rear four link using rusty's front long arms

[a_boy_named_sue]

does any one see a down side to the y-style 4 link set up that rustys offers for their front long arm being used in the rear?, (any prob w/ clearence anti-squat and axel location or anything else?). other then price and bracket fab.

[Menzenski]

I don't really know enough about suspension design to knowledgeably comment on your idea, but I'm curious if you would use (need?) a panhard bar, and why or why not.

[Meeks]

When you triangulate your control arms, you shouldn't need a panhard bar. However if they are just going to be trailing, you will need a trackbar, or a panhard for sure.. I think? :)

[djblade311]

ummm. Are the long arms for the front designed to connect to the UCA brackets? They wouldnt be the same for the rear so you would need to do some fabrication for the mounts.

[Dirk Pitt]

They are not triangulated so you will definitely need a trac bar.

Lots of anti-squat in the rear I would think.

[bj-666]

:huh:

[Kittrell]

In on page one.

[OT]

Panhard......track bar......
I'm in on page one too.....


BTW, people do run radius arms on the rear of all sorts of rigs.
Most are in simple redneck-rock-rods on 44s that have more horse power than traction, that rely on momentum and don't care much for articulation.

[Goatman]

does any one see a down side to the y-style 4 link set up that rustys offers for their front long arm being used in the rear?, (any prob w/ clearence anti-squat and axel location or anything else?). other then price and bracket fab.

Why on earth would you want to?

It is very easy and relatively inexpensive to build you're own links. They can be built to the design of the suspension, rather than designing a suspension around existing (not very ideal) links. Links are made by folks building custom suspensions all the time....it is very common and much prefered.

[ckh550]

I'm in on page one too..




not really sure what that means but all you smart guys are doing it, so I'll try also.

Chris

[shortxjdoug]

I'm in on page one too..




not really sure what that means but all you smart guys are doing it, so I'll try also.

Chris

hell why not? me too then :D



but on a serious note i don't see why you would run a raius/trailing arm design in the rear when all that design work could go to a triangulated system

[ashmanjeepxj]

If the radius arm is flat, so not alot of angle from the axle to the frame, then it will not have HUGE anti squat. It could be long and maintain all the facory floor, It would could have better axle control and ride then leafs, especially if you had a lift block.

My buddie had an all y-long arm kit on his grand cherokee. 35s, mybe 7in lift. It rode really soft and nice. Could this work on my cherokee with 42s. no way it would suck, and I wouldent get 16in of travle out of it but on a fully boddied cherokee for milde trails 10in travel it would be nicer then leafs.

[Cruzin Illusion]

In on page one.
WTF is this about????

[Cruzin Illusion]

I'm in on page one too..




not really sure what that means but all you smart guys are doing it, so I'll try also.

Chris

Some are not smart

[OT]

Some are not smart
It's called "knowing better".

Think about it, any thread that has both, Rusty's AND radius arm rear-ends has gotta end up being a multipager.
But, any thread in which, someone asks about using Rusty's front radius arms for a rear link setup is an instant classic!

[BrettM]

a radius arm suspension on a lifted vehicle is basically impossible to get both reasonable clearance and anti-squat. if you still wanted a radius arm type suspension, I would look at the "one-link" type.

[cagedxj]

Id look at a one link too. I run it and with a rear winch and limit strap it has been GREAT not to mention pretty easy to fit to an XJ.

[MaXJohnson]

without the rear winch, Rusty doesn't recommend using the front links in your rear on less than 8" of lift.