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.
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.
Best Suspension Curiosity Question?
Moderators: toaddog, TWISTY, V8Patrol, Moderators
how does this effect there onroad behaviour? stability?Gwagensteve wrote:That was Bill Larman - used to be Daddylonglegs on here.
all live axle designs provide some amount of leverage.
With suzukis (my speciality) we inboard springs and bumpstops to increase this effect. Adding track width also adds articulation at the wheel for a fixed amount of vertical travel.
Steve.
also i imagine it would be putting more stress on the axle casing(bending)
cheers, Serg
It's a sierra mate, they don't handle.
All we're doing is running the springs under the chassis as per factory up until 1988, so any effect on roll stiffness etc is only puts the car back to the same as an earlier model.
We do signficantly inboard the bumpstops, but as the car doesn't really ride on the bumpstops during normal operation it's not a significant effect until the car is articulated, which doesn't really happen on road.
Steve.
All we're doing is running the springs under the chassis as per factory up until 1988, so any effect on roll stiffness etc is only puts the car back to the same as an earlier model.
We do signficantly inboard the bumpstops, but as the car doesn't really ride on the bumpstops during normal operation it's not a significant effect until the car is articulated, which doesn't really happen on road.
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]
5 link front end of a jeep destroys a rangie when the sway bar is removed. (i'm talking factory with no mods too)
rear of a patrol (gq-gu) best i've seen.
you guys talking up the pommy gear obviously dont understand how good a 5 link front is on a jeep.
now here is a pic of a patrol flexing (front) vs a jeep.
now i realize neither are standard, but both have a 3" lift with no sway bar on the font. the patrol has castor plates and the jeep no castor mods.
as you can see the jeep is far out flexing the patrol, and if you put a rangie/disco there it would still kill it.
best supension is 5 link front and 5 link rear, and the longer the arms the better.
rear of a patrol (gq-gu) best i've seen.
you guys talking up the pommy gear obviously dont understand how good a 5 link front is on a jeep.
now here is a pic of a patrol flexing (front) vs a jeep.
now i realize neither are standard, but both have a 3" lift with no sway bar on the font. the patrol has castor plates and the jeep no castor mods.
as you can see the jeep is far out flexing the patrol, and if you put a rangie/disco there it would still kill it.
best supension is 5 link front and 5 link rear, and the longer the arms the better.
Jeep Wrangler TJ
Jeep Cherokee XJ
Jeep Cherokee XJ
Check out this from
http://www.offroaders.com/info/tech-corner/rti.htm
I wonder where the patrol would fall compared to these. As you can see the RAngy is one of the best and the Land cruiser is no slouch either.
96 Acura SLX: 506
'93 AM General Hummer: 385
'92 Chevrolet S-10 w/Rugged Trail 3.5-inch lift: 351
'81 Chevrolet K-5 Blazer: 653
'81 Chevrolet K-5 Blazer w/Rugged Trail 2.5-inch lift: 695
'92 Chevrolet K-1500 Blazer: 453
'92 Chevrolet K-1500: 421
'92 Chevrolet K-2500HD turbo diesel: 365
'92 Chevrolet K-3500 Crew Cab dually: 303
'94 Chevy S-10 ZR2: 420
'94 Chevy K-2500 Suburban: 401
'95 Chevy ZR2 Extended Cab: 336
'95 Chevy Blazer 2-dr:. 405
'96 Chevy K-1500 extended-cab: 376
'96 Chevy Tahoe LS: 433
'92 Dodge Ramcharger: 613
'92 Dodge Dakota Club Cab: 393
'92 Dodge W150: 526
'92 Dodge W250 Cummins: 372
'92 Dodge W250 Cummins w/Natl. Spring 3-inch lift: 406
'94 Dodge Ram 1500: 556
'95 Dodge Ram BR2500 Club Cab: 431
'92 Ford Explorer 4-dr.: 460
'92 Ford Explorer 4-dr. w/Superlift 4-inch lift :492
'92 Ford Bronco: 516
'93 Ford Ranger SuperCab: 416
'92 Ford F-150 Flareside: 471
'92 Ford F-150: 484
'92 F-350 Crew Cab w/Mac's Spring Shop 2-inch lift: 405
'94 Ford Ranger SuperCab: 406
'94 Ford Explorer Limited 4-dr.: 443
'94 Ford F-250 SuperCab: 383
'95 Ford F-250 SuperCab: 406
'95 Ford Explorer 2-dr.: 391
'95 Ford Explorer 4-dr.: 352
'97 Ford F-150 SuperCab: 441
'92 GMC Sonoma: 354
'93 GMC Sonoma Club Coupe: 334
'92 GMC K-1500 Suburban: 342
'92 GMC K-3500 Crew Cab: 338
'95 GMC K-1500 Club Coupe: 387
'95 GMC Jimmy 4-dr.: 371
'93 Isuzu Rodeo LS: 435
'92 Isuzu Trooper LS 4-dr.: 497
'93 Isuzu Trooper LS 2-dr.: 508
'93 Isuzu Trooper RS 2-dr.: 529
'94 Isuzu Rodeo LS: 454
'96 Isuzu Rodeo: 464
'75 Jeep DJ-5D: 556
'92 Jeep Cherokee 4-dr.: 399
'92 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 458
'93 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 448
'93 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 439
'96 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 422
'96 Jeep Wrangler: 357
'96 Jeep Wrangler w/Pro-Comp 2.5-inch lift:532
'97 Jeep Wrangler:532
'96 Kia Sportage: 471
'94 Land Rover Defender 90: 580
'95 Land Rover DIscovery: 588
'94 Mazda B4000 Cab Plus: 409
'92 Mitsubishi Montero 4-dr.: 391
'92 Nissan Pathfinder: 511
'96 Nissan Pathfinder: 466
'92 Oldsmobile Bravada 4-dr.: 411
'92 Range Rover County: 670
'93 Range Rover County LWB: 588
'96 Range Rover 4.0SE: 600
'92 Suzuki Sidekick 4-dr.: 379
'96 Suzuki Sidekick Sport: 440
'96 Suzuki X-90: 441
'93 Toyota 4Runner:441
'93 Toyota Land Cruiser: 593
'93 Toyota T100: 407
'95 Toyota T100 XtraCab:369
'96 Toyota Tacoma: 435
http://www.offroaders.com/info/tech-corner/rti.htm
I wonder where the patrol would fall compared to these. As you can see the RAngy is one of the best and the Land cruiser is no slouch either.
96 Acura SLX: 506
'93 AM General Hummer: 385
'92 Chevrolet S-10 w/Rugged Trail 3.5-inch lift: 351
'81 Chevrolet K-5 Blazer: 653
'81 Chevrolet K-5 Blazer w/Rugged Trail 2.5-inch lift: 695
'92 Chevrolet K-1500 Blazer: 453
'92 Chevrolet K-1500: 421
'92 Chevrolet K-2500HD turbo diesel: 365
'92 Chevrolet K-3500 Crew Cab dually: 303
'94 Chevy S-10 ZR2: 420
'94 Chevy K-2500 Suburban: 401
'95 Chevy ZR2 Extended Cab: 336
'95 Chevy Blazer 2-dr:. 405
'96 Chevy K-1500 extended-cab: 376
'96 Chevy Tahoe LS: 433
'92 Dodge Ramcharger: 613
'92 Dodge Dakota Club Cab: 393
'92 Dodge W150: 526
'92 Dodge W250 Cummins: 372
'92 Dodge W250 Cummins w/Natl. Spring 3-inch lift: 406
'94 Dodge Ram 1500: 556
'95 Dodge Ram BR2500 Club Cab: 431
'92 Ford Explorer 4-dr.: 460
'92 Ford Explorer 4-dr. w/Superlift 4-inch lift :492
'92 Ford Bronco: 516
'93 Ford Ranger SuperCab: 416
'92 Ford F-150 Flareside: 471
'92 Ford F-150: 484
'92 F-350 Crew Cab w/Mac's Spring Shop 2-inch lift: 405
'94 Ford Ranger SuperCab: 406
'94 Ford Explorer Limited 4-dr.: 443
'94 Ford F-250 SuperCab: 383
'95 Ford F-250 SuperCab: 406
'95 Ford Explorer 2-dr.: 391
'95 Ford Explorer 4-dr.: 352
'97 Ford F-150 SuperCab: 441
'92 GMC Sonoma: 354
'93 GMC Sonoma Club Coupe: 334
'92 GMC K-1500 Suburban: 342
'92 GMC K-3500 Crew Cab: 338
'95 GMC K-1500 Club Coupe: 387
'95 GMC Jimmy 4-dr.: 371
'93 Isuzu Rodeo LS: 435
'92 Isuzu Trooper LS 4-dr.: 497
'93 Isuzu Trooper LS 2-dr.: 508
'93 Isuzu Trooper RS 2-dr.: 529
'94 Isuzu Rodeo LS: 454
'96 Isuzu Rodeo: 464
'75 Jeep DJ-5D: 556
'92 Jeep Cherokee 4-dr.: 399
'92 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 458
'93 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 448
'93 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 439
'96 Jeep Grand Cherokee: 422
'96 Jeep Wrangler: 357
'96 Jeep Wrangler w/Pro-Comp 2.5-inch lift:532
'97 Jeep Wrangler:532
'96 Kia Sportage: 471
'94 Land Rover Defender 90: 580
'95 Land Rover DIscovery: 588
'94 Mazda B4000 Cab Plus: 409
'92 Mitsubishi Montero 4-dr.: 391
'92 Nissan Pathfinder: 511
'96 Nissan Pathfinder: 466
'92 Oldsmobile Bravada 4-dr.: 411
'92 Range Rover County: 670
'93 Range Rover County LWB: 588
'96 Range Rover 4.0SE: 600
'92 Suzuki Sidekick 4-dr.: 379
'96 Suzuki Sidekick Sport: 440
'96 Suzuki X-90: 441
'93 Toyota 4Runner:441
'93 Toyota Land Cruiser: 593
'93 Toyota T100: 407
'95 Toyota T100 XtraCab:369
'96 Toyota Tacoma: 435
89 gq dx. bone stock --- for now.
