Triangulated 4 Link

[Roxtar]

Well Lets look at last weekend. Cracker made a fall that Farmer Matt and Goatman didn't. Now cracker is on 42's, but Matt is running 40 stickies.
Goatman has water in his front 37 stickies.

Paul has leafs on the back of his rig and has not been held back by them at all. Plus there is no need for a swaybar with leafs. With the full body trying to
make the shocks fit it looks like you had to mount them way to close at the top. This is the kind of thing you could without if you keep leafs.

Never mind then, I guess that proves it.
Things like your line being 2" to one side or another, exact skinny pedal movement, or driver timing couldn't possibly ever come into play.
Nope, it's all about the leafs.
That's probably why so many pro rigs are designed with leafs.
They're just as good.
I stand corrected.

Sorry, couldn't resist.
Reread my post, I agreed that leafs can work well.
But saying they are "just as good" as links?
I stand by my choice of the word, "rediculous".

 

[David Taylor]

That's probably why so many pro rigs are designed with leafs.
They're just as good.
I stand corrected.

Sorry, couldn't resist.
Reread my post, I agreed that leafs can work well.
But saying they are "just as good" as links?
I stand by my choice of the word, "rediculous".

I thought we were talking about an xj with fullbody ? Not comp rigs.

If you think your links
are that much better than leafs see how your junk holds up to an F-toy.
If someone wants to keep the body there is no need to do links.

 

[whompinxj]

Never mind then, I guess that proves it.
Things like your line being 2" to one side or another, exact skinny pedal movement, or driver timing couldn't possibly ever come into play.
Nope, it's all about the leafs.
That's probably why so many pro rigs are designed with leafs.
They're just as good.
I stand corrected.

Sorry, couldn't resist.
Reread my post, I agreed that leafs can work well.
But saying they are "just as good" as links?
I stand by my choice of the word, "rediculous".

x2

 

[Roxtar]

I thought we were talking about an xj with fullbody ? Not comp rigs.

If you think your links
are that much better than leafs see how your junk holds up to an F-toy.
If someone wants to keep the body there is no need to do links.

I fail to see how having a body or not effects suspension design (other than the obvious designing for more weight)
If a design is better, it's better.
The only difference is the extra work it takes to design it inside the confines available.

 

[GSequoia]

Most full bodied people don't want this:

I know I don't. I'll save linking up for when I build a buggy. For now I'm keeping my body and keeping my leaves.

 

[5spd_xj]

i know i want that.... that would be so awesome...

 

[Roxtar]

Most full bodied people don't want this:

I know I don't. I'll save linking up for when I build a buggy. For now I'm keeping my body and keeping my leaves.

Like I said in my origional post here; I feel it gives me the best of both worlds.
I get the flex and ride of a buggy with AC, heat, power windows and seats, rear seat (it's folded down in pic but fully functional), and full protection from the elements.
In fact, if you really look at the picture, you'll see I've lost about 12", at most, of rear cargo area. The shocks & mounting bar run right along the back seat.

 

[Paul S]

I fail to see how having a body or not effects suspension design (other than the obvious designing for more weight)
If a design is better, it's better.
The only difference is the extra work it takes to design it inside the confines available.

The point is that on a full body XJ the body is the biggest limiting factor, not the suspension. You can easily reach the limit of what a full body XJ can do with a decent set of leaves.
As far as leaves Vs links go, I guarantee that if you slapped my Deaver's on your XJ you'd notice a HUGE increase in performacne. This isn't to say that Deaver's are better than links, but you're going to have to do a lot better on your link design if you expect to see an improvement.

P

 

[Jump This]

I like well thaught out suspentions....
I saw a leading link rear suspention on a MJ. It was just so unique that I couldn't help but want to see it work....air bags and all.
Custom is cool......

:yelclap:

Rick

 

[forcefed]

A 3 or 4 link suspension IS superior to leaves period. in every situation that i can think of. However as mentioned earlier, for the xj the body IS the limiting factor. but that could be said about any truck, thats why there is buggies / truggies. if you want to link your xj you will have to cut into the floor in the rear passenger area, at least to get anywhere near an ideal geometry, and that area could be closed off with sheet metal any way.

In the desert, at a traveling speed, on rough terrian, the differance between leaves and links is ridiculous (repeat ridiclous). Side by side, deavers or whatever leaves, dont stand a chance, a rear leaf set up bucks like a bull, which at that point is out of control. obviously that will not happen at slow speed. but in the whoops even at slow speed, it would be obvious to anyone
and i dont think comparing two different buggies with different frames and different suspension is a good example.
I honestly dont have to much experiance in the rocks. much more desert. and speak only from that. but even with road race / drag / formula or virtually any other motor sport, a properly designed link system is as good as it gets.
Although, how many people that use leafs for rocks complain about them? as long as they travel the distance they need, they work fine, at slow speed.

 

[rehab]

Why compromise when you can get to here WITH the full body.

2.5" X 16" travel Fox AirShox

That's just a rediculous statement.
Yes, a good set of leafs will work fine.

As good as a well designed 4 link?
Not even close. Deavers or not.

got any pics of the underside? I am very interested in how you mounted the upper arms.

 

[AzRick]

I've built 2 different 4-links. One was a buddies YJ, the other was my XJ. Both of our rigs work better now than with leaves.

There were a few obstacles out at Table Mesa that we could never climb with leaves. Too much hop and axle wrap.

On the flip side, neither of us ran deavers. He had 2.5" Ranchos on a SOA, and I had 4.5" RE's with a 3/4" lift block.

I've tried to follow Paul S. many times...............his rig works really well. It stays planted on the climbs for sure........I have a hard time following him.

 

[Caged94XJ]

Yes, I will agree that the body is the limiting factor. However, in my case I cut out my rear wheel wells and replaced them with 40" wheel tubs. I am dealing with far less body then the standard XJ. Also cutting through the floor is not a problem for me. I like the design that vetteboy has with his cross member, and from what I can see there is min. intrusion into the passenger area. Also kid4lyf has a point you are not really giving up that much. I know that some of you are saying if you want to flex and the benefits of a 4 link setup loss the body. There is a happy middle ground, and that is what I am trying to find.

 

[Paul S]

I think the point about link'n a full body XJ got lost. The point is not that you have to compromise on the mounting locations, as you do not, you can cut the floor, frame, whatever you need to nail the geometry.
The point is that the physical size of a full body XJ is going to stop you long before your leaf springs.
My XJ is pretty cut up, narrowed, etc., there's nothing left to damage or hang-up on, & I'm still limited only by it's size.

Paul

 

[Roxtar]

I think the point about link'n a full body XJ got lost. The point is not that you have to compromise on the mounting locations, as you do not, you can cut the floor, frame, whatever you need to nail the geometry.
The point is that the physical size of a full body XJ is going to stop you long before your leaf springs.
My XJ is pretty cut up, narrowed, etc., there's nothing left to damage or hang-up on, & I'm still limited only by it's size.

Paul

I respectfully disagree.
You make it sound like the body adds a foot or so to the width.
Unless you've gotten rid of the floorpan and went to a center single seat, your XJ buggy's footprint is reasonably close to my full bodied one.
It's a rare case where the body has physically kept someone from clearing an obstacle.
Not wanting to damage the body? Sure.
But just having a body? No.
The limiting factor, IF you don't care about body damage, is pretty much always due to what's under the floor; clearance, suspension, tires, line, etc. not what's on top of it. (excepting the driver)

 

[David Taylor]

I respectfully disagree.
You make it sound like the body adds a foot or so to the width.
Unless you've gotten rid of the floorpan and went to a center single seat, your XJ buggy's footprint is reasonably close to my full bodied one.
It's a rare case where the body has physically kept someone from clearing an obstacle.
Not wanting to damage the body? Sure.
But just having a body? No.
The limiting factor, IF you don't care about body damage, is pretty much always due to what's under the floor; clearance, suspension, tires, line, etc. not what's on top of it. (excepting the driver)

If your body isn't getting in the way your not on trails that need links.
Why do you think a lot of us that wheel the hard stuff out west cut up the body ? It's because once you reach a certain point the body IS what holds you back. Not your rear suspension. Sure made flex looks cool in photo's but doesn't help you get up the rocks.
In this photo you can see I have Lots of flex. Looks cool. Did I need it to get up this trail ?
Nope, the jeep in front of me is Paul with his leafs. The same trail (resolution) is run with F-toys(front and rear leaf) as well.

Do you have any pics of obstacles that your making with your links that others aren't ?

 

[BIGWOODY]

body = more weight......give me a leaf sprung buggy with the same foot print and I'll leave all the 4 linked XJs behind.

 

[BIGWOODY]

you'll never get a full body through here
and my foot print is longer and wider than an XJ

 

[Roxtar]

If your body isn't getting in the way your not on trails that need links.
Why do you think a lot of us that wheel the hard stuff out west cut up the body ? It's because once you reach a certain point the body IS what holds you back. Not your rear suspension. Sure made flex looks cool in photo's but doesn't help you get up the rocks.
In this photo you can see I have Lots of flex. Looks cool. Did I need it to get up this trail ?
Nope, the jeep in front of me is Paul with his leafs. The same trail (resolution) is run with F-toys(front and rear leaf) as well.

Do you have any pics of obstacles that your making with your links that others aren't ?

And that proves... what? Are you suggesting that having a body on your rig would have somehow made that trail undoable?
I've been on your tough trails.
I did BOTW with leafs, full body, and 33s.
Lot of full bodied rigs there.
Show me a pic that couldn't be done if the body was on it.
You didn't address one single thing in my post, instead making a stupid blanket statement like the first one quoted above.

Here, I'll try again:

You make it sound like the body adds a foot or so to the width.
Unless you've gotten rid of the floorpan and went to a center single seat, your XJ buggy's footprint is reasonably close to my full bodied one.
It's a rare case where the body has physically kept someone from clearing an obstacle.
Not wanting to damage the body? Sure.
But just having a body? No.
The limiting factor, IF you don't care about body damage, is pretty much always due to what's under the floor; clearance, suspension, tires, line, etc. not what's on top of it. (excepting the driver)

Now, do you have anything that even remotely sounds factual to say about these statements?
Frankly, this is getting stupid.
And boring.

 

[BIGWOODY]

or here...lemme keep digging I could go on and on...having a full body is nice but you're smoking crack if you don't think it limits you