o_teunico Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Has anyone attempted to make at home a 3Link or One Link suspension arrangement in a coiler? Have read interesting stuff in http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=41311&hl=%2Bsuitable+%2Bjoint+%2Bfor+%2Blink+%2Bfront+%2Bsuspension and http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=81602 Any pics or experiences? Bill van Snorkel moved coils closer to the centre and, along with a 3 Link, obtained a great articulation. Could it be possible to move not only coils, but also "hockey sticks" inwards for better axle articulation? I was thinking in LH radius arm bracket beeing welded in the inner side of the RH chassis rail and vice versa (locating points in axle also beeing moved closer to centre). This way, with relocated/longer shock absorbers and the parts needed beeing alrerady in the car, it will be a cheap way of having great articulation. I undertand that vehicle will lean quite a lot, but some detachable anti-roll bars will solve it for road use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landy_andy Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Go join Pirate 4x4 & read up on linking your landy.... huge amount of info on there.... just watch out for being flamed if you post.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Idris Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I suspect that the radious arm anchor points could be moved much closer together and mounted on the crossmember to get more flex. (2 point rubber version of 1 link) Dave Lloyd's truck does have the anchors closer together and under the chassis rails. Not only does this increase flex, but the bent-in radious arms increase steering lock 1 link fits, but 4 link doesn't clear the sump well. 3 link can work with the existing radious arms, if the end bushes are removed and a top link run from the diff to the chassis. But 4 link looks the best option once it is fitted. I looked into it all a fair bit, but personally I prefer twin lockers. Waving a wheel doesn't seem to be an issue and I keep the side slope stability. But if I was on a tight budget I'd go 4 link and have pull down winches for side slopes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishbosh Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Have a chat with Rogue Vogue - he has a vague idea about one link... :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 27, 2013 Author Share Posted February 27, 2013 I´m not registered, but sometimes have a look to pirate. What are the advantages of the 4 link arrangement? Any pics of Dave Lloyd´s or Nick "RogueVogue"´s? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 27, 2013 Author Share Posted February 27, 2013 Is this the one with 1Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Has anyone attempted to make at home a 3Link or One Link suspension arrangement in a coiler?Have read interesting stuff in http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=41311&hl=%2Bsuitable+%2Bjoint+%2Bfor+%2Blink+%2Bfront+%2Bsuspension and http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=81602 Any pics or experiences? Bill van Snorkel moved coils closer to the centre and, along with a 3 Link, obtained a great articulation. Could it be possible to move not only coils, but also "hockey sticks" inwards for better axle articulation? I was thinking in LH radius arm bracket beeing welded in the inner side of the RH chassis rail and vice versa (locating points in axle also beeing moved closer to centre). This way, with relocated/longer shock absorbers and the parts needed beeing alrerady in the car, it will be a cheap way of having great articulation. I undertand that vehicle will lean quite a lot, but some detachable anti-roll bars will solve it for road use. My vehicle was not originally a coiler and I made my panhard rod attachments at both the chassis and axle significantly higher than on a genuine coiler. This has the effect of moving the front ends roll centre higher up and closer to the centre of gravity. This compensates to a degree in restoring roll resistance that is lost when replacing radius arms with a 3 or 1 link. Due to the fact that most of my offroading these days involves extreme articulation, and to address the high rate of bushing wear, I have replaced the 2 piece rubber bushings of the 3 control arms with old, used adjustable A frame ball joints.I replace the worn plastic ball joint liners with lead liners that I recast from melted down wheel balance weights.These seem to last very well. On a 3 link, if you can mount the top link left of centre and angle it down from axle to chassis, this will help to counter the force of propshaft torque roll on offcamber gradients where the vehicle is leaning to the right. Relocating the radius arm chassis mountings closer together, or making longer radius arms will definately increase articulation, but body roll on a genuine coiler will be increased unless panhard location is addressed or a lockable antiroll bar is fitted. I have done a 3 link conversion on 2 coilers and found the increased articulation causes the right hand side tyre to foul the coil spring bucket unless rims with less backspacing are fitted. DirtyDeisel on here is currently rebuilding a Jeep Wrangler with 1 link suspension front and rear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I looked into it all a fair bit, but personally I prefer twin lockers. Waving a wheel doesn't seem to be an issue and I keep the side slope stability. But if I was on a tight budget I'd go 4 link and have pull down winches for side slopes Side slope stability isn't specifically a product of link arangement, your spring rates, roll center and center of gravity play a much greater role. 4 link by it's nature has greater roll resistance than 3 link or 1 link. I have built just about every permutation of link suspension over the years, and they all have advantages and pitfalls. the biggest problems i've faced are packaging link arangements around existing features on the