Post by: Asylum on April 30, 2007, 07:05:04 PM
8)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_311.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_266.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_100.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_101.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_104.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_107.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_108.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_110.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_112.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_121.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_122.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_127.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_275.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_130.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_290.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_294.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_300.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_305.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_308.jpg)
(http://http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l115/Asylum76/IMAGE_307.jpg)
Thanks again Warthog.
Post by: daggie on April 30, 2007, 07:12:54 PM
Post by: greggmo on April 30, 2007, 07:48:49 PM
Post by: Mik on April 30, 2007, 08:01:40 PM
Unfortunately you will be ripping the chassis mounts off now. That style of control arm is great unless you want to do any froading.
They have less flex than the standard arms and as such are truly landfill.
Buy a set of Rubicon Express or Clayton or any of the other makes with a high misalignment rebuildable bearing on one end and make sure the upper arms are adjustable.
Post by: Warthog on April 30, 2007, 08:33:34 PM
Quote from: "Mik"
Top job.
Unfortunately you will be ripping the chassis mounts off now.
They have less flex than the standard arms and as such are truly landfill.
Buy a set of Rubicon Express or Clayton or any of the other makes with a high misalignment rebuildable bearing on one end and make sure the upper arms are adjustable.
OooooH thats Harsh :? But hey, we worked with what we've got and can afford and learn from our experiances..... But:
- Chassis mounts are a piece of piss to make stronger, If it breaks we will fix it :wink:
As for my gloves Mr Greggmo..........I thought they were rather fetching and went well with the surrounding shades of spring
Post by: Mik on April 30, 2007, 09:16:21 PM
Quote from: "Warthog"
OooooH thats Harsh :? But hey, we worked with what we've got and can afford and learn from our experiances..... But:
Ive always found by far the most affordable way was to learn from other peoples experience.
The std arms are thin and tinny and flex beautifully. I would use them instead of anything from the skyjacker/procomp etc camp.
Your current train of thought will result in you welding your axles directly to the chassis and doing away with the pesky arms altogether.
Your team skills seem to be up to it, buy some joints from Currie or Daystar and get busy with your new arms.
If you leave it long enough your chassis mounts will drop off and you can jump a step straight to long arm
Post by: greggmo on April 30, 2007, 09:46:14 PM
Post by: isle of man on April 30, 2007, 09:52:12 PM
peter henry
Post by: Warthog on April 30, 2007, 10:09:17 PM
This may come accross as an Arrogant statement by me, but im not try'in to be. I just need to see things up close and for myself sometimes, to understand and make my own conclusions too. However i will take your experiance/opinion and conclude upon it myself. :wink:
KingCJ got it sussed..........Mog axles and Triangulated 4 link front and rear. Hydraulic steering and it flex's like hell. All on a tight budget i may add.
Post by: isle of man on April 30, 2007, 10:22:31 PM
peter henry
Post by: Bubba on April 30, 2007, 10:51:30 PM
Post by: Warthog on April 30, 2007, 10:57:04 PM
Quote from: "isle of man"
time will tell oh doubting one..........
peter henry
Who ME!
I drive a Landy me
I have chosen my words carefully on my responses. As i know "Mik" is well respected by those whom I have listened to
Post by: Warthog on April 30, 2007, 11:02:42 PM
Quote from: "V8 Bubba"
go with what you feel if it goes shit shaped at least you can say you tride i also think you may be beefing up the other mounts soon
SSShhhhh! Dont tell anyone............But the Lower control arm mounts on the chassis are already a little duffed up
Waiting for Asylum to get those Moggy's......
Post by: Asylum on May 01, 2007, 12:50:18 AM
At the moment I am very much limited to using what I got. Not a lot of ££ floating around and after running that suspension system for a year this is the first problem I have had with/caused by it. When I got it, I never new the amount of flex it has and the rigidity of the arms would over time wear a component (axle mount) to the point of fracture. Nobody every told me so. It didnt even occur to me that the axle mount was a weak point on the axle until it broke and you guys told me so.
I took everybodies advice and researched the crap out of the JKS/Currie axle mounts and mini skids and the rather more expensive rubicon full axle mount replacement kit. I came to the conclusion that my bank balance couldnt stretch to the rubicon setup that was hardcore and the Currie/JKS mounts with mini skids although cheap enough were only 1mm thicker material than the stock mount. The best thing in my opinion was to conclude that with warthogs skills on toe and willing help was to make some that rivaled the rubicon hardcore axle mount system for strength. I think his design has succeded if not surpassed it. And this has cost £10 in materials and a couple of weekends work.
Now, regardless as to if I had made my own, purchased the rubicon system or the JKS/Currie mounts the "weak point" would have still moved to the chassis! I think I am correct there, please correct me if I am wrong? so in essence there is nothing wrong with the new mounts but the problem caused by lots of flex and ridgid arms will over time take it toll on that next weakest point.
I have looked into the JKS short arms and they seem to retain the very same rubber bushings as in my present arms but allow a twist within the shaft helping with suspension flex. Looking closer at these though they would still suffer the same fate as my present arms if met with a frontal force, transfering the impact to the weakest point (now the chassis mount) as the arms will maintain its logitudanal rigidity. From what I can see Mik/peter/all you are saying introduce a rebuildable, relitively inexpensive "weak link" into the equation that can be carried as a spares and easily replaced on location ie. the high misalignment rebuildable bearing. Is this the same as a johhny joint? Better/Worse?
Now, please correct me if I am not quite understanding correctly. The introduction of the johhny joint type bearing would assist with axle flex and releave stresses on pionts that would normaly have stress applied by the tradition rubber bushing, and would also become the weak point should a direct force be applied along the shaft, giving before the now weak point "the chassis mount"?
OK I have been looking at johny joints for a while now also and looking at the Currie johhny joint control arm system for ideas. The problem I can see with all the short arm kits is the arms are straight. The present arm I have has a kink in to assist with the angle from chassis mount to axle mount and helping clearance. All other short arm systems I have found are straight, thus reducing axle articulation by hitting the back of the spring/shock perch sooner. Hence the advantage with reduced angle of the long arm systems. Looks like another mindfield!!!!
Any ideas greatly appreciated.
I will add though that not many people can put all the problems right in one go mostly due to budget and as far as I am concerned, thanks to warthog and others kindness and advice as soon as I have my new shocks and other bits will be back offroading again. All be it with the knowledge that my weak points have now moved and with a mind to rectifly that as soon as my funds allow. But if I were to worry about it too much the truck would never leave the drive and I would never get any enjoyment out it. Its a balance I think. It does annoy me that I can buy a product like the suspension system I have and the manufacturer must know the long term effects the system will have on parts and not document it.
Warthog.... It may be easier and cheaper to skip straight to the portals and custom long arm.....but no doubt that will have it problems too 8)
Post by: isle of man on May 01, 2007, 06:11:32 AM
peter henry
Post by: Warthog on May 01, 2007, 06:49:02 AM
As for moggy axles or 303's....What problems....I was gonna weld'em to the chassis
Post by: Asylum on May 01, 2007, 08:49:38 AM
Quote from: "Warthog"
As for moggy axles or 303's....What problems....I was gonna weld'em to the chassis :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Post by: Steve B on May 01, 2007, 09:29:35 AM
This is what you want, only $40 each and perfect for your fabrication skills. Just get 1 for each control arm and your sorted. You can cut off the poor polybushes which have no flex and give your control arms the flex they need.
http://www.currieenterprises.com/cestor ... px?id=1262 (http://www.currieenterprises.com/cestore/Product.aspx?id=1262)
Steve
Post by: Warthog on May 01, 2007, 12:25:02 PM
Post by: Mik on May 01, 2007, 07:30:55 PM
Quote from: "Steve B"
Hi Asylum,
This is what you want, only $40 each and perfect for your fabrication skills. Just get 1 for each control arm and your sorted. You can cut off the poor polybushes which have no flex and give your control arms the flex they need.
http://www.currieenterprises.com/cestor ... px?id=1262 (http://www.currieenterprises.com/cestore/Product.aspx?id=1262)
Steve
Quote from: "Warthog"
40 Dollars still won't remove the weakness issue of the mounts.
There is no inherant weakness in the mounts but if your going to rip them off then a constant side to side twisting force is the most effective way to do it.
Control arms with just a polybush at either end can only twist as far as the poly can compress (which isnt very far) and then ALL the energy from articulating your axle go towards mount destruction.
Before the mount gets trashed its usual for the control arm bolts wear the mounting holes so large that they are unable to grip the sleeve which runs through the bush. This results in the nut coming loose and the subsequent overtightening which distorts the mount and crushes the polybush giving it even less flex.
The nut still comes loose.
A number of Jeeps Ive seen wear a lock nut. It doesnt fix the cause. It just makes them feel better.
A Johnny joint will swivel and twist with virtually no resistance, especially if kept lubricated, allowing the chassis mounts to deal with the front-to-back forces. I am certain you will find no instances whatever of mounts being damaged by these forces and I dont know of any instance where these have needed to be reinforced.
BTW an RE control arm avoids fouling at full articulation by offsetting the bush mount on the end of the arm thus avoiding the banana arm nonsense.
Mik
Post by: Warthog on May 01, 2007, 08:06:12 PM
Looking back on the original Jeep arms, i now see that being naturaully flexible was part of the set-up. With axle mount strength to suit, i would assume that the original arms would buckle before the axle mounts.
Where i can see Asylums frustration lies is in the bullshit hype all these companies give about their products. What they dont tell ya are issue's like this.
See...........im learning all the time, taking onboard what ya got to say Mik, Peter and all :wink:
All i reckon the post was put up for was to show others a potential problem lurking under ya truck and how with a bit a time/help it can be resolved. A few members on Birty's were at Kirton when it got trashed. They were interested in the problem as they were also embarking on mods to suspension etc.
Cheers
Post by: greggmo on May 01, 2007, 09:01:04 PM
Post by: Warthog on May 01, 2007, 09:03:42 PM
Quote from: "greggmo"
i like usefull educational threads like this one. we all learn off each other and thats good. :lol:
I shall bring you a pair on the next play day..........
Post by: greggmo on May 01, 2007, 09:06:03 PM
Post by: doublej on May 01, 2007, 09:19:33 PM
Post by: Asylum on May 01, 2007, 09:22:01 PM
Post by: Warthog on May 01, 2007, 09:51:59 PM
(http://http://birtydastardsjeepclub.com/forum/userpix/343_IMAGE_261_1.jpg)
Post by: greggmo on May 01, 2007, 10:13:20 PM
cool pic mate.
Post by: tedthefed on May 02, 2007, 09:05:40 AM
Post by: Asylum on May 02, 2007, 11:19:02 AM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
Hey Hog, you started it with the gloves anyway, dont go blaming me cause greggmo thinks they are gay!! :lol:
Mik
You said in an earlier post that its important to have adjustable upper control arms, it may be a dumb question, but why is that?
Clayt
Post by: isle of man on May 02, 2007, 12:24:19 PM
peter henry
Post by: Warthog on May 02, 2007, 02:12:15 PM
Post by: isle of man on May 02, 2007, 03:08:46 PM
peter henry
Post by: Asylum on May 02, 2007, 04:50:06 PM
Quote from: "isle of man"
it's for the pinion angle................next weak link.
peter henry
OK.
At the moment the driveshaft is dead in line with the pinion on the present arms and factory uppers. Would I be correct in saying then that as time goes on and the springs sag then the top would need to be adjustable to keep this alignment correct?
For all this we have spoke of only the front, I am guessing the same applies to the rear axle and mounts? The mounts on the D44 I would asume to be stronger than that of the D30 (Probably incorrectly) and should not need the same amount of reinforcement?
Cheers
Clayt
Post by: isle of man on May 02, 2007, 05:45:28 PM
Quote from: "Asylum"
OK.
At the moment the driveshaft is dead in line with the pinion on the present arms and factory uppers. Would I be correct in saying then that as time goes on and the springs sag then the top would need to be adjustable to keep this alignment correct?
the stress is on the flex
Quote from: "Asylum"
For all this we have spoke of only the front, I am guessing the same applies to the rear axle and mounts? The mounts on the D44 I would asume to be stronger than that of the D30 (Probably incorrectly) and should not need the same amount of reinforcement?
Cheers
Clayt
on the rear it is the upper axle mounts that will give you trouble i have never seen the lower rear break free as the front does..........
peter henry
Post by: Asylum on May 02, 2007, 07:43:32 PM
Sorry to keep picking yours and everybodies brain but how do I adjust the axle to suit the pinion under flex? My thoughts may be incorrect but is it because the drive shaft can run out of linear travel, probably not the correct term to describe what I am thinking but I mean the drive shaft can not extend or retract enough? Please correct me if completely wrong.
As far as the rear goes, if the lowers were johnny jointed and the axle triangulated does that solve all the issues with the rear?
I have had another thought. Been looking at the Johnny joints and am wondering how they can be effective when bolted in between two solid bits of metal! They have 30 degress movement but as the joint pertrudes only slightly from the case and is then bolted between two bits of metal larger than the caseing, that is going to stop/restrict movement to the point the metal case will foul the inside of the mount, or is this restricted movement enough for suspension travel and the unused johnny joint movement an added bonus?
Cheers
Clayt
Post by: isle of man on May 02, 2007, 08:36:29 PM
Quote from: "Asylum"
Cheers Peter
Sorry to keep picking yours and everybodies brain but how do I adjust the axle to suit the pinion under flex? My thoughts may be incorrect but is it because the drive shaft can run out of linear travel, probably not the correct term to describe what I am thinking but I mean the drive shaft can not extend or retract enough? Please correct me if completely wrong.
As far as the rear goes, if the lowers were johnny jointed and the axle triangulated does that solve all the issues with the rear?
I have had another thought. Been looking at the Johnny joints and am wondering how they can be effective when bolted in between two solid bits of metal! They have 30 degress movement but as the joint pertrudes only slightly from the case and is then bolted between two bits of metal larger than the caseing, that is going to stop/restrict movement to the point the metal case will foul the inside of the mount, or is this restricted movement enough for suspension travel and the unused johnny joint movement an added bonus?
Cheers
Clayt
wow...........your now talking, if you fit johnny joints alone you will be impressed............to do as you have listed above is in the realms of much expense im affraid.
peter henry
Post by: Mik on May 02, 2007, 09:07:28 PM
Quote from: "Asylum"
Quote from: "isle of man"it's for the pinion angle................next weak link.
peter henry
OK.
At the moment the driveshaft is dead in line with the pinion on the present arms and factory uppers. Would I be correct in saying then that as time goes on and the springs sag then the top would need to be adjustable to keep this alignment correct?
For all this we have spoke of only the front, I am guessing the same applies to the rear axle and mounts? The mounts on the D44 I would asume to be stronger than that of the D30 (Probably incorrectly) and should not need the same amount of reinforcement?
Cheers
Clayt
:roll:
Unfortunately its not quite that simple because rotating the axle also effects your pinion angle. The front pinion should ideally be 1 degree above parallel (IIRC).
Both the pinion angle and the caster angle cannot both be correct in a lifted Jeep so a comprimise is required. Unless you have an opportunity to change the axle geometry (which you just missed) it is accepted procedure to re-introduce as much caster as you can until the prop starts to vibrate and then back it off an odd degree. As the front prop is so long on a Wrangler and already has a double-cardan at the TC end it is quite tolerant of mis-alignment.
The rear contol arm mounts are no stronger than the fronts but having diddy springs back there means that it cant flex as much as the front therefore putting less stress on the mounts.
Adjustable arms in the rear allows you to dial your pinion angle in and you have no geometry issues back there. However you do have a very short prop, no double-cardan joint and a weak-as-you-like slip yolk so a slip yolk eliminator kit is very recommended.
The correct angle at the back with a std prop is to have both UJs at identical angles.
A Johnny joint casing does not foul the mounting bracket at full swivel.
Mik
Post by: Asylum on May 02, 2007, 09:43:31 PM
Mmmm triangulation does look expensive but I was hoping I could bribe Warthog into lending me his expertise at some point in the future. :lol:
I am fortunate enough that when I shipped a load of bits from the US I bought a slip yoke elimator and Rubicon Express double cardan prop along with a terraflex belly up skid plate. I have already fitted these and have been running them for as long as the suspension now.
If I had known at the time the result of wear and tear applied by the kit I got, I would have put the extra cost on my card and gone for the Full Traction 6 inch long arm setup with triangulated rear. But as a beginer was advised to ease into it and started with the moddifications that made the most sense to me. ie. cost effective (I thought) and practicle 4 inch lift, extended brake lines, belly up skid plate, slip yoke eliminator, double cardan prop, snorkel, winch, internal winch controls, saftey etc etc.........!!!
I did offroad the truck as stock a couple of times but it had issues which ironicaly until now the above purchases solved. Before the TJ I had and offroaded a CJ7 so in my opinion the TJ needed that extra something to get places the CJ7 could.
Theres kind of a lot to take in, in your replies so thats going to keep me busy for a while.
Thanks all
Clayt
Post by: Warthog on May 02, 2007, 09:53:31 PM
Quote from: "Asylum"
Cheers Peter and Mik
Mmmm triangulation does look expensive but I was hoping I could bribe Warthog into lending me his expertise at some point in the future. 8)
Oi Asylum..........Bog Off :? I aint ya Jeep Fab Biatch
If ya goin as far as that! Scrap the axles first! Start new.
Something that i have noticed too is the stress placed on the shox's on the front as the axle is in its lower position. The bushes take care of it to some degree on the 4" But surely some mods to shox mounts or shox type would be of benefit too?
Post by: isle of man on May 02, 2007, 10:20:20 PM
peter henry
Post by: Asylum on May 03, 2007, 09:56:03 AM
Quote from: "isle of man"
the shocks on the front are no problem the rear is another story........
peter henry
..........Oh go on, you may as well let me know the problem with them so I can plan for the future..............
Post by: isle of man on May 03, 2007, 10:36:19 AM
(http://http://snap34.photobox.co.uk/09983816fae9433674a6e58a1399ecb10e36df9ff9f8b7f90a5ac2f0.jpg)
the problem with the rear shocks is the mounts (too low) you need to move them, have a look at my wrangler...........
(http://http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m246/manxmafia/G08.jpg)
(http://http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m246/manxmafia/IMG_0674.jpg)
i have since changed the shocks in the photo and have a chassis strengthening brace included also, but as my wrangler is having some more work bieng carried out i can not give you the updated photo unfortunately.
just found this of my wrangler on full droop
(http://http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m246/manxmafia/IMG_0678.jpg)
peter henry
Post by: Warthog on May 03, 2007, 05:13:10 PM
Post by: isle of man on May 03, 2007, 05:58:21 PM
Quote from: "Warthog"
I am begining to get that sinking feeling.......You know when you have bitten more of than you can chew :-k
clayton himself did my suspension when i had my wrangler in america............
http://http://www.claytonoffroad.com/
you can now buy a kit to relocate the shock from.........
http://http://www.polyperformance.com/shop/home.php
peter henry
Post by: Asylum on May 03, 2007, 09:59:42 PM
Oh. I have seen a fair few people mounting the rear shocks upside down, is there any benefit to doing this?
Thanks for all the info and help
Clayt
Post by: isle of man on May 03, 2007, 10:05:49 PM
peter henry
Post by: Mik on May 03, 2007, 10:14:54 PM
There are a number of solutions and having the shocks rod end down gains a little clearance for free. Lower mounting extensions are a common bolt-on answer or for those with fabbing ability you can just cut the original mount off and relocate it where the shock doesnt foul.
Its common to cut a section of perch away too.
Mik
Post by: Warthog on May 04, 2007, 06:48:59 AM
Cheers
Mr Hog
Post by: Asylum on May 08, 2007, 01:10:36 PM
How many degrees of movement is required within an axle/chassis mount for an axle to articulate?
I have been looking at JJ's and Rose joints and have looked at the rubicon express/currie arms etc.
My budget at the moment wont stretch to a new long arm kit nor a set of arms from currie/rubicon express.
A rose joint has 22 degrees
A johnny Joint has 30 degrees
Does 1 rose joint on the arm one end and the original rubber mount the other end give the axles enough flex without stresses to cause any of the damage earlier mentioned or is 22 degrees not enough but a 30 degree JJ provides enough movement?
If 1 JJ works pefectly and 1 rose joint doesnt then a rose joint either end will surely do the job? Or to have the axle articulate without any stresses are 2 JJ's required?
Sorry if I have confused anybody
Thanks for the help
Clayt
Post by: isle of man on May 08, 2007, 01:54:32 PM
Quote from: "Asylum"
I have another related question for all ye brainy folk out there.
How many degrees of movement is required within an axle/chassis mount for an axle to articulate?
very difficult to answer that one as too many variable in the set up that your wrangler has..............but would stick with johnny joints.
Quote from: "Asylum"
Does 1 rose joint on the arm one end and the original rubber mount the other end give the axles enough flex without stresses to cause any of the damage earlier mentioned or is 22 degrees not enough but a 30 degree JJ provides enough movement?
in short- yes you can have johnny joint on one end and rubber on the other but for best results both should be johnny joints on the rear.............
but for the front only one johnny joint will suffice in fact will give better feel for the steering (less torque steer) it's a compromise i have adopted.
peter henry
Post by: Asylum on May 08, 2007, 02:12:43 PM
Clayt
Post by: Mik on May 08, 2007, 07:52:44 PM
Post by: king cj on May 08, 2007, 11:19:33 PM
Post by: daggie on May 09, 2007, 06:10:47 PM
Post by: daggie on May 09, 2007, 06:11:24 PM
this is a handy page
http://www.rubiconexpress.com/Builders- ... F9BF879599 (http://www.rubiconexpress.com/Builders-Parts.aspx?Vid=37F9BF879599)
Post by: Asylum on May 10, 2007, 10:02:27 AM
Post by: isle of man on May 10, 2007, 12:45:12 PM
peter henry
Post by: daggie on May 10, 2007, 05:49:49 PM
it seemed logical to me to have the flexy joint at the axle, as that end of the arm is cranked
http://www.rubiconexpress.com/Img_Produ ... /0/590.jpg (http://www.rubiconexpress.com/Img_Products/Pn/6/2066/Photographs/0/590.jpg)
maybe I have them the wrong way round,
:? now
Post by: dtooth on May 12, 2007, 12:41:02 PM