3/4 eliptic spoa

[roc box]

have any of you guys tried it and how was it eg good horrendously,unstable just lookin for something a little different to try tried a search but got nothing thanks in advance for any help.

[bigsteve]

Off the top off my head i can't recall a zook on the B that has SPOA and 3/4

I think its because of the amount of insane flex acheived from SPOA there is no need to do a 3/4

[ZOOK60]

Off the top off my head i can't recall a zook on the B that has SPOA and 3/4

I think its because of the amount of insane flex acheived from SPOA there is no need to do a 3/4

what about sams old tuff truck entry?

[roc box]

i already have spoa,just thought id be a bit different try something new.theres a few trucks in the states that have it just looking for a bit of feed back.

[Gwagensteve]

I'm not entirely sure it is a good idea. I have built a couple of cars SPUA-3/4 elliptic, and it is quite useful, but can do some odd things under steep climbs, and this is generally on cars with RUF ( better balanced than stock) and with not mroe than 3" of suspension lift.

We had a car in the club that was SPOA + 3/4 elliptic, but it was never really fully sorted. Is never had bumpstops, so it tended to invert the (stock length) shackles what ever position they were set to. It was an extended wheelbase LWB (12" over stock LWB) so the funny weight transfer issues that SPOA's and 3/4's tend to exhibit were reduced, but it sure did body roll on side angles, as due to the higher COG of a SPOA, the 3/4 REALLY unloaded.

Personally, I think that more benefit would be had increasing front end travel rather than lowering roll stiffness and increasing droop more in the rear end.

[roc box]

i thought that might be the case i was just loking for another opinion,thanks for the input i apprecate it.this particular suzuki,did it have a habbit of falling over by any chance even though mine is spoa i wouldnt say its unstable at all not even on off camber terrain.

[redzook]

i thought that might be the case i was just loking for another opinion,thanks for the input i apprecate it.this particular suzuki,did it have a habbit of falling over by any chance even though mine is spoa i wouldnt say its unstable at all not even on off camber terrain.

longer flatter springs with a good shackle angle is what you want

[Gwagensteve]

I saw it fall over once, but it was surprisingly stable. Just looked really spooky. It had a pretty stiff front end with limited travel compared to the rear, which is pretty common for "modified" SPOA set ups, and I think that this is what kept it from falling over more.

The owner is 4 link/coil converting and I believe has lowered the car considerably.

[roc box]

any good suggestions tim

[redzook]

any good suggestions tim

feroza springs in the rear and rears upfront
very stable
here is a side hill pic as u see almost no body roll
actually drove onto the sidewalls of the tires and the body didnt touch
so much for SOA's are unstable

[roc box]

do you remove any of the leaves or just run them stock will it give a great deal more flex than spoa on std springs

[roc box]

also what size bar did you use for exo cage as i want to build one.i agree with you spoa is not unstable mines just fine and im still running nt diffs but with offset wheels im trying to keep it all zook.

[redzook]

i run stock rears upfront
and stock ferozas in the rear + one stock rear main leaf with the eyes cut off (only on the drivers side)

yeh quite flexy

and yeh i know ive posted this b4

[toysuzi]

have any of you guys tried it and how was it eg good horrendously,unstable just lookin for something a little different to try tried a search but got nothing thanks in advance for any help.

some pics to help you out
best to ask sam (overkill)
hes built n testerd 3/4 set ups on hes own rig

daryl

[roc box]

looks to be 1/4 eliptic but thanks for the effort what about bar size tim could you help me there please and did you extend rear chassis as well

[grimbo]

if you go 3/4 in the rear on a spoa you will have a hard tme matching the rear to the front in flexability. You don't want the rear flexing way more than the front as this will tend to pitch the car over onto its side in alot of positions. If I was you I would be trying to get as much usable even flex between front & back

And yes those pics are oof a 1/4 eliptical setup which is a whole different kettle of fish

[roc box]

how much xtra flex will i get with ruf if its only a couple of inches i probly wont bother.

[Guy]

how much xtra flex will i get with ruf if its only a couple of inches i probly wont bother.

it's not just the additional flex that RUF gives you. it's additional stability. mega flex is WAY overrated.
You want good balance of flex front to rear and good weight transfer. That extra couple of inches make a huge diffrence in the way the vehicle behaves in climbs etc. I know that a couple of inches may not sound like much (as with cawk size) but it really is quite critical.

[roc box]

are there any pit falls to watch out for ie shock mounts associted with the axle moving 1in forward what length chassis extension is best etc