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.
RUF without chassis extension?
RUF without chassis extension?
Has anyone attempted to run OME RUF without a chassis extension? I am interest because from photos of vehicles with the extension the front shackles appear to very vertical. By leaving the spring mounts in the stock location and running a slight extended shackle, at rest the angle of the shackle would be probably be in the vicinity of 20 to 30 degrees from vertical. Is there anything wrong with this?
bigsteve wrote:Its been done with a longer flatter shackles and the eye bush hole re-drilled further back in the mount (rear of front spring)
do you know of anyone that has without re-drilling the rear mount of the spring? if i move the rear mount of the spring then i loose the advantage of being able to move the diff forward.
We tried it with Grimbo's car without moving the rear mount backwards at all and it just inverted the shackle immediately, that was with a 2" longer shackle.
I have seen it done with the rear mount re drilled further back and it should work without an extension, but there will be very little wheelbase extension and so it won't be as helpful to fitting a big tyre, and the balance of the car will not be positively affected as much.
Big Steve's car never flattened it's springs out as much as other cars running this set up so the shackles always ended up sitting quite vertical. I can assure you it has plenty of travel though, and generally, the shackles only invert if you are doing something very stoopid.
On Bigsteves, the front mount position was set by mounting the spring unladen and stretching the shackle out to "full droop" then welding everything up, bolting the axle in and that's where it sat.
The more angle on the shackle the lower the car sits and the worse the approach angle, so we were hooting for lift. I was planning on doing mine EXACTLY 75mm over stock with OME RUF, but other plans have interupted and I am now going to a link suspension.
I have seen it done with the rear mount re drilled further back and it should work without an extension, but there will be very little wheelbase extension and so it won't be as helpful to fitting a big tyre, and the balance of the car will not be positively affected as much.
Big Steve's car never flattened it's springs out as much as other cars running this set up so the shackles always ended up sitting quite vertical. I can assure you it has plenty of travel though, and generally, the shackles only invert if you are doing something very stoopid.
On Bigsteves, the front mount position was set by mounting the spring unladen and stretching the shackle out to "full droop" then welding everything up, bolting the axle in and that's where it sat.
The more angle on the shackle the lower the car sits and the worse the approach angle, so we were hooting for lift. I was planning on doing mine EXACTLY 75mm over stock with OME RUF, but other plans have interupted and I am now going to a link suspension.
[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]
Gwagensteve wrote:We tried it with Grimbo's car without moving the rear mount backwards at all and it just inverted the shackle immediately, that was with a 2" longer shackle.
I have seen it done with the rear mount re drilled further back and it should work without an extension, but there will be very little wheelbase extension and so it won't be as helpful to fitting a big tyre, and the balance of the car will not be positively affected as much.
Big Steve's car never flattened it's springs out as much as other cars running this set up so the shackles always ended up sitting quite vertical. I can assure you it has plenty of travel though, and generally, the shackles only invert if you are doing something very stoopid.
On Bigsteves, the front mount position was set by mounting the spring unladen and stretching the shackle out to "full droop" then welding everything up, bolting the axle in and that's where it sat.
The more angle on the shackle the lower the car sits and the worse the approach angle, so we were hooting for lift. I was planning on doing mine EXACTLY 75mm over stock with OME RUF, but other plans have interupted and I am now going to a link suspension.
wouldn't there be more chance of inverting a shackle if it was vertical to begin with as apposed to it angled out towards the front?
The shackle inverts forwards, like this ]_ rather then _]Under even mild compression. How about attaching the spring eye to the end of the chassis (we did this with Critta- ljxtreem) when we went to MQ springs. this is not really an "extension" just a bracket (could even be made bolt on). this might be just enough I think. wioth Critta we made a dart shaped bracket that welded about 60mm under the chassis and up the full height of the rail, with the shackle tube set into it. This would give you about 50mm of "extension" perhaps enough to get by, and can look quite trick
It seems that extensions are OK with engineers here in Vic, but I guess there are always lots of variables with what engineers will allow. You will have plenty of trouble trying to run RUF with stock shock mounts if the engineer reckons you can't "modify" the chassis!
It seems that extensions are OK with engineers here in Vic, but I guess there are always lots of variables with what engineers will allow. You will have plenty of trouble trying to run RUF with stock shock mounts if the engineer reckons you can't "modify" the chassis!
[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]
Gwagensteve wrote:The shackle inverts forwards, like this ]_ rather then _]Under even mild compression. How about attaching the spring eye to the end of the chassis (we did this with Critta- ljxtreem) when we went to MQ springs. this is not really an "extension" just a bracket (could even be made bolt on). this might be just enough I think. wioth Critta we made a dart shaped bracket that welded about 60mm under the chassis and up the full height of the rail, with the shackle tube set into it. This would give you about 50mm of "extension" perhaps enough to get by, and can look quite trick
It seems that extensions are OK with engineers here in Vic, but I guess there are always lots of variables with what engineers will allow. You will have plenty of trouble trying to run RUF with stock shock mounts if the engineer reckons you can't "modify" the chassis!
I like the idea of the brackets aat the front of the chassis rail. i could probally be made bolt on if it bolted to the bullbar mounts. The shock mounts are a bit of a problem. I might just have to have a bit more in depth conversation with my engineer. i may end up running just a normal set of lifted front springs untill after i get my certificate. Then i'll have a bit more of a play around with the setup.
i'm pretty sure tim/redzook runs shackle reversal with his RUF... seems to work damn well...
so ya reckon that the benefits of that (better approach angle cos no shackles to hit, wheel moving backwards on compression over obstacle etc) aren't worth it? why not?
so ya reckon that the benefits of that (better approach angle cos no shackles to hit, wheel moving backwards on compression over obstacle etc) aren't worth it? why not?
___,,,,_('o')_,,,,____
part of the newy conspiracy...
part of the newy conspiracy...
stumped wrote:i'm pretty sure tim/redzook runs shackle reversal with his RUF... seems to work damn well...
so ya reckon that the benefits of that (better approach angle cos no shackles to hit, wheel moving backwards on compression over obstacle etc) aren't worth it? why not?
nope i dont.
will have a sr shortly though cos i hit the dam shackles on everything
redzook wrote:stumped wrote:i'm pretty sure tim/redzook runs shackle reversal with his RUF... seems to work damn well...
so ya reckon that the benefits of that (better approach angle cos no shackles to hit, wheel moving backwards on compression over obstacle etc) aren't worth it? why not?
nope i dont.
will have a sr shortly though cos i hit the dam shackles on everything
Thats coz your tyres are too damn small
yeshemesh
bigsteve wrote:redzook wrote:stumped wrote:i'm pretty sure tim/redzook runs shackle reversal with his RUF... seems to work damn well...
so ya reckon that the benefits of that (better approach angle cos no shackles to hit, wheel moving backwards on compression over obstacle etc) aren't worth it? why not?
nope i dont.
will have a sr shortly though cos i hit the dam shackles on everything
Thats coz your tyres are too damn small
ive got a feelin my approach is way better then yours
redzook wrote:stumped wrote:i'm pretty sure tim/redzook runs shackle reversal with his RUF... seems to work damn well...
so ya reckon that the benefits of that (better approach angle cos no shackles to hit, wheel moving backwards on compression over obstacle etc) aren't worth it? why not?
nope i dont.
will have a sr shortly though cos i hit the dam shackles on everything
damn, woulda sworn i had a memory of a red zook with SR
not jake's maybe? meh... coulda been dreamin 
wit SPOA, tim's zook's got a decent approach angle for a leafy bigsteve
___,,,,_('o')_,,,,____
part of the newy conspiracy...
part of the newy conspiracy...
bigsteve wrote:Barathrum wrote:what is your approach angle?
Redzook = ?????
Bigsteve = ?????
Tims would be better, just look at how far he has moved his diff forward, I preferred the extra dropp of RUF so I left my axle in the stock rear holes.
oh come on bigsteve.
we all know the differences between the two different setups. but we'd still like to see what it is.
I did rears up front with longer shackles, it flexed well and handled better than it did with "missing link" style shackles, bit to be honest I would not bother with it again.. A chassis extension is the best way of doing it.
If your engineer does not like the extended chassis .. he would spew if he saw shackles long enough to fit the rear up front ..
If your engineer does not like the extended chassis .. he would spew if he saw shackles long enough to fit the rear up front ..
" If governments are involved in the covering up the knowledge of aliens, Then they are doing a much better job of it than they do of everything else "
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests