4-link, and mounting a panhard bracket on passenger side?

336wheeler

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Location
Boone
I think I'm ready to link the front of my YJ, and because of the mechanical draglink I'm having a hard time trying to figure this mess out. I think that for space reasons and having a mechanical steering set-up, radius arms are my best bet for now (heims on both ends of the radius arm to prevent binding). I'm running a dodge 60 pass drop in the front, and will having the panhard bracket on the housing side affect anything? I would be running a 4 link to prevent any further torque twists from having the panhard on the housing side, but would really like to run a 3 link because of the radius arm design. Any opinions?
 
If you are going to keep your mechanical steering then you can't mount the tracbar on the ps side I don't think. The panhard/draglink/control arms would all bind up. But If you went full hydro I think you would be ok with doing that. The hiems at both ends are going to make for a little harsher ride but they will def. articulate better I think. There is a guy with an XJ on pirate that runs a pass. drop 60 with a 3 link front and panhard mounted on the pumkin truss like I'm talking about...his screen name is Timmay, look through his build up it should give you some good ideas. I have also seen it tied into the diff gaurd (very risky I think, but Timmay does this).
 
as stated, you can do it using a truss over the diff... the panhard and draglink should be at the same angle (preferably horizontal or parallel with the tierod halfway through the suspension cycle, iirc)...

If doing radius arm style or 3-link then dont use a top link on one side to prevent binding... or do a true 4-link where all arms have a frame mount...
 
I found a picture of a yota that had a chevy 60 and was running a 3 link with mechanical steering in an '03 Four Wheeler mag, "Ultimate TTC Suspensions". Badass. Anyways, I'm trying to narrow it down to a true 3 link or a 3 link radius arm.
 
336wheeler said:
I would be running a 4 link to prevent any further torque twists from having the panhard on the housing side, but would really like to run a 3 link because of the radius arm design. Any opinions?
Click to expand...

For clarity, when you're talking 3-link, 4-link, the panhard isn't included in that number. A radius arm would be considered a 2 link in this case.

That said, a 3-link is nothing like a radius arm - it's much better if done right. Only problem is, all your upper link forces are channeled through one mount, so make it STRONG. Radius arms are harder to screw up because you have less options in where to mount shit.

But a well-designed 3 or 4 link (they behave basically the same) will trounce the performance of a radius arm.
 
A picture I stole off of pirate, but this is what is pushing me towards a radius arm:
ai212.photobucket.com_albums_cc116_336wheeler_KelsoJeep014.jpg
... still imagine that I have to fit my starter and driveshaft in there too.
 
The pic from PBB is not a radius arm design. Its a standard 5 link, it will be a 4 link + a panhard.
radius arms are my best bet for now (heims on both ends of the radius arm to prevent binding).
Click to expand...
You actually cant do that. On the lower link where the upper will seperate from, you have to have a stationary bushing on the lower axle mount - if not the link will invert itself and discombooberate itself.

Here is a pic of a radius arm setup I did a whiles back. Crappy pic but you can get the idea.
100_1125.jpg
 
I know the pic from PBB isn't a radius arm. I was showing Rich what kind of clearance problems you run into with a pass drop and jeep frame with a traditional 3 link.

Studnuts, on the one you set up, is there a radius arm on the passenger side link? I can't tell from the picture. I was under the impression that the housing side needed the link?

I would be down for a radius arm on the drivers side if it would work right. After looking today though, I think I can handle a true 3 link with 36" lowers and a 27" upper. Your panhard and draglink angles are dead on. I already have a truss in the works for doing a true 3 link, but would entertain the idea of a drivers side radius arm set up. Is there a desirable percentage of the lower links that a radius arm should be?



I know it sounds dumb but I have some very basic link questions also: Why is it necessary to have a left and right handed tube insert? Also, for air shocks will air shocks fit in a standard shock mount? I have a bunch of new shock tabs from axle swaps that are the pre-bent ones.
 
336wheeler said:
I know it sounds dumb but I have some very basic link questions also: Why is it necessary to have a left and right handed tube insert? Also, for air shocks will air shocks fit in a standard shock mount? I have a bunch of new shock tabs from axle swaps that are the pre-bent ones.
Click to expand...

It's not necessary to have L&R, but you won't have to remove the link to adjust it if you have L&R.

For the mounts - they should - my coilovers did.
 
As was said, if you go with radius arms...don't use heims at both ends or you will have *bad* binding problems. The bushings and deflection in the axle housing itself are what allows it to flex. Unless you're only using a RA on one side... Which now I see it looks like you're going to do? It's common to put the arm with a top link on the dshaft side to help keep pinion angles in check.

