Attn Farmermat and other radius arm folk....? about wristing...

[Safari Ary]

Hey all, I know that some of you run the ford style radius arms. I was wondering if you've ever wanted to wrist one arm to get more flex. I'm asking this from a theory perspective, 'cause I plan to use rover style arms.

If you have done it, do you feel that you lose all control stability wise? I'm not quite ready to lay out my plans for everyone to critique yet, but I planned to use rubber bushings and no swaybar because I've been told that in the rover setup, the twin radius arms with solid rubber allows for very little flex and is very stiff, which means I can get rid of that pesky swaybar. Anyway, what do you guys think, I was also considering one radius arm and one control arm, and just skipping the wristed setup, but I think I want to radius arms controlling axle twist on the road, especially considering how close together the two mounting points are on the axle. Peace

Ary

[FarmerMatt]

No wrist. I like my arms solid. I use all of a 14" travel shock in the front & don't think I need any more.

Matt

[Cresso]

Wrist. Definitely wrist. Especially if we're dealing from a theoretical standpoint, there's no question in my mind. The main reason long arms are successful in flexing well is that they travel through a larger arc. This doesn't decrease the bind inherent in the stock radius arm configuartion, it just allows the axle to articulate more before the bind stops it. In a non-wristed setup, you can either have good road manners or good trail flex. Not both. Anyone who says they have both has learned to put up with either bad road manners or limited flex.
Wristing, however, completely eliminates the bind. The articulation with a wristed arm is only limited to the other items - shock length, brake line length, track bar length, etc. Most of the methods to wrist radius arms also leave some way to lock the arm. Either replace the top arm, put a bolt through a hole, crank down on a clamp, etc. With this setup, you can have the best of both worlds. Use all tight urethane bushings or even fewer bushings and you'll get an extremely solid road ride. Unlock the wrist and you'll have as much articulation as you can handle. For example, I have locking wristed arms and on the street when it's locked, the side to side roll is very comparable to stock. This is with 8" of lift and no swaybars. On the trail, if I weren't limited by shock, I'd be limited by the track bar length.

To sum up: lockable wristed. The best of both worlds.

[Safari Ary]

Now what if I were to throw in the fact that I want to retain use of the stock LCA brackets, i.e. my two radius arms would use the LCA mounts on the frame rather than lengthening the arms for a "long arm/radius arm setup" I have several reasons for doing this. 1) my arms would sit perfectly parallel to the ground, 2) I wouldn't have to hack off the frame brackets on my '01(I admit it's purely a fear driven reason, I'm scared of hacking them off), and 3) I won't have to go through fabbing a custom crossmember.

Okay, it seems like I'm gonna lay it out now, so here goes. Twin rover style radius arms, either custom made to use JJs or Montero rear arms with poly bushings. One wristed like this:

http://web3.foxinternet.net/venom9/P0001648.jpg

The arms will go over the axle and the spring buckets will mount to the tops of the arms themselves. The arms will utilize JJs at the frame end as well

My goal in all of this is to clear under the axle tubes of any brackets, improve my ride(i.e. lessen CA angles), eliminate need of a swaybar on road, and still have gratuitous amounts of flex off-road. So far, I have not been able to find a major design flaw with my idea, if you see one, please point it out. I'm planning to get started on this relatively soon, hopefully I'll have it done by the Cherokee Crawl. As for as I know, no one has used this style of radius arm under an XJ, but they have under numerous other vehicles. I've been talking with a guy that's got in under the back of his TJ and he loves it. Anyway, let me know what you guys think, positive and negative. Thanks again

Ary

[Cresso]

Sounds like a great idea. I do recall someone using rover arms on an XJ, but not in this country. I'll see if I can find pics. Another great thing about a lockable radius arm like you pictured is that the shorter the arm is, the greater the swaybar effect when it's locked. I say go for it.

[rockwerks]

Wrist. Definitely wrist


You know that the best of teh wristed arm setups over stock non wristed is ony about 3 to 4 inches of droop...according to teh guys at the ranger station....I jsut got back my narrowed HP44 for the front and the moron cut off and threw away the ford radius brackets so Im gonna make my own...just gonna cost me a few hundred more to put teh suspension under teh MJ now..but it will be a radius arm set up with around 39" arms and 15" travel coil overs

[Cresso]

Not all wristed arm setups are the same. An improperly done wristed arm setup can be way worse than a standard long arm setup (see rockkrawler for an example of a wristed radius arm that should never see the road). The prevailing design from the guys at the ranger station involve something similar to the rover arm pictured above. They take a stock radius arm, chop it right behind the c-clamp and throw some sort of bolt in there to pivot on. While technically a wristed arm, this design still has bind in it. As the axle droops, the arm twists along its axis to accomodate. It also drops down, obviously. Since the bolt can only swivel in one plane, it'll still bind a bit.
On the other hand, 4 to 5 inches is a significant amount, considering you can achieve all that without sacrificing any sway control like you do with standard long arms. I gain probably closer to 10 inches on my setup, but I run a very different radius arm from what is pictured above.

[XJ HO]

WAH wristed axle housing BC Broncos...

http://www.bcbroncos.com/WAH.gif

I like the rear shackle pivot things too

[Safari Ary]

Ok, so poly bushings are out I think, because they'd limit travel too much, making the road ride intolerable. Think I'll stick to rubber, but other than that, I think this will work. Anyone else have anything to contribute?? Thanks

Ary

[TOZOVR]

Why is the swaybar pesky?

If you have a daily driven rig and wheel often is taking 4 minutes to disco that stressful?

Ary and I discussed this but I'm just making a point. I wheel with many rover folks and while no, the earlier rangies don't have swaybars, and the later guys who go big don't run them, it SUCKS on the street on a rig with 3" of lift.

When you compare Flex on road in a driving situation, as it relates to those bushings they will deflect TONS on a lifted rig. No, they won't flex a lot on a ramp, but the stressed and leverage is much different than at 45mpg around a corner or in a panic manouver.

Try it Ary, but don't forget where you left that swaybar. You indeed stand to gain some articulation, but be careful.

What happened to evening out flex? I thought you had too much up front and not enough in the back? :D

[Safari Ary]

RJ, I've tried to explain in this thread my main motives for doing this swap, but here they are again:

1) Improved ride
2) Improved clearance
and lastly 3) Improved handling

The side benefits I hope to gain, are:

1) more fluid flex when un-pinned
2) more articulation overall(not sure if that will be the case with the arms so short)

Now that I think about it, Matt, aren't you running poly C-bushings?? I've seen pictures and you definately don't have a lack of flex. How is your on-road ride, do you still run a swaybar? or did your combination of springs, shocks, and bushings tighten everything up enough to get rid of the swaybar. Also, as for gaining more flex in the rear and stiffening the front, I'm trying to do this(maybe I should go poly afterall), but I have to get my new HP30 under the rig because of the gears that are in it, and a couple of the stock brackets are toast.... Thanks

Ary

P.S. BTW, IMHO this is where the old style board would have been better, because the thread's topic has changed direction slightly and I think a lot more people would contribute if they new what we were talking about in here....(just making a general statement)

[TOZOVR]

You said Pesky swaybar :flip:

And then last week complained about too much front flex and needing to even things out


:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Safari Ary]

Originally posted by TOZOVR
You said Pesky swaybar :flip:

And then last week complained about too much front flex and needing to even things out


:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Alright asshat, I'm about to own you(:D)

I said pesky swaybar because I don't like it, it makes my Jeep violently sway back and forth when I enter a parking lot at any kind of angle. As for the rear flex, I've got plans for it too. I just figured I could fix my front suspension by doing this suspension setup. Thanks

Ary

Edit: RJ and I are good friends and just engaging in a little friendly ribbin.

[TOZOVR]

Asshat?

Right but initially it was a concern/reason for going with the Rover style...Fix as in how? What is wrong?

Just decide with what color anodizing you want on your new blingslingin wheels and stop harassing Matt and the rest of the guys....






BAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Good thing your my friend and showed me around Georgetown or I'd take ya apart! ;)

[Safari Ary]

Ok RJ, I have too much sway with my current setup, sans swaybar. If I hookup my swaybar the ride becomes intolerably stiff and beats me up when approching any sort of incline at an angle(like a parking lot entrance). I believe that with the Rover style arms, I will be able to stiffen my setup in regards to sway by using poly bushings(already have relatively stiff shocks, Bilstein 5100s), improve my straight line ride characteristics because the arms will be parrallel to the ground and gain clearance to boot. Does this not make any sense to you or what? I feel like I keep explaining and no one is getting it. :confused:

Ary

[TOZOVR]

Get longer swaybar links.

[Safari Ary]

I have JKS's for 6" of lift, how much longer should I make them?

[MaXJohnson]

Originally posted by Ary'01XJ
retain the use of the stock LCA brackets

my arms would sit perfectly parallel to the ground,

My goal ... is to improve my ride(i.e. lessen CA angles),

So far, I have not been able to find a major design flaw with my idea, if you see one, please point it out.

I've been talking with a guy that's got in under the back of his TJ and he loves it


Use of the stock LCA brackets will severely limit the length of your swing arm. This will result in more axle rotation and fore/aft movement during articulation. The net result will be excessive stress on your bushings, binding and axle steer.

Mounting the arms over the axle might result in a physical arm that is parallel to the ground, but the "effective arm" will be at a steep angle and the ride will suffer because of it. Using a short arm, mounted at the axle will give you steeper "effective arm" angles than either long arms or stock 4-link.

IM(humble as usual)O, you will not achieve your goal with this design.

The TJ example is a rear axle suspension where the arm swings rearward and upward on impact with a bump. Big difference.

[RCP Phx]

Ary,just take the plunge!!!! I was so nervous about cutting off the BB's,but now I really see the benefits.I even considered using Ford style stem/bushings at the frame end instead of JJ's but they made the arm alot shorter!

[Safari Ary]

Just curious, but wouldn't the length and angle of the "effective arm" be determined by drawing a line from the frame bracket to the center of the axle tube? If so, my effective arm will still be nearly parrallel. Anyway, I'm just looking back at the fact that I hacked off my rear quarter panels and regret it from time to time, and I don't want that to happen with something as important as the frame. Thanks

Ary

[RCP Phx]

You correct on the angle,but the arms are so short youll get a lot of axle rotation(pinion/caster changes).I found out after my first test ride thar I had 0* caster but it was driving great.I am up to 2.5* now.Ive still got to add about an 1" to the wheebase(curled the pass. fender under this weekend).

[FarmerMatt]

I'd be afraid to use such a short arm. Stock XJ's have a hard time climbing a ledge without the front end trying to rotate back under the rig. If you mount the arms level it would counter act this, but containment of the axle starts to be comprimised & bushing life will be short with the axle having greater leverage over the mounts. The ford style arms I use have treated me really well & I have no complaints about not wristing them. In fact I've switched to the stiffer poly "C" bushings to increase the swaybar effect. This has help with body control on off camber stuff & has helped balance the suspension front to rear & still allows full use of the 14" travel shocks. This is the same reason a lot of guys are running Curries "AntiRock" swaybars. In short all bind is not bad & huge uncontrolled articulation is not always good.

Matt

[Safari Ary]

Matt, what do you mean by "containment of the axle" and could I do a long-arm esque center limiting strap to fix the problem that arises from such a short arm?? Also, if I'm using poly bushings at the axle and JJs at the frame, what bushings would wear out. I'm really not trying to be a stubborn a$$, I just think that the arms would be about the same length as a stock LCA and we all know stock XJs flex respectably in stock form. I also can appreciate the "not all bind is bad" idea, which is what I've based my on-road handling desires on. I just think that with the short arms the pinnable wristed setup would be the best of both worlds.

What if I were to make my arms longer, say in the 22-24" range, would that alleviate problems? or would I just have to go to like a 30" arm to see any difference. Thanks for your help guys.

Ary

[Cresso]

hmmm, I'm gonna have to back pedal a bit here. I think FarmerMatt is right about the axle pushing underneath the vehicle on a steep ledge. There are ways to fabricate this to keep bushings alive so I don't think that'd be a problem. I don't think flex would be a problem either. However, I think you'll be disappointed with how it reacts to ledges/large rocks/steep climbs. I wouldn't be as concerned about cutting off the stock lower mounts - there's enough thickness in the frame there that you could weld on some mount tabs if you decide to go back to a stock style LCA in the future. Plus, you wouldn't want to miss out on all the fun of cutting through those 4-layer thick LCA mounts, would you? =)

EDIT: the shorter arm would definietly have a more profound difference between pinned and unpinned, but too short and you'll lose capability even when unpinned. Stock bronco arm length seems to be really good, whatever that is.

[FarmerMatt]

What I mean by containment is control of the axle by the arms. It sounded like you were wanting to build mounts up off the axle in order to keep the arm level with the ground. The further away the mounting points are away from the axle the more leverage the axle has over those mounts. The ford "C" busing mounts allow very little leverage by the axle over the bushings because it literally wraps around the axle tube. The rover arms allow a little more because they mount away from the tube 2-3" fore & aft. Now you build mounts & mount the arms over the top of the axle to level out the arms another 3-4". This is like putting a cheater bar on the end of a breaker bar. It puts a whole lot more stress on the mounts & mounting bolts. Everything will need to be super beefy. The axle could also have a tendency to want to hop in high traction situations. I would also question whether the stock LCA mount would be up to the task of pulling double duty for both the LCA & UCA mounts. I'd like to see these beefed up if you were to go this route. A center limiting strap will help on a straight up ledge climb, but most of the time you try to climb these at an angle so the problem comes when the one side is compressed & the other extended. The extended side wants to go backwards under the truck rather than up the rock face. If you go with a longer arm & bigger arc that the axle travels this becomes less of a problem. I believe that stock ford arms are around the 25-27" range. Mine are about 7" longer than the stock arms. This would be measured from the center of the axle to the end of the arm. Don't hold me to those #'s though. It's been awhile since I've measured a stock arm. In short the longer the arm the bigger the arc. You need to take into consideration where you want them to mount, ground clearance, & angle of the arms to name a few, but I'd say an arm around 28-30" would be a good start. Measure it out & see where that would put the mounts & if you would be happy with that.

Matt

[Safari Ary]

Now I get what you're saying. Actually, with my lift height and setup, the arms would be parrallel to the ground with the brackets mounted pretty much tight to the tube. The rover arms are setup originally to wrap under the tubes due to room constraints. By flipping the arm over and putting it on top of the tube, I would gain quite a bit of height, and the mounts on the axle would still be tight up against the tube. I totally see what you're saying about building up a bracket above the axle, but that's not what I'm wanting to do at all. I was also thinking that if I stayed with the stock mounts I could install the LCA braces that come on MJs in order to strengthen them. Maybe I should do up a drawing so you guys can see what I'm talking about. Thanks for the opinions guys. Peace

Ary

P.S. One of the reasons I wanted to keep the arms short is so that I maintain my ground clearance. Keep in mind, I'm not running 8" of lift or anything, just a meager 4.5-5" after all is said and done. Thanks again