Notice: We request that you don't just set up a new account at this time if you are a previous user.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
Recovery:If you cannot access your old email address and don't remember your password, please click here to log a change of email address so you can do a password reset.

Bent uppers on 4 link front?

Tech Talk for Suzuki owners.

Moderators: lay80n, sierrajim

Post Reply
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

Bent uppers on 4 link front?

Post by Gutless »

A mate and I are building a zook buggy ATM, and have encountered a little problem. At the beginning I suggested we move the 16v back into the cab, and move the front diff forward to give the buggy better weight balance. The engine has gone back 250mm, and down 150mm. As a result, there has been little room left to run the triangulated uppers.

So my question....is it possible to put a curve in the uppers to go around the sump, or will not having straight arms cause geometry issues?

Clear as mud?
Posts: 4882
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 8:36 pm
Location: Medowie, NSW

Re: Bent uppers on 4 link front?

Post by redzook »

Gutless wrote:A mate and I are building a zook buggy ATM, and have encountered a little problem. At the beginning I suggested we move the 16v back into the cab, and move the front diff forward to give the buggy better weight balance. The engine has gone back 250mm, and down 150mm. As a result, there has been little room left to run the triangulated uppers.

So my question....is it possible to put a curve in the uppers to go around the sump, or will not having straight arms cause geometry issues?

Clear as mud?
the link dosent know it is bent

so as long as it is strong enough not to bend more u will be right

also u wont be able to use heims on both ends as the link will flop

also a 4 link in the front?? full hydro steer?
Team UNDERDOG #233
WERock Australia thanks to
[url]http://www.longfieldsuperaxles.com[/url]
[url]http://www.rockbuggysupply.com[/url]
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Bent uppers on 4 link front?

Post by Gutless »

redzook wrote:
Gutless wrote:A mate and I are building a zook buggy ATM, and have encountered a little problem. At the beginning I suggested we move the 16v back into the cab, and move the front diff forward to give the buggy better weight balance. The engine has gone back 250mm, and down 150mm. As a result, there has been little room left to run the triangulated uppers.

So my question....is it possible to put a curve in the uppers to go around the sump, or will not having straight arms cause geometry issues?

Clear as mud?
the link dosent know it is bent

so as long as it is strong enough not to bend more u will be right

also u wont be able to use heims on both ends as the link will flop

also a 4 link in the front?? full hydro steer?
Poo! I was going to run hiems at both ends :?

Ok, I might have to look into missalignment joints, or perhaps A-framing the front :? Don't really want to :cry:

Yes full hydro :armsup:
Posts: 1889
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: Brisbane

Post by just cruizin' »

You could balance the link by either making it "s" shaped or by adding weight, therefore it wouldn't want to fall to one side.
;)
Posts: 5062
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:06 pm
Location: queensland

Post by ofr57 »

why not change the sump :?:
[color=green]Vote Earth[/color]
Posts: 1889
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 10:23 pm
Location: Brisbane

Post by just cruizin' »

I've seen some pics, this is an cool build. I think if changing the sump was an option these guys would have done it.
Last edited by just cruizin' on Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
;)
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

Post by Gutless »

Its not just the sump. The block is sitting so low that the arm; if straight; could potentially hit the block on full stuff. The buggy is on 16" Fox coilovers, and sits at 1/3 extention ( or less) at static ride height. this helps a little with clearances during the setup period because they won't get much closer than what they are at ride hieght, but the block/ arm clearance is a little worrying on the passengers side, hence the bent arms question.

Front. Only pic I have. this was taken quite some time ago, but you can see the posision of the motor. Cylinder 4 is actually inside the cab.
Image

Rear
Image
Posts: 2297
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 1:23 pm
Location: Melbourne-Australia

Post by MightyMouse »

Go dry sump, virtually no pan required at all, good for angles as there is no oil in the sump.

Would also let you lower the engine even more, or tip it on an angle etc etc......
( usual disclaimers )

It seemed like a much better idea when I started it than it does now.
Posts: 7345
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 3:29 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by Gwagensteve »

I likey Gutless :D - some thought's gone into that.

Steve.
[quote="greg"] some say he is a man without happy dreams, or that he sees silver linings on clouds and wonders why they are not platinum... all we know, is he's called the stevie.[/quote]
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

Post by Gutless »

MightyMouse wrote:Go dry sump, virtually no pan required at all, good for angles as there is no oil in the sump.

Would also let you lower the engine even more, or tip it on an angle etc etc......
Love to dry sump it, but the budget may not stretch that far :D

Really though, the sump isn't an issue. I can take the corners off the leading edge of the sump if need be, but I still think the bottom of the block/ sump flange area is at risk of contacting a straight arm.

Maybe I should be looking at a 5 link? Going full hydro (single ended ram) so there would be plenty of room for the panhard....
Posts: 9393
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:51 am
Location: Brisbane

Post by antt »

3 link with panhard should solve everything shouldnt it?
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 7:57 pm
Location: Brisbane

Post by Gutless »

antt wrote:3 link with panhard should solve everything shouldnt it?
Yeah.

Upper on drivers or passengers side? I'm leaning towards the passengers side with a combined upper mount and panhard mount. This would be easier than bent uppers I guess.

Thanks for the tips fellas.
Posts: 4882
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 8:36 pm
Location: Medowie, NSW

Post by redzook »

Gutless wrote:
antt wrote:3 link with panhard should solve everything shouldnt it?
Yeah.

Upper on drivers or passengers side? I'm leaning towards the passengers side with a combined upper mount and panhard mount. This would be easier than bent uppers I guess.

Thanks for the tips fellas.
easier to work a panhard mount off the pumkin to the passanger side of the chassis

then tie the 3rd link into the mount on the pumpkin
Team UNDERDOG #233
WERock Australia thanks to
[url]http://www.longfieldsuperaxles.com[/url]
[url]http://www.rockbuggysupply.com[/url]
Posts: 1732
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 6:12 am
Location: Roof, side, end, sometimes wheels

Post by ljxtreem »

Gwagensteve wrote:I likey Gutless :D - some thought's gone into that.

Steve.
Yeah, I like it too!!

I think a 3 link and panhard could sole the problem too.

Mock :D
My photographic Art http://www.redbubble.com/people/ljxtreem

www.dirtcomp.com.au

Sierrajim wrote:
So hurry up, come back, buy a Lada (can't believe i just said that) and we'll go wheelin'.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest