landroversforever Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 hmmm I think i see what you mean for some of it...Think i need to look at a picture though! has anyone on here got an Xlink setup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warthog Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Errr you should have drilled a couple of holes only they might last even less so Emmenthal style Cant be any worse than Polybushes, ah no biggy...... Guess i got carried away making pretty patterns With just a couple of holes there seemed to be little differance on movement. So i went a stage further If by doing this and with Mr Lewis's suspension set-up i get a little more out of the front? i'll be happy......... Read HFH thread for more details on X-link + images: http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=7276 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
najw Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Slight thread hijack buyt has anyone any bright ideas of a good setup for the knuckle/joint of a one link system? Or any links to topics discussing same... TIA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_warne Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Slight thread hijack buyt has anyone any bright ideas of a good setup for the knuckle/joint of a one link system?Or any links to topics discussing same... TIA What are Si's joints rated at? They're plenty beefy and easy enough to mount..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollythelw Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Yanik in Canada for a pure comp solution? Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warthog Posted June 26, 2008 Author Share Posted June 26, 2008 Evolution Machine do this monster? crewdly named "Frankenhiem" http://www.evolutionmachine.com/index.php?showtopic=2567 But i would assume costing an arm and a leg? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GBMUD Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 What are Si's joints rated at? They're plenty beefy and easy enough to mount..... http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...162&q=x-eng As linked to on the X-eng site... Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landrovermanuk Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 3 or 4 years ago Scrapiron had a Disco on their stand and the hockey sticks had a lockable joints in the middle. It was a prototype...Never seen it since...Would it work??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landroversforever Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 3 or 4 years ago Scrapiron had a Disco on their stand and the hockey sticks had a lockable joints in the middle. It was a prototype...Never seen it since...Would it work??? not if it was made by Scorpion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Slight thread hijack buyt has anyone any bright ideas of a good setup for the knuckle/joint of a one link system?Or any links to topics discussing same... TIA I've used a rangy A frame ball joint before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_warne Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 3 or 4 years ago Scrapiron had a Disco on their stand and the hockey sticks had a lockable joints in the middle. It was a prototype...Never seen it since...Would it work??? Hinged radius arm - popular in the Ford Bronco community. Talk to filthy boy about using them on Land Rovers..... General consensus is they look good on the twist off ramp but have several flaws in the real world because they're unbalanced and the hinged side has poor control over the axle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bush65 Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 My 2p (for what its worth). I've spent a fair bit of time looking into this and here's my thoughts:3-link: Design it and set it up right and you'll have few issues. This is the problem with most setups I've seen as to do it right (upper single link) causes all sorts of packaging headaches. Yes, you'll loose some of the anti roll characteristics which is not desirable on road or at speed. 4-link: Not ideal for the front end unless doing very major mods as you really want to keep a panhard rod with a Land Rover type steering setup. There are similar packaging issues. "X-link": Impossible to make bolt on and there are issues with the panhard rod (however relocating can improve the bump steer situation on a raised vehicle). As Simon said, forces involved are epic meaning HFH type materials are required and serious welding gear needed to stitch it together. However, it does allow you to create a lock out system giving you the best of both worlds. Because of this I will be going down this route. A-frame/one link: A nice, simple and elegant solution. More steering lock but can also be a bit of a pain to package. If I was just building a car for low speed work this is what I'd use. The thing to consider with all these systems is to gain more articulation you need to remove anti roll characteristics. Doing this will be detrimental to the vehicles handling at speed. If this is of any concern then you need some kind of lock out system. One last thing: IMHO balance is more important than outright travel (my old non dislocationg OME setup worked very nicely 90% of the time) and I have seen more than one vehicle with hockey sticks on the back that have performed very impressively. I disagree about relocating the panhard rod on raised vehicles improving bump steer. The panhard needs to be parallel with the steering link (what we call drag link but I think it has a different name in UK). Relocating the panhard will likely result in loss of parallel and cause bump steer. I disagree with the statement about forces involved are epic with respect to an X-link setup. The forces on the radius arm in a X-link will be little different to normal radius arms in a similar situation. I note you neglected to comment about the forces in the lower link of 3-link with single lower link. I agree with your last comment about balance being more important than outright travel - too many make rear suspension dislocate to the detriment of balanced articulation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T1G UP Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 Would simonr care to comment on the possibility of using his X joint for a 1 link system? Need to replace the joint in mine so is it strong enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguevogue Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 Would simonr care to comment on the possibility of using his X joint for a 1 link system? Need to replace the joint in mine so is it strong enough? I hope so, thats what i'm basing my plans around. In reality I think it's plenty up to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T1G UP Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 ok i'd guess it would be but, in laymans terms ther are usually 2/3 axle locate points not 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted June 29, 2008 Share Posted June 29, 2008 Would simonr care to comment on the possibility of using his X joint for a 1 link system? Need to replace the joint in mine so is it strong enough? OK, since you ask. The longitudinal failure load of the new joints is in the region of 16 ton. The peak load you are likely to experience on a '1 link' (actually a 2 link if you count the panhard rod) is about 4.4 ton under most circumstances. Although this reduces the safety margin a bit, I reckon it will be strong enough - in fact I'm banking on it for future product development - if you catch my drift. My feeling is that 1 link is the best way to go. I experimented with hinged radius arms using a hydraulic damper to slow down the asymetry between the two sides of the vehicle (there is a thread about this somewhere) but it didn't work all that well and was abandoned. Trouble is it makes the steering geometry asymetric. The steering self centres one way, but tries to wind on full lock in the other. In terms of bang for your buck, slotted or drilled bushes give you the most. 3 link works well, but the forces in the 3rd link are very high (in excess on 15 ton) so it's no wonder they fail. X-Link is a great idea, but hard to implemet on a Land Rover due to the location of the panhard rod and steering bar. 1 link has the best balance of forces & symetry IMHO - and improves the steering lock as Will said. I've been working on an anti roll bar with disconnects - which is surprisingly hard on a LR. I have a pretty neat solution now which just needs building and testing. This should give you decent road handling even if you have extra flexible front and rear ends. Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 Anyone is welcome to correct me if I'm wrong. The way I see it after previously experimenting with removing radius arm bolts etc is that for the holey bushes to do any good re increased articulation, the 2 holes in each bush would need to be more or less positioned vertically. Is this not the the same area of the bushing material where compression resistance is required to resist braking and axle tramp forces ? Seems to me that safe handling and true offroad performance is compromised for the sake of a bit of flex, particularly as flex is less important these days when many of the serious players have locking differentials. Bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michele Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 Yup I'm having the bushes positioned that way,I'll be able to tell you as soon as I'll fit the radius arms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escape Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 Anyone is welcome to correct me if I'm wrong. The way I see it after previously experimenting with removing radius arm bolts etc is that for the holey bushes to do any good re increased articulation, the 2 holes in each bush would need to be more or less positioned vertically. Is this not the the same area of the bushing material where compression resistance is required to resist braking and axle tramp forces ? Seems to me that safe handling and true offroad performance is compromised for the sake of a bit of flex, particularly as flex is less important these days when many of the serious players have locking differentials.Bill. I'm afraid your reasoning is correct... On the other hand, I have alse drilled my bushes, exactly the way you described, removing almost all the material bar a few mm. Offroad the difference is remarquable, especially because the car feels a lot more balanced. Onroad I have not noticed any side-effects, altough I heve been using it to get to work on occasion. So I guess it's not as dramatical as one might think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_warne Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 I disagree about relocating the panhard rod on raised vehicles improving bump steer. The panhard needs to be parallel with the steering link (what we call drag link but I think it has a different name in UK). Relocating the panhard will likely result in loss of parallel and cause bump steer.I disagree with the statement about forces involved are epic with respect to an X-link setup. The forces on the radius arm in a X-link will be little different to normal radius arms in a similar situation. I note you neglected to comment about the forces in the lower link of 3-link with single lower link. I agree with your last comment about balance being more important than outright travel - too many make rear suspension dislocate to the detriment of balanced articulation. John - as far as the panhard rod goes mine was no where near parallel hence the comment. When I played around with relocating it to a more suitable position for an X-link everything was better. As you say - it is crucial the drag link and panhard rod are parallel to reduce bump steer. The force issue with an X link is still valid IMHO - you only have to look as the stories of aftermarket hockey stick failures on standard setups to see that. In the X-link you are also concentrating all the force on a small area of the axle casing (the pivot) and transmitting it along the link across the axle (which wants to be as compact as possible to aid clearance). Yes, you're right, I didn't mention anything about the forces on single lower link 3-link systems. I've mentioned it in the past and only referred to it in passing in this thread. However, a single link in compression (as it is with the lower link(s) on the front) isn't smart - steel works well in tension but less so in compression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T1G UP Posted June 30, 2008 Share Posted June 30, 2008 OK, since you ask. The longitudinal failure load of the new joints is in the region of 16 ton. The peak load you are likely to experience on a '1 link' (actually a 2 link if you count the panhard rod) is about 4.4 ton under most circumstances. Although this reduces the safety margin a bit, I reckon it will be strong enough - in fact I'm banking on it for future product development - if you catch my drift. My feeling is that 1 link is the best way to go. I experimented with hinged radius arms using a hydraulic damper to slow down the asymetry between the two sides of the vehicle (there is a thread about this somewhere) but it didn't work all that well and was abandoned. Trouble is it makes the steering geometry asymetric. The steering self centres one way, but tries to wind on full lock in the other. In terms of bang for your buck, slotted or drilled bushes give you the most. 3 link works well, but the forces in the 3rd link are very high (in excess on 15 ton) so it's no wonder they fail. X-Link is a great idea, but hard to implemet on a Land Rover due to the location of the panhard rod and steering bar. 1 link has the best balance of forces & symetry IMHO - and improves the steering lock as Will said. I've been working on an anti roll bar with disconnects - which is surprisingly hard on a LR. I have a pretty neat solution now which just needs building and testing. This should give you decent road handling even if you have extra flexible front and rear ends. Si Spot on Si, wheres my credit card! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 The force issue with an X link is still valid IMHO .In the X-link you are also concentrating all the force on a small area of the axle casing (the pivot) and transmitting it along the link across the axle (which wants to be as compact as possible to aid clearance). Will,you are aware that on an X link setup that the hockey sticks attach behind the axle on the standard brackets in the usual manner ? The impact forces from wheels hitting bumps etc is transmitted into the chassis via the hockey sticks as it does in a standard setup. The X link centre pivot just resists the forces trying to roll the axle assembly backwards and forwards due to impact, accellerating and braking forces in much the same way that the 3rd link of a 3 link system does. Whilst the force acting on the centre pivot can be significant it is not ''concentrating all the force'' just all the torsional force that the vehicles tractive effort and braking system can generate. Bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve 90 Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Never heard of the X link! Can anyone stick up a link to an explanation or give a quick explanation please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangeyRover Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 X link fitting Link to an x link being fitted. Makes it a lot easier to understand. And I want one...... No, I mean I really want one. Surely this is not beyond the wit of guys in this forum. bending looks a bit bonkers though.... Dobbin engineering x-link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted July 1, 2008 Share Posted July 1, 2008 Never heard of the X link! Can anyone stick up a link to an explanation or give a quick explanation please? The X link should more accurately be called Cross Link. It is a lateral beam centrally pivoted at the front of the axle housing.Each end of the crosslink attaches to the front bushing of the standard hockey sticks instead of the hockey sticks being bolted drectly to the axle housing. The pivoting beam allows the front of the hockey sticks to rise and drop independantly of the axle housing giving unhindered axle articulation that is not dependant on the compliance of the bushings. bill. 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.