Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Off OFN

Its so obvious! I was looking at tractor spline a few years ago - but this is already done. Could use a vacuum hub for in cab use too!

Saw that too. 10 points for thinking outside the box. I don't mind the Manx he's building either.

I orginally saw it on the front of a Jeep on some Foxtel show and thought thats tops.

I want to use on on the back of my GQ Ute when I build the new tray.

My only problem is what steel to use ? Can anyone help ?

Nick

i have 2 air-disconnect swaybars setups awaiting patent application ATM. They will be in production in approx 2 months......

very nice..........

Pretty sure it's Skyjacker that started the FWH as a swaybar disconnect.

Personally, I'd tend to say the suspension will either work with or without a swaybar, but not both. Just my 2C.

Steve.

Gwagensteve wrote:Pretty sure it's Skyjacker that started the FWH as a swaybar disconnect.

Steve.

Your off road nerd nous astounds me Steve.

the guy who's build thread it is wrote: It was one of those dangit things..... The customer I build chassis for wanted an anti-sway bar that they could "disconnect" for their beam cars. They asked for a removable link. I really didn't like the idea and had thought of the hub. Splined shaft, need to unlock it, It was a natural. Then I found out Skyjacker was already doing it for Jeeps! D'oh!

I saw it done on a Sierra a few years ago too. It was based on the Skyjacker.

cj wrote:I saw it done on a Sierra a few years ago too. It was based on the Skyjacker.

pfft too slow...

you have to be a quick nerd around here Cj

Steve.

1MadEngineer wrote:i have 2 air-disconnect swaybars setups awaiting patent application ATM. They will be in production in approx 2 months......

very nice..........

interested to see what you've got, as I was just about to start on this project

1MadEngineer wrote:i have 2 air-disconnect swaybars setups awaiting patent application ATM.

Interesting given that there are a few air-disconnect systems currently out there - what makes yours different?

Gwagensteve wrote:Personally, I'd tend to say the suspension will either work with or without a swaybar, but not both. Just my 2C.

Steve.

I'd rather a dual rate swaybar - one that gives a nice tight onroad ride and then gives a subtle but balanced swaybar for offroad - Just my 2c

Wooders wrote: I'd rather a dual rate swaybar - one that gives a nice tight onroad ride and then gives a subtle but balanced swaybar for offroad - Just my 2c

I've toyed with the idea of a swaybar that changed from either rigidly connected, to connected via a damper.

Onroad it works like a normal swaybar, offroad it gives you full travel but still smooth and controlled and adds control to fast body movements.

If anyone makes a million from that, they need to make me a couple.

Id say a damper would get cained hard, there are some serious amount of load on those rods some times

jet-6 wrote:Id say a damper would get cained hard, there are some serious amount of load on those rods some times

And a normal suspension damper has an easy life?

Just gotta wait for a 200 series to go tits up and pinch its KDSS

I looked at this a while ago with a flamminfabrications winch air freespool disconect style of setup using a gq hub.

I was going to fill in and cut out odd numbers of teeth at set intervals so that it would only mesh back in the original position.

i just wasn't sure how positive the mesh of the teeth would be as it reconnected.

Clever.

But I much prefer my electric disconnects as its a lot easier to just reach up and flick a switch

http://members.iinet.net.au/~ozrunner/Suspension2.html

.

ozrunner wrote:Clever.

But I much prefer my electric disconnects as its a lot easier to just reach up and flick a switch

http://members.iinet.net.au/~ozrunner/Suspension2.html

.

What's it off?

KiwiBacon wrote:

jet-6 wrote:Id say a damper would get cained hard, there are some serious amount of load on those rods some times

And a normal suspension damper has an easy life?

A shock would be too soft, you would need something compact yet strong, like a motorbike shock but skinner, i think you would be pressed to find a item to do it and still allow the system to be rigid when it needs it

jet-6 wrote: A shock would be too soft, you would need something compact yet strong, like a motorbike shock but skinner, i think you would be pressed to find a item to do it and still allow the system to be rigid when it needs it

You can valve a shock to give whatever damping rates you please. When rigid, the damper is just along for the ride.

Picture a system like ozrunners, but with a damper mounted beside his electric disconnect.

You can use the hub concept and on the hub end intergrate a mount off a lever arm chain slack tensioner into the equation.

The rubber would then act as a dampner and i guess you could then change the dampening by ordering the mounts with varying degrees of tension.(duro of the rubber)

Your basically creating a winch air freespool but the input shaft/torsionbar has a dampner inside the drum and the drum it self is the pivot point of the arm which is connected to the lower trailing arm.

What stopped me was the reliability of the teeth meshing and unmeshing whilst on the run mid stage.

cheers smitty

cj wrote:

ozrunner wrote:Clever.

But I much prefer my electric disconnects as its a lot easier to just reach up and flick a switch

http://members.iinet.net.au/~ozrunner/Suspension2.html

.

What's it off?

I'd like to know too.

There was a thread on Glamis awhile back by a builder who used two splined torsion bars (front ifs) joined together by gears that could be slid along to adjust the sway bar rate.

I'll try to find the thread and post the link up.

chimpboy wrote:

cj wrote:

ozrunner wrote:Clever.

But I much prefer my electric disconnects as its a lot easier to just reach up and flick a switch

http://members.iinet.net.au/~ozrunner/Suspension2.html

.

What's it off?

I'd like to know too.

x3

KiwiBacon wrote:

Wooders wrote: I'd rather a dual rate swaybar - one that gives a nice tight onroad ride and then gives a subtle but balanced swaybar for offroad - Just my 2c

I've toyed with the idea of a swaybar that changed from either rigidly connected, to connected via a damper.

Onroad it works like a normal swaybar, offroad it gives you full travel but still smooth and controlled and adds control to fast body movements.

If anyone makes a million from that, they need to make me a couple.

ive wondered if this type of setup would work on your average 4wd??
http://www.hrpworld.com/index.cfm?form_ ... ct_picture
its the same thing used on a v8 supercar. it wouldnt have to be in cab adjustable as you would only want 2 settings but the idea is when the blades are vertical they are at their stiffest (in our case for on road) and when they are horizontal they are at their softest giving more articulation by allowing the arm to bend. dunno it was just a thought

**I'll preface these comments by saying they apply to live axles, not IFS. I do understand that "decoupling" each wheel from the other in an IFS car is a good thing**

There's lots of innovative ideas here, for sure, but I'm still confused as to why a suspension that's designed to work properly needs to have its swaybar removed under "some circumstances" *. Swaybars are added to overcome a characteristic of the suspension that's unhelpful, and I'm 100% sure that if the characteristic is unhelpful on road it will be unhelpful offroad. I've always found that to be the case. The nasty stuff my cars do on road they also do off road under similar circumstances - ie my Gwagen had too much front roll stiffness on and off road, so I pulled the stock swaybar, but it has always had inadequate rear roll stiffness, a problem that afflicts it on and off road.

I am aware that unhooking a sway bar might assist in adding articulation, but by unhooking the swaybar you'll also unbalance the car by excessively lowering the roll stiffness, the reason the swaybar was there in the first place, and in any case, since when has travel added capability? (in any car with lockers)

*Except posing on a ramp

Steve.

Gwagensteve wrote:**I'll preface these comments by saying they apply to live axles, not IFS. I do understand that "decoupling" each wheel from the other in an IFS car is a good thing**

There's lots of innovative ideas here, for sure, but I'm still confused as to why a suspension that's designed to work properly needs to have its swaybar removed under "some circumstances" *. Swaybars are added to overcome a characteristic of the suspension that's unhelpful, and I'm 100% sure that if the characteristic is unhelpful on road it will be unhelpful offroad. I've always found that to be the case. The nasty stuff my cars do on road they also do off road under similar circumstances - ie my Gwagen had too much front roll stiffness on and off road, so I pulled the stock swaybar, but it has always had inadequate rear roll stiffness, a problem that afflicts it on and off road.

I am aware that unhooking a sway bar might assist in adding articulation, but by unhooking the swaybar you'll also unbalance the car by excessively lowering the roll stiffness, the reason the swaybar was there in the first place, and in any case, since when has travel added capability? (in any car with lockers)

*Except posing on a ramp

Steve.

I understand your point, but there's still a large void between the best suspension trim for comfort and stability onroad at say 100km/h and offroad at 20-60km/h.
If your offroad use takes you closer to onroad speeds of 100km/h then the differences in suspension trim become smaller.

I'm not sure the difference is as big as people think, for two reasons:

A) I can laterally load my car as much offroad as on, offroad it's by side angle and on road it's by cornering g's - but the effect of too little roll stiffness and a high COG is the same

B) general suspension tune makes very little difference to car behaviour at low speed, but LOTS of difference at maybe 60 km/h upwards. What I mean is that a car setup to handle for 60km/h up won't behave very much differently at 20 km/h than a car setup only to work at low speed (I'll maintain the 60km/h+ car would work better... but anyway) but a car setup to be optimum at 20km/h would be lethal at 60km/h.

Of course, wheelspeed needs to be taken into account too - I'd vote that possible wheelspeed needs to be taken into account too.

A car moving slowly but with the potential for high wheelspeed needs much better suspension control than a car just plain crawling along - that's why cars "getting on it" in mud tend to look floppy - all that intertia from the spinning wheels starts to be the tail wagging the dog.

all things being equal, I still say a competent car on road will be a competent car off road, but a compenent car off road could be lethal on road.

PS KOH is an excellent exmple of how off road performance in difficult terrain and high speed capability are linked.

Steve.

Gwagensteve wrote:I'm not sure the difference is as big as people think, for two reasons:

I'd agree with that entirely. Some people think dampers offroad are a waste of time.

One major difference would be swaybars tuned to prevent oversteer when overcooking a corner onroad vs swaybars tuned to give equal roll-stiffness offroad to keep the vehicle more level more often.

My rangie is a great example of that. It needs a decent amount of roll-stiffness up front to keep the oversteer under control onroad, this is provided by the radius arms.
Offroad the back suspension does most of the work and the body follows the front axle.

I imagine your G-wagon wouldn't be too different. But yours may have more weight rearward.

The G wagen is very very matched front to rear - both ends are radius arm.

The rear has high roll stiffness only due to spring rate and slightly wider arm spacing. The problem is the rear has a higher COG - ( lots of steel bodywork) than the front so when climbing the effect is that the rear is too floppy/soft.

The front has longer springs/shocks and opens up well offroad.

Factory the car had a massive front swaybar and understeer was excessive on road, turn in was terrible, and offroad the balance sucked.

Even my old G mechanic thought the car was much, much better to drive on road with the swaybar removed.

Steve.

benhl wrote:

chimpboy wrote:

cj wrote:

ozrunner wrote:Clever.

But I much prefer my electric disconnects as its a lot easier to just reach up and flick a switch

http://members.iinet.net.au/~ozrunner/Suspension2.html

.

What's it off?

I'd like to know too.

x3

patrol