Outer Limits 4x4 Board

ok guys i carnt find sfa on this
talking about in the rear!
what is the benefit??
other than roll center???
thats about as much as i can think!!!
what has more flex?
what rides better???
im not to keen on the 4 link idea but im open to almost anything!
chears in advance
Phil

A four link (triangulated) moved in a verticle plane, where as a 3 link plus panhard rod will move in an arc perscribed by the panhard (dunno if this is any help Phil ). Both can be built to have the roll centre that you want, as well as desired anti-squat. Tri 4 link takes up more room, and will require more things to be moved to fit the upper links in. This may factor into your zook build, from memory you want it engineered and rego'd don't you ??

Layto....

lay80n wrote: you want it engineered and rego'd don't you ??

Layto....

nah it will be a regersterd (some time drivin on the road) tralor toy!
ok yeah thats the only difrence i can think of 2..
im thinking of using 3link parnard all round atm..
just trying to work out what is going to be better

I believe it is also harder to get a 4-link approved as it usually has bump steer - unlike a properly designed 3-link + panhard setup (e.g. where the panhard and track rod are parallel).

What about a 3 link A frame setup,Cheers Paul.

I may be wrong here, but I thought this was for the rear only and comparing the differences between running a rear A-frame to running a 4 link with triangulated uppers.

You will get more flex out of an A frame and much simpler to set up,Cheers Paul.

MART wrote:You will get more flex out of an A frame and much simpler to set up,Cheers Paul.

if setup right the only thing limiting his travel should be his shocks/ coils

ISUZUROVER wrote:I believe it is also harder to get a 4-link approved as it usually has bump steer - unlike a properly designed 3-link + panhard setup (e.g. where the panhard and track rod are parallel).

Only if used in the front, Phil is talking about the rear. The bumpsteer is due to the reason i mentioned in my post about the planes of action of the suspension.

Layto....

I run a 3 link in the front with panhard,doesn,t flex as good as rear.

This is the centre link mount,nissan bush,also gearbox mount,also nissan bush.



Cetre front link mount,nissan bush also,engine mounts are also nissan bushes,nothing moves anywhere.



Lower links and panhard rod,nissan bushes and 32 OD tube,6mm wall,24mm high tensile rod,about $150 for one,home made.



Centre link crossmember,bolted to chassis,also lower link mounts and panhard rod upper mount



Just a bit of info,hope it helps,but i reckon A frame rear is the go as a front A frame requires hydro-steer,otherwise you lose your steering when flexing suspension. I guess one drawback is the rear links need to be as long as possible to avoid torque steer,Cheers Paul.

MART wrote:I run a 3 link in the front with panhard,doesn,t flex as good as rear.

This is the centre link mount,nissan bush,also gearbox mount,also nissan bush.

Cetre front link mount,nissan bush also,engine mounts are also nissan bushes,nothing moves anywhere.

Lower links and panhard rod,nissan bushes and 32 OD tube,6mm wall,24mm high tensile rod,about $150 for one,home made.

Centre link crossmember,bolted to chassis,also lower link mounts and panhard rod upper mount

Just a bit of info,hope it helps,but i reckon A frame rear is the go as a front A frame requires hydro-steer,otherwise you lose your steering when flexing suspension. I guess one drawback is the rear links need to be as long as possible to avoid torque steer,Cheers Paul.

why do u have them other little bushes off your lower links??

hard to tell from the pics but it would stop the gq bush from doin its job and twisting up

you can traingulate you lower links on an Aframe to get ur roll axis flatter eleminating flex steer (torque steer)

They are for the sway bar disconnects,and the bushes don,t flex to much as I leave one nut loose on trailing arm to stop the bushes binding,Cheers Paul.

ok well basicly.. im going to be running all the bottom arms (and top for that matter)
AS long as posilble.and will nearly touch on the outside of the chassi rail...
the front top arm will be on the other side of the pumpkin. so will mount to drivers side of chassi. in about the middle of the car...
rear will have top link of pasingers side of pumpkin.. up to a mount at about the middle of the car...
and parnards will be simple...
arms will be about 1300long..
will this all work?

Sounds allright,you need to make your panhard rod on the same angle as your steering arm to minimise steering loss when the 4wd is flexed,that is the problem with front A frame setups . Without hydro steer you will lose your steering on one side as 4wd flexes,unless you do what glen dobbin has done with his truck,Cheers Paul.

Red_Zook wrote:ok well basicly.. im going to be running all the bottom arms (and top for that matter)
AS long as posilble.and will nearly touch on the outside of the chassi rail...
the front top arm will be on the other side of the pumpkin. so will mount to drivers side of chassi. in about the middle of the car...
rear will have top link of pasingers side of pumpkin.. up to a mount at about the middle of the car...
and parnards will be simple...
arms will be about 1300long..
will this all work?

1300 sounds way to long

900 should be plently long enuff to get rid of rear steer if setup right

the longer they are the more of a rock anchor they will be and easier they are to bend

Red_zook,what type of trailing arm are you going to use as I have seen high tensile chrome-moly trailing arm,they bend them near the diff to keep trailing arm up out of the way which allows a longer trailing arm/link to be used,also aids in a better ramp-over<cheers Paul.

the mogota lower arms are 1200mm with 117" wheel base so i dont know how you will be able to use 1300mm on yours

The lower arms on my old zook were 1200mm long but i wouldnt do it like that again as tim said too easy to bend and to get caught up on