Tell Me Why this wouldn't work

[Maggot4x4]

I got to thinking last night about another project and was thinking about the links for the front end.

What if you took a rangie rear A frame, flipped it over and ran it on the bottom of the front diff, then use the rear lower arms as the top arms on the front. You could position the ball joint so as not to be below the height of the diff, and also build a bash plate for it. You should also have enough room for the sump by doing it this way.

Please think out loud and share any ideas you may have.

[DaveS3]

Interesting thought

Where would you run the uppers? Inside, outside or under the chassis rail?
Would be hard to get link separation / clearance. You would still loose alot of clearance under the diff to mount the ball joint, unless you built it to mount on the on the back surface of the tube, so that the centre of the joint was about inline with e welded seam of the housing.
Would the Aframe allow too much movement for a steering axle?
I think a 3 link + parnhard rod is proven to work and would be easier to set up and fine tune.
Safari guard make the 3 link option as do another british mob.
Bill (daddylonglegs) has setup a few rovers with the 3 link with lots of sucsess. Were engineered as well.

Dave.

Edit: Wheres the I still have no clue option

[GRIMACE]

Very interesting thoughts.

I agree witht he 3-Link comment thou. And Where is Bill????

[DaveS3]

Working hard, spending time with Family.

[Slunnie]

I voted no.

Not that it wouldn't work physically, you would have to hold the A frame up to check it cleared the motor and propshaft, but I think your steering would be all stuffed up due to the arc of the axle travel being so different to that of the steering. I would have thought that short of going hydro which I dont think is certifiable, that you will have to correct the steering significantly everytime you hit a bump or articulate. The 3 link + panhard should be good though.

[Maggot4x4]

Interesting thought

Where would you run the uppers? Inside, outside or under the chassis rail?
Would be hard to get link separation / clearance.

Dave.

Probably try to run them on the out side, but I haven't got under with a tape, just tossing the idea around.

[ISUZUROVER]

This is very similar to the US $afari-Gard 3-link. A single lower link that runs from the gearbox crossmember (heavily strengthened from original) forward to the bottom of the axle, and 2 upper links.

The only problem with a 3-link front like this is the lower (single) link takes most of the load. $G's first designs kept breaking lower links or gearbox crossmembers. If you did this with an a-frame you may break lots of ball joints... The MD ball joint might hold up to it though.

You may have problems with bump steer - may need to run a panhard as well.

[GURU]

You may have problems with bump steer - may need to run a panhard as well.

It WILL bump steer.. would have to run a panhard rod. As soon as you have a panhard no point in the A frame. Stronger to run a single arm ontop of diff and 2 lowers with panhard, thats whats in my project 100"

[red90]

You can NOT run a panhard and an A-frame. They would both be trying to locate the axle. In any case, I doubt there is enough room for an A-frame in that location.

3 link or 4 link with a panhard rod. Just make sure the lower links have lots of bending strength to prevent impact damage and failure from buckling.

[rick130]

You may have problems with bump steer - may need to run a panhard as well.

and roll steer. It could be quite disconcerting on road.
And I'd be terribly worried about all that load through the ball joint. Much, much greater on a lower link than an upper.

Like everyone else, I reckon a three or four link would have less headaches and be easier to build/engineer.

[andrew e]

IMHO you could eliminate the bump steer if you reversed the a frame so the ball joint was on the chassis rather than the housing. it may work depending on clearance under the sump.

Its great hearing of people thinking outside the square. Now lets not be too critical.

Andrew

[Slunnie]

I don't think anybody is being critical, but a critical analysis of this setup is whats been asked for.

If you run the ball joint on the chassis instead of the axle, the axles arc of travel still wont work with the steering links arc of travel and will continue to bump steer badly. To prevent this you still really need to go to a panhard to maintain a constant relationship between the steering and axle when the axle is moving, or change over to steering setup like hydro which is independant of the chassis.

[Slunnie]

Then again I guess if you kept the steering link reasonable flat itd be not a lot different to a leaf sprung truck for steering.

[Maggot4x4]

What about running it with sway bars?

Great comments everyone, keep them comming.

[trr35l]

as the steering is going if going to that much trouble ram steer get rid of the steering arm altogether ram on diff housing to hub

worried more about sump although dry sump may be the answer how much money do you have as money fixes all

if you make it post photo's
or
if you build it we will come

[takearidewifme]

i like the 1 link... i belive it is called.... that Bill ( daddylonglegs) did on tims jeep bodied rover chassis... basically same set up as "A" model ford without leaf spring... triangulated links running from diff to a centre of chassis mounting point... like a 3 link but the arms meet in the middle... from memory has a panhard rod//// basically thats it and flexes a treat...

Mark