"Gonna do it right...maybe!!??" Fuller's new XJ build!!!

I have a strap style yoke that'll work. It was my spare for my wife's ZJ. 1310 series D44a/D60.
$40 shipped and it's yours.
15202935291869004030068502795998.jpg
 
Making little progress on the rear coil buckets
IMG_20180305_201101177_LL.jpg
 
marty79 said:
Making little progress on the rear coil buckets
View attachment 264019
Click to expand...

Again John. Set it at ride height, build links first. THEN build coil buckets/mounts. If you place the coils in the wrong place on the axle you'll be removing them again.
Don't repeat an error from the front axle/suspension build.
 
Jody Treadway said:
Again John. Set it at ride height, build links first. THEN build coil buckets/mounts. If you place the coils in the wrong place on the axle you'll be removing them again.
Don't repeat an error from the front axle/suspension build.
Click to expand...
Dammit crap, In the zone and was looking through and I thought I read it right and somehow ended up doing this then the other steps. Well shishkabobs..I hope they're close enough then cause buckets and link mounting area is secured
Them flux welds though....:D

IMG_20180305_210710860_LL.jpg
IMG_20180305_210739755_LL.jpg
 
Can we just call you “can’t get right”? Slow down and ask question if you need to. Don’t assume and just ask. There are plenty of people to help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
iwaxmyjimmy said:
Can we just call you “can’t get right”? Slow down and ask question if you need to. Don’t assume and just ask. There are plenty of people to help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...
Dang it I know, I get so ancy and going all the time I loose focus.
So just making sure this is what I'm shooting for right
IMG_20180305_214011642.jpg
 
Not picking on you, but you said you did, so...
Did you really run the link numbers in the calculator? Cause if you did (like you said you did) then you'd already know the answer to your question.
Don't get me (us) wrong. We desire to help you learn. The proof of this is us collectively laying a ton of information in your lap. Down to the vehicle specific details and tips.
So, what are your link lengths, separation at axle and chassis? What is your anti-squat numbers?
There's more to a properly setup and acting triangulated 4 link than angled uppers.

Again, not bashing. Just wanting to see your own input based on the answers to questions you've already asked.
 
Jody Treadway said:
Not picking on you, but you said you did, so...
Did you really run the link numbers in the calculator? Cause if you did (like you said you did) then you'd already know the answer to your question.
Don't get me (us) wrong. We desire to help you learn. The proof of this is us collectively laying a ton of information in your lap. Down to the vehicle specific details and tips.
So, what are your link lengths, separation at axle and chassis? What is your anti-squat numbers?
There's more to a properly setup and acting triangulated 4 link than angled uppers.

Again, not bashing. Just wanting to see your own input based on the answers to questions you've already asked.
Click to expand...
I did it or tried on the front but things got weird so I chose a route that kinda made sense from people's 3link posts.

The rear I haven't started with numbers yet, doing that soon. There are several different triangulated setups is only reason I asked that question. If that is something the calculator shoes me after inputting the numbers than I'll see that tomorrow probably when I get into spending time on the computer. I didn't really learn that much from front numbers cause it was or I was way off on stuff but I have watched couple videos on it and should be able to get somewhere with the rear. Now that my front axle is at ride height I also have complete accurate numbers for body height and such for the rear so that will help I'm sure and I know where to put the rear axle for ride height rather than guessing like I did on front according to the springs.
I realize these rear springs might not work and that's fine but everything should be much smoother with rear calculations. Will post results tomorrow when I'm off work so I can start the links.
 
Jody Treadway said:
Did you really run the link numbers in the calculator?
Click to expand...
What few numbers I got from it I posted on previous page I think but it didn't help, I was lost so I just went with the true 3 link many were suggesting
 
marty79 said:
Dang it I know, I get so ancy and going all the time I loose focus.
So just making sure this is what I'm shooting for right
View attachment 264026
Click to expand...
Triangulate your lowers, parallel lowers will have quite a bit of rear steer. Plus it can help keep your roll axis in check.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Well I typed in the numbers I have written down already so here's what I've got so far..only thing left is to set the rear exactly where it goes and measure upper links
IMG_20180305_232446258.jpg
 
That anti-squat figure is way up there...might want to try to cut that down a bit. Then you can tweak your roll axis angle, if you can. I can't really speak much for the roll center height, but seeing as it is near your CG, I think it should be okay.

Someone else please correct me if I'm way off base there.
 
marty79 said:
Well I typed in the numbers I have written down already so here's what I've got so far..only thing left is to set the rear exactly where it goes and measure upper links
View attachment 264027
Click to expand...



That AS number is terrible.

Shoot for 60% It’s going to rise in droop and that will be worse.

Bc you aren’t using the travel to plot the AS at full droop, shoot for an even lesser amount bc it is going to rise in droop.

Make the upper chassis side mounts adjustable so you can try each hole and adjust to what you like.

Too much AS will cause rear wheel hop.

Too much AS at droop will cause excessive wheel hop on the hardest of climbs.

This is because the suspension will move towards droop as you jeep goes uphill.

This is because the direction of gravity is constant, but the angle of the springs to gravity changes.

This takes weight off the springs and places more weight onto the links, moving the suspension towards the droop position.
 
It'd be better to use the new calc that does both ends. Looks like you need to shorten your lowers and make the uppers longer. Ideally you want a slightly longer upper link than the lower if running a double cardon driveshaft. If possible bring your upper link down at the frame side to try and get it parallel to a slight upward rake to the rear.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Mac5005 said:
I’ll share, but I fear this will be lost like triangulation.

There is no perfect setup, only ideal #s to shoot for, but you will always have to compromise to fit your chassis constraints.

Rear Antisquat less than 60-80%, less than 10% increase at full droop.

Front Antisquat/antidive less than 50%.

Less than 6 degrees pinion change.

Driveshaft style also affects this. If double cardan you want to keep pinion point at tcase output. If single joint shaft, then you want pinion to stay parallel to tcase output.

Front roll center height higher than rear.

Roll moments as short as possible. This means getting the roll centers as close to the Center of gravity height as possible.

Shoot for your top bell housing bolt for COG height.

Minimal pinion angle change and caster change in front.

Links as flat as possible.

40 degrees of triangulation in the links when viewed from above if no panhard.

If panhard, locate in front to reduce bump steer. Parallel and equal length to drag link.

Lower links equal in length to tire size. Vertical separation of links at axle 1/4 of tire size. Upper links 65-75% of lower link length.

I can answer why to any of these, but it gets very wordy.

Get the best you can. For where/how I see you wheeling, the most important thing is to limit rear AS increase in droop.

Getting the AS wrong will lead to wheel hop. Can be in front or rear.

It will ride better with flatter links.

Make upper chassis side mounts adjustable with as many holes as possible. Typically with 1” spacing difference vertically on holes so you can try different setups to see what you like the best.
Click to expand...
 
I haven't put the numbers in for uppers, I will today when I set axle in place under it then we'll see what computer says. Thank guys
 
You might also want to take a look at your masses. You're saying there that you have only 1500 total sprung mass on a 4800 lb. rig? That's a bottom-heavy b**ch. I like some junk in da trunk, butt damn, Gina!

IMG_1772.GIF


EDIT: I'm a blind and under-caffeinated jackass this morning... thanks @paradisePWoffrd for catching that.

You're good here, never mind me. I'm going back to my corner to eat paste. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Scooter402 said:
You might also want to take a look at your masses. You're saying there that you have only 1500 total sprung mass on a 4800 lb. rig? That's a bottom-heavy b**ch. I like some junk in da trunk, butt damn, Gina!

View attachment 264037
Click to expand...

????

That says unsprung in the calc. :sniper:
 
Scooter402 said:
You might also want to take a look at your masses. You're saying there that you have only 1500 total sprung mass on a 4800 lb. rig? That's a bottom-heavy b**ch. I like some junk in da trunk, butt damn, Gina!

View attachment 264037
Click to expand...
I also doubt the cog is 28". I'd bet its closer to 60" with all that cage.
 
paradisePWoffrd said:
????

That says unsprung in the calc. :sniper:
Click to expand...
Wow... I seriously need to go get my eyes checked... good catch.

I'm going to blame it on the fact that I was only 1/4 the way into my first cup of coffee for the morning.

No sense in editing my post now that it's been twice quoted. Anyway, @marty79 , forget what I said about unsprung mass. You're probably at least in the ballpark there.

Where's that face palm when I need one?
IMG_1773.JPG


That'll do it...:shaking:

RHSCTJ said:
I also doubt the cog is 28". I'd bet its closer to 60" with all that cage.
Click to expand...
In all seriousness, @RHSCTJ is right. The COG is likely much higher than 28" here. I'd be willing to help calculate it for you, if you would like. It would take a boatload of measurements from your cage, though. That, and I would be willing to bet that even at ride height the standard "top bell housing bolt" measurement is higher than 28". (I'm rounding off here from 27.68 - I did read this time... :rolleyes:)
 
For the front, make sure the truss and upper link mounts on both ends can't be yanked off with a bulldozer. The last thing you want to happen deep into a hardcore trail is to have your front axle rotate forward or backward 90 degrees, ripping off your shocks, coils springs, and bending your steering.
 
Ok wow guys too much overload hold up. Let me get caught up tonight and go through the numbers. I have ? On several comment but can't right now..
Y'all hold your thoughts please give me time to be there and work in this new stuff. Thanks
 
drkelly said:
For the front, make sure the truss and upper link mounts on both ends can't be yanked off with a bulldozer. The last thing you want to happen deep into a hardcore trail is to have your front axle rotate forward or backward 90 degrees, ripping off your shocks, coils springs, and bending your steering.
Click to expand...

This. I "broke" my 3 link front on my old MJ during an ECORS race. The mount held, the link held, the 5/8" bolt held. But what didn't hold was the 3/16" steel crossmember my frame side mount was welded to. It ripped the steel out over 1" away from the weld. Just plain metal fatigue.
IMO- The ideal way to do the frame side mount on an XJ is to plate the inside of frame (did anyone mention that yet?) and weld a typical mount to a piece of plate that is them welded and plug welded to the plated frame. 3 link mounts see extraordinary forces on them.

To be clear, I broke my front axle pinion yoke with my crankshaft when my 3 link failed. Yes, you read that correctly.
 
Back
Top