I think it's a measure that discriminates against narrower vehicles isn't it? If you have a wide car your off-ramp wheel will stay on the ground much longer than if you have a narrower one? Or does it take that into account.Remydog05 wrote:Great info! I thought and 80 might be good.
The Vitara/Sidekick are struggling!!!!!!!
If it is just a measure of how far up the ramp you get one side before the opposite side comes off the ground, then wider offset rims would give you an instant increase. Or does it actually measure axle angle?
BTW '96 Range Rover 4.0SE: 600 and I've got my 3" more flexy Gen III air springs in the mail too woohoo!
This is not legal advice.
I saw a test years ago which I think was done by one of the mags. On that test the Disco TD5 with ACE topped it, the LC was very close (but remember it has a longer wheelbase so probably actually flexs more than a shorter disco), the Jackaroo came after and the Patrol followed.Yom wrote:pootrol would fall somewhere between the disco and the cruiser.
thats what they all rate as over here.
Cheers
Slunnie
Discovery TD5, Landy IIa V8 ute.
Slunnie
Discovery TD5, Landy IIa V8 ute.
I think 80s flex good for standed, when I got my 1st 80s, with standed suspension i out flexed my brothers GQ with 3'' lift my coil where pretty sagged & soft. Some of you mite no one of the tracks at Landcruiser park called camp road, at the end of it there's a hill with pretty big wombat holes all the way up it, i got up it with standed suspension but was ruing 33'' muds. But i reckon rangie's flex best for standed.
not sure that for a 5 link with a 3" lift it flex's massively yankee dave, when a poor little rover with a 2" lift (all standard arms, etc) can flex just as hard and almost identical wheelbase. the front and rear of the GQ isn't massive, and judging by your (estimated) rear axle angle it isn't any further then this....? i doubt it would still 'kill' a rover, rangies, discos and fenders round the same age are all relatively the same suspension just different wheelbasesYankeeDave wrote:5 link front end of a jeep destroys a rangie when the sway bar is removed. (i'm talking factory with no mods too)
rear of a patrol (gq-gu) best i've seen.
you guys talking up the pommy gear obviously dont understand how good a 5 link front is on a jeep.
now here is a pic of a patrol flexing (front) vs a jeep.
now i realize neither are standard, but both have a 3" lift with no sway bar on the font. the patrol has castor plates and the jeep no castor mods.
as you can see the jeep is far out flexing the patrol, and if you put a rangie/disco there it would still kill it.
best supension is 5 link front and 5 link rear, and the longer the arms the better.
rear springs are tied in now with no change in travel
1986 - Stage 1 V8 serIII style side ute - gone
1997 - 300 TDI 130 single cab ute - gone
1986 - 90 defender soft top, bars, buttons and tyres
2000 - TD5 disco 'the boss's rig'
1997 - 300 TDI 130 single cab ute - gone
1986 - 90 defender soft top, bars, buttons and tyres
2000 - TD5 disco 'the boss's rig'
I know with identical vehicle weights, identical spring configs (coil front, leaf rear) and with a 2" OME lift + 3700kg GVM upgrade our LC79 utes outflex and outdrive the GU utes offroad every time.
2005 HDJ100 Manual, ARB bar, XD9000 winch, ARB rooftop tent + awning, Drawers, Engel, 2" OME lift, 285/75R16 KM2's, iCom, HID XGT's.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests