Long Arm vs Short Arm?
#21
The uppers are mounted to the frame and the axle too, unless my eyes are lying to me. What else would they mount to?
I understand the advantage of longer arms, especially for reducing the amount of wheel base lost at droop. It seems to me, as I visualize it in my head, that short upper arms and long lower arms would cause the pinion to rotate down, pointing towards the ground more as the axle droops, creating stress on the ujoint/CV.
I have been trying to understand suspension more, but I think I just need to sit down with a book because the piece by piece info I find isn't very helpful. IE, I still don't understand anti-squat, though I've read through all the links and google searches I find.
#22
The clayton long arm uses a radial or Y arm. The lowers are connected to the frame but the uppers are connected from the upper axle mounts to the lower arms, not the frame. The rear arms are all long on the clayton long arm.
They are just like the TJ model, I have installed the long arm kit on them before.
They are just like the TJ model, I have installed the long arm kit on them before.
#23
The clayton long arm uses a radial or Y arm. The lowers are connected to the frame but the uppers are connected from the upper axle mounts to the lower arms, not the frame. The rear arms are all long on the clayton long arm.
They are just like the TJ model, I have installed the long arm kit on them before.
They are just like the TJ model, I have installed the long arm kit on them before.
Wasn't the drawback of that set up binding at flex/articulation?
#25
It depends on the set up, and shock length you would be running. On JK's with up to a 12" travel shock I wouldn't that concerned about excessive binding. The radial or radius design also has extra stress placed on the lower frame mounts and lower control arms since those two support the entire weight of the axle assembly.
Last edited by TheDirtman; 01-06-2014 at 04:15 PM.
#26
Got a lot further searching "radius arm"
Yeah, sounds like binding happens, but is more of a theoretical issue on anything using springs and shocks. Seems to flex as well as anything else using that set up.
I did read something about unloading on a climb, but I don't really understand that either.
Still kind of makes me want to avoid the y-arm. Shouldn't be much harder to do a triangulated 4 link or a 3 link.
I have to admit, I was intrigued by RK's new 1.5" X factor, with the triple rate coils and the 1" rear wheel base stretch. I have heard some mention the RK 3 link feels "loose" on the road.
Yeah, sounds like binding happens, but is more of a theoretical issue on anything using springs and shocks. Seems to flex as well as anything else using that set up.
I did read something about unloading on a climb, but I don't really understand that either.
Still kind of makes me want to avoid the y-arm. Shouldn't be much harder to do a triangulated 4 link or a 3 link.
I have to admit, I was intrigued by RK's new 1.5" X factor, with the triple rate coils and the 1" rear wheel base stretch. I have heard some mention the RK 3 link feels "loose" on the road.
#27
Unloading is when you are on a steep climb or decent and your weight shifts from the front to back or back to front and your coils expand due to no weight on them. It will feel like you are going to flip over backwards or forwards on to the roof.
It happens with any coil suspension not just the radius design.
A triangulated 4 link is way more work then the radius design since it will require relocating the fuel tank and if you do it on the front will require you to run full hydraulic steering.
It happens with any coil suspension not just the radius design.
A triangulated 4 link is way more work then the radius design since it will require relocating the fuel tank and if you do it on the front will require you to run full hydraulic steering.
#29
Also... in the front, triangulation is going to interfere with the drive shaft. It can be done, but seemed to me when I got there that it was just going to be too much work for too little payback.
Although having a set of front arms triangulated, would make for a pretty nice tranny slider.
The solution to unloading is closer than you think. Weld a 10k d-ring (HF is good for these) onto your axle housing in the center... bring your winch rope to it and tighten. Walla.... suck down to prevent unloading. Or... get rid of those pesky coils like I did.
It's an easy item to add and you will run into climbing situations where you'll want it if you haven't already seen the need.
Routing may be an issue for you with all the steering crap in the way.
#30
Unloading is when you are on a steep climb or decent and your weight shifts from the front to back or back to front and your coils expand due to no weight on them. It will feel like you are going to flip over backwards or forwards on to the roof.
It happens with any coil suspension not just the radius design.
A triangulated 4 link is way more work then the radius design since it will require relocating the fuel tank and if you do it on the front will require you to run full hydraulic steering.
It happens with any coil suspension not just the radius design.
A triangulated 4 link is way more work then the radius design since it will require relocating the fuel tank and if you do it on the front will require you to run full hydraulic steering.
As for the front, I think just a standard four link and track bar will be my realistic option. Plenty of time to think about it, but I'd like to learn as much as I can and make the best decision for myself well ahead of time.