vehicle. I have never quite got on with 4 link, i haven't found anything with enough space to package a double triangulated setup, i've built a few front setups with parrallel uppers and triangulated lowers converging at the gearbox crossmember. this setup offers great strength, tuneability, flex and stability, but all the joints i've tried wear badly, especially on competative winch events, side winching just kills the bushes and joints. Anything with a panhard rod the can directly resist the side loadings from winching and steering lasts much better. I like 3 link, easy to package, great flex, but it puts the axle case under greater strain and i feel it's a little easy to get the roll center too low 1 link with the right joint at the chassis end is near bomb proof, same problems with roll center and added you normaly end up with huge amounts of anti-squat, but i quite like anti-squat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I have some experience of this too! On my last build which is not on here because it's a <cough>Suzuki Jimny</cough> I put 1 link (actually it's 2 if you count the Panhard rod) on the front & 3 link (4 with Panhard) on the back. I've used Toyota 80 series axles with lockers - but there is still no substitute for travel as no matter how you look at it, having 4 wheels on the ground is better than 3 or 2 even if you have lockers. The biggest benefit is that the front & rear are very well balanced with equal articulation for a given force. This means on gulley crossings, the body stays much more level and it feels less frightening. Mine is set up with the body & GofG as low as possible with only about 100mm of compression travel on the springs (Fox AirShox) but 250mm of extension. This minimises the body roll on side slopes. I need to increase the height a little as it hits the bump stops too often! The biggest down side so far is handling at speed. Although all the joints and bushes are tight, it feels very uncertain while cornering. The main reason is that as the body leans, you get a lot of axle steer which on the front acts to increase the rate of turn which increases the lean and so on. This makes the steering feel under-damped & twitchy! It also suffers from a lot of bump steer for the same reason. I would not want to use it on the road at anything more than about 30mph! The three link on the back just uses regular trailing arms plus a third trailing arm above the axle (offset to the side of the diff) to stop the axle roll. I cannot see any disadvantage to having the third link offset to the side - and it would make fitting it in to the front much easier as it could pass by the side of the sump. The Panhard rod stops side to side movement. Toyota & Suzuki trailing arms just have a clevis type bush on either end (like the axle end of a LR trailing arm) but with much bigger bushes (60mm diameter) to allow for the rotation as the axle articulates. I wasn't sure how well this would work - but it seems to! Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 1 link with the right joint at the chassis end is near bomb proof, same problems with roll center and added you normaly end up with huge amounts of anti-squat, but i quite like anti-squat You know it Dan, I know it, but for the benefit of some others that may not. If the 1 link is as long as the radius arms it is replacing then the degree of antidive/antisquat will remain unchanged. Antidive/ Antisquat on a 3 link can be made adjustable. Antidive/ Antisquat on a parrallel 4 link will cause rapid wear at the link bushings and limit free articulation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 The biggest down side so far is handling at speed. Although all the joints and bushes are tight, it feels very uncertain while cornering. The main reason is that as the body leans, you get a lot of axle steer which on the front acts to increase the rate of turn which increases the lean and so on. This makes the steering feel under-damped & twitchy! It also suffers from a lot of bump steer for the same reason. I would not want to use it on the road at anything more than about 30mph! Si, do you think it might "just" be bump steer? i've found theres far less axle walk with a 1 link than multilink systems We built a 1 link setup on my pajero hybrid when it was on g wagon axles, using the stock g wagon axle ends of the radius arms fabbed backwards into a landy A frame ball joint at the gearbox crossmember, the panard rod was setup perfectly to the steering bar and, honestly it drove perfectly beyond the legal speed limit, In retrospect this setup is still the nicest driving "suspension jobbed" car i've built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Diesel, you may be right! my feeling about the steering is fairly subjective! It's not helped by 37" soft tyres - and so far I've only tried driving fast across a field. It could be quite civilised on a smooth metaled road! The vehicle I built prior to that had 4 wheel independent double wishbone - and you could hammer that across bumpy ground and it just soaked it up and felt stable & controlled - but it's not a fair comparison! I'm very impressed with the capability of the vehicle. Off road, the suspension setup works really well! Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Toyota & Suzuki trailing arms just have a clevis type bush on either end (like the axle end of a LR trailing arm) but with much bigger bushes (60mm diameter) to allow for the rotation as the axle articulates. I wasn't sure how well this would work - but it seems to!Si The 80 series radius arm bushing on the forward end of my rear one link is just starting to break up now after 10 years of hard service, and is good for around 30 degrees of axle articulation in either direction. No need for anything fancier or more expensive than that unless seeking more articulation. The component that contributes to axle steer or 'walk' on a one link is the panhard rod.For a One Link rear suspension, replacing the Panhard rod with a Watts Link or sliding link upper A frame for lateral control will keep the axle perfectly perpendicular to the chassis throughout the full range of articulation. Correct antidive/antisquat geometry, aside from making the vehicle safer during heavy braking at speed, also keep the diff pinions aiming at the transfercase during suspension cycling, to reduce the chances of propshaft U joint binding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 I like 3 link, easy to package, great flex, but it puts the axle case under greater strain and i feel it's a little easy to get the roll center too low I heard of a spanish Disco I that was fitted with a 3Link at front. After rolling over it twice, the owner used some straps and limited wheel travel to 70cm. This solved the rolling over tendency, but with coil/shock change the standard radius arms have a wheel travel of 65cm. In that case all the expense of the 3Link for just 2" more of wheel travel simply didn´t pay off. replacing the Panhard rod with a Watts Link or sliding link upper A frame for lateral control will keep the axle perfectly perpendicular to the chassis Disco II Watts linkage are cheap and easy to source at scrapyards. Same for A frames. We built a 1 link setup on my pajero hybrid when it was on g wagon axles, using the stock g wagon axle ends of the radius arms fabbed backwards into a landy A frame ball joint at the gearbox crossmember, the panard rod was setup perfectly to the steering bar and, honestly it drove perfectly beyond the legal speed limit,In retrospect this setup is still the nicest driving "suspension jobbed" car i've built. Any pics of that setup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 What about the steup proposed by Flatback90 and used in the Auverland A3? Seems very easy and cheap to make. With it the diffs nose will be allways pointing to t-box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landy_andy Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Interesting build on Pirate for this type of setup.... http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/land-rover/961915-d90-spidertrax-9-609-build.html Ummm....... Spidertrax axles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 Very nice project and with lots of detailed pics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 A few piccies! Full extension Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 Si, how is the front axle attached to the "Y" piece? What prevents it from wrapping? Nice Fedimas. 9.00? How ended the twisting buggy experience? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Si, how is the front axle attached to the "Y" piece? What prevents it from wrapping?Nice Fedimas. 9.00? How ended the twisting buggy experience? Unfortunately, I've lost most of the photos - they were uploaded to another forum, then one day they all vanished! The Axle end of the frame attaches in the same way as Land Rover / Toyota front hockey sticks with standard bushes. Although the bushes are not strictly needed, they reduce the impulse forces through the A frame, reducing the peak stress - making the whole thing safer. 9.00? They are 35" x 10.5 R16 but stand 37" tall. They ought to look huge - but it's actually quite well proportioned. I've extended the wheelbase to 100" which helps a bit. The twisting buggy ended with it breaking! I found a major problem with a twist in the middle vehicle. If you are climbing a slope diagonally, it is only the reaction to the down force on the down hill rear wheel which holds the up hill front on the ground. I found that on fairly shallow slopes the front wheel would lift and the front would roll over, pulling the back over. I rolled it on a slope that cannot be steeper than 30 deg! I drove the same in a Land Rover with ease! To cure the problem, I added a hydraulic ram to control and force the twist - which worked really well, but over-stressed the pivots for the rear sub frame and eventually tore it apart! So much of the spaceframe needed to be cut off and replaced that I decided to start again with a new vehicle and try something different! Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddy Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 What are the chances of bending some hockey sticks inwards at the axle end bringing the chassis ends together and making a triangle out of tube they could screw/weld into the two ends of and use one of Simons X joints with the ball threading into the other point with the bush case bolted to a modded gearbox x member. Is this impossible to package due to sump/ prop clearances or would a solid bar prop and cut the rear corners off the sump sort this? You could skin the underside of the hockey sticks going under the axle and trackrod for a serious skid plate/ track rod protected/ sump gaurd. I was hoping to have a play with this idea next tune I have a rolling chassis but its just not happening. Will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluespanner Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I had good results by cutting one of the hockey sticks in between the bushes. I called it two and a half link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted February 28, 2013 Author Share Posted February 28, 2013 9.00? They are 35" x 10.5 R16 but stand 37" tall. Those are the ones I want for the Disco. Fedima makes them in both 9.00R16 and 35x10.5R16 marking, but it´s the same tyre. I had good results by cutting one of the hockey sticks in between the bushes. I called it two and a half link This will be a selectable version of that Good treads also http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=27817 and http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/land-rover/816718-diy-3-link-front-suspension-rrc.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Looks good Si, wheels look familiar??? winch looks like it'd be better higher up? Lee Bond and i built this one many years ago, gwagon axles, ford 2.9 v6, merc auto, sj transfer, 3 link front and rear, 8274 front 9.5xp rear 1460kg all up wieght Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.