacle but it will minimize damage. The top bolt will be boxed to double sheer.

Thanks for all your suggestions. :wave:

[chassellbandit]

I've only got crappy shots of my double tri 4 link during build. May have some more after this weekend though.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226826_backview.jpg
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226619_sideview_top_rt.jpg
This was where I thought it would be, but I ended up dropping the body 1" lower which made the lowers almost dead level.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226685_sideview_rt.jpg
It doesn't matter to me whether you have a 3 or 4 link, just make sure you can have some adjustment so that you can actually play with it without having to hack apart the whole thing.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226730_rtside_4_link.jpg
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226759_ltside_4_link.jpg
I wouldn't be too worried about a 1" bore heim no matter what way you have the bolt axis facing. I have this one on my front 3 link and the bolt axis is parallel to the ground. I don't see it ever having a problem. That's a 5/8-3/4 next to it for comparison.
http://pics.montypics.com/Onetonxj/2004-02-19/1077226794_heim.jpg


bear with me, just tryin to learn. y are the upper links mounted so high over the pumpkin? could they be dropped down lower, allowing the frame end to be dropped lower as well? i.e. not hack the body that much. looks like a hella beefy setup, nice job.

[JeepFreak21]

bear with me, just tryin to learn. y are the upper links mounted so high over the pumpkin? could they be dropped down lower, allowing the frame end to be dropped lower as well? i.e. not hack the body that much. looks like a hella beefy setup, nice job.


Because he cares more about the ground clearance then the preservation of the body. :)
Billy

[chassellbandit]

so solely a clearance issue. ok, makes sense to me. thanx

[JeepFreak21]

so solely a clearance issue. ok, makes sense to me. thanx


Not to mention other issues with the complex geometry of a link suspension like that.
Billy

[ashmanjeepxj]

Not to mention other issues with the complex geometry of a link suspension like that.
Billy

Since his lower arms are mounted above the axle tubes (for clearance) the upper arms have to be moved higher so there is enough seperation. Teh upper links and lower links can not be very close together or they will over stress the joints.

Also moving the upper links to a high mounting location keeps the link flat (less angle) that is good.

[4ward]

Ground clearance is just an added bonus of the james link, or whatever they're calling it now. I wanted a high roll axis to keep body roll down and needed to keep the antisquat #'s below 100%. Plus I like to build new(to me) things and now I've had a hand in 4 of them.

[ashmanjeepxj]

I have a godo start on my 4link project...
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3142976&posted=1#post3142976

Lower link axle end
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=2423
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=2426
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=2425

[ashmanjeepxj]

Frame end mounts

http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=2427
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=2429

Upper link axle end mount...
http://www.wheelingarizona.com/forums/download.php?id=2428

[bj-666]

i know this is prob a stupid question but why dosent anyone use radius arms. bad example but like claytons arms without the link to the upper mound i'm pretty sure you could weld a super beefy peice of square stock or dom to the axle and then have 3 heims at the front desired mounting position. feel free to shoot me down on this one but just curious.

[Dirk Pitt]

i know this is prob a stupid question but why dosent anyone use radius arms. bad example but like claytons arms without the link to the upper mound i'm pretty sure you could weld a super beefy peice of square stock or dom to the axle and then have 3 heims at the front desired mounting position. feel free to shoot me down on this one but just curious.

The trac bar is required with a set of radius arms. A triangulated 3 or 4 link eliminates it. This is just one reason.

Lookin good Ash.

[JeepFreak21]

The trac bar is required with a set of radius arms. A triangulated 3 or 4 link eliminates it. This is just one reason.

Lookin good Ash.


Another is a radius arm rear makes for a lot of rear stear upon articulation and because antisquat is a much bigger concern than antidrive.
Billy

PS - Looks great Ash! Keep us posted!

[JJacobs]

have you checked out the Jimmy Joints from PolyPerformance(.com)? They're pretty similar to an 1.25" heim, but rebuildable and I think more misallignment, and supposedly cheaper once you factor in the spacers and stuff you need for the heim. they're in the vendor's section on PBB.

I've seen those. They look really beefy. Unfortunately, the one I saw was broken right down the middle of the outer cage. It was on Becca Webster's Red Bull RockHer when she tumbled down my course at the last Farmington UROC.

This and similar competition-level breakages, combined with the performance of the track-bar equipped moon buggies, lead me to think maybe we're asking the triangulated or even double triangulated four links to take a lot of load at the heim. Whereas a panhard suspension will do every bit as good a job in overall performance yet school the triangulated 4-links in strength.

I'm thinking my next rig (soon) will have a one-link, or A-frame, or whatever you want to call it rear suspension with panhard. The front will also have a track bar- of course with an XJ that's hard to get away from in the front :)

[THE_OWL]

According to Poly, Jimmys are on back order.

[ashmanjeepxj]

i know this is prob a stupid question but why dosent anyone use radius arms. bad example but like claytons arms without the link to the upper mound i'm pretty sure you could weld a super beefy peice of square stock or dom to the axle and then have 3 heims at the front desired mounting position. feel free to shoot me down on this one but just curious.

I would put a radius arm rear suspension at the bottom of My choice list for my type of wheelin:
Double triangluated 4link
single triangulated 4link (could be upper or lower triangulated)
3link wishbone (could be upper or lower triangulated)
5link (4 parellel links with a track bar)
Wristed Radius arms 3 link
Radius arms. 3link

If I was building a mud truck for flat gound and didnt need alot of ground clearance, a flat linked radius setup on the rear would probibly be ideal...
But I need to do steep hill climbs (less swuat), lots of clearance, flex, side hilling stability (High roll axis) that a radius armed rear links cant do.