On links, I only use RH joints. Easier to find, easier to keep spares, typically cheaper as well.

Air shocks will fit standard shock mounts with the right spacers.
 
For those of you who have the july/august version of Crawl with the orange TJ on the front, "gin and juice", he did a traditional 3 link with panhard with an HP60 but put his upper on the passenger side, and has mechanical steering. Are there any negative effects to doing this?
 
Alot of guys that run a radius arm setup on the Cherokees keep the upper link on the driver's side. That way all the torque gets transfers to the link, not to the axle tube and link. That'll help elevate any concerns about spinning an axle tube or cracking a housing.
 
On the picture I stole from pirate, can you guys tell me what kind of bad geometry I'd be looking at if the upper mount was a tad shorter (probably ~2", or in the bottom hole of that bracket) and the frame end of it connected under the frame rail, roughly where the frame bends up? I could swing that, as long as it didn't bind. Unfortunately, my upper would be like ~68% of my lower (30" lower, 20" upper). One thing I can see beneficial about what I just talked about is that the upper would triangulate more inwards.
 
Your upper should not triangulate.. it'll fight with the panhard.
 
I suppose that for now I'm going to shoot for a 2 link/ radius arm set up. I was looking at using 3 bushings and 3 3/4" heims. I'm running one radius arm so the bushing in the radius arm is necessary correct? I'm shooting for a 16" radius arm and 34" lowers. I figured it was the easiest way to fit a link set-up with a panhard onto a jeep frame with a mechanical draglink. The RE long arm kits seem to work well enough, so I'm pretty much just copying that but with one radius arm.
 
Its a good setup and I have done about a dozen rigs that way. Might want to consider a sway bar for the front however. But for the links, you can get away with only 2 bushings(bushings only on the axle side of the radius). The standalone arm can use a flex joint, heim, etc. to increase range of motion and less resistance.
For the whole driver/pass. location, I normally put the radius setup opposite side of the frame mount panhard. I have done a few of these setups and I found that works the best. If it does happen to be on the long side tube, I weld the tubes to the chunk. A jeep is the most easy to follow 'put it on the drivers side' technique due to it being left hand chunk and the axle mount panhard is the the pass side.
 
Sweet. Last night I ordered my brackets for the frame and axle end of the lowers, and tabs for the radius arm to weld to the lower. I'm gonna run bushings at the axle end of the lowers, and probably heims on the frame end. On the radius, I was thinking about two heims. Idk yet though, I'm still trying to figure that out.

In this particular set up, this guy is running bushings on the axle end of his lowers, heims on the frame end, two heims on the radius arm, and his radius arm on the drivers side with a pass drop D60.

ai212.photobucket.com_albums_cc116_336wheeler_0612or_03_z1994_toyota_pickupradius.jpg
 
From what I had read, if you're going to drive it on-road, you'd be well served to make both arms in that y configuration, but make one of the "uppers" easily removable.

Since you're talking about retaining mechanical steering, I can only assume you plan to street it.
 
I don't street it what-so-ever... maybe from the eldorado outpost to a trailhead, but thats the extent of it. I'm keeping the mechanical steering because full hydro costs too much right now.


Being that the design is called a "radius" arm, and seeing how RE patterns their radius arm designs, if I were to have a 34" lower, then I would need roughly a 17" upper, because of the "radius" arm. I think that RE is pretty close to that when they make theirs, so maybe I'm just blowing it out my ass but it seems like a good guess.
 
Now I just have to figure out what to do about my lower links. Since I'm running a fullwidth 60 and running bushings on the axle end, my links won't be able to line up on the frame end because of the width difference and not running a straight lower link... it needs to triangulate just a tad. I suppose that the best thing to do is notch my axle end lower for the bushing sleeve at an angle? Seems like that would be better than putting a slight bend in my lower links.

On the above picture, that guy is running straight lower links with bushings.
 
Just make your axle tabs for the lower control arms similar to this /__/ (one tab will be a little longer than the other one)that way you dont have to cut the lower at an angle. Some people have put bends in their control arms but I think that can weaken them some if you do.
 
I dont see any reason to put a bend in the control arm... the geometry acts through the end points no matter how many bends you have... and bends weaken the tube, which leads to needing thicker tube and gussets to make it as strong...

why dont you outboard the frame side mount?
 
Well I've gotten all my DOM and bracketry... just need air shocks, shock hoops, and heims or johnny joints. Anyways, still looking at a true 3 link, I just get hung up on some things with it. For a true 3 link with 3 frame mounts, if my lowers triangulate 10 degrees, what should my upper do? Also, what type of reprocussions would I have of running a short upper, in comparison to my lowers? (Like 20-22")
 
Back
Top