96 xcab backhalf

[wickedfab]

new here thought id post some pics of my junk....

ganna have a tri 4 link with the uppers going back...and the bags mounted on the arms.

[Izzy]

All that work and you're going to run a reverse 4 link? :think:

The frame looks good though.

[wickedfab]

All that work and you're going to run a reverse 4 link? :think:

The frame looks good though.


thnx mang

yup i like to be the outcast everybody talks smac about;) it ill work good....no worries.

[Mike]

You like to be the idiot that thinks physics dont apply to them?

[lowryder99]

harsh but true.....

[wickedfab]

You like to be the idiot that thinks physics dont apply to them?


no... i like to make idiots stand out when they think they know what they are talkin about. ;)

like i said no worries man...i got it covered... and for some reason it doesnt work...i change it.

i know how a.s. works do you???

[wickedfab]

oh yeah,,.,im not here to start ****.....just fyi

[wickedfab]

harsh but true.....


how??

[Mike]

i know how a.s. works do you???

ok? it has nothing to do with air at all, throw coilovers in there and Id still think it was wrong. The main functions of the suspension are being nulled by running the links backwards. Will it work? Maybe. Will it produce a superior suspension? No. A reverse setup offers absolutely no advantage to a forward setup, it does nothing but reduce braking performance, traction qualities, and proper pinion and driveshaft angles.

[Physh1]

Welcome to the site for starters....secondly the work looks good.

While some of the comments may be a little harsh, they have a sound point. There are no benifits to a reverse system. They work, but they work against a lot of properties and cause many of the issues mentioned above.

Good luck with it...you seem set in what you've done and that's fine. For my last comment, I've seen many say what you've said and switch it out for a forward setup. While I know this sport is about pushing limits and creating new setups, they all still need to work on basic properties....anyhow, good luck with it.

Cameron

[thecodeman]

ok? it has nothing to do with air at all, throw coilovers in there and Id still think it was wrong. The main functions of the suspension are being nulled by running the links backwards. Will it work? Maybe. Will it produce a superior suspension? No. A reverse setup offers absolutely no advantage to a forward setup, it does nothing but reduce braking performance, traction qualities, and proper pinion and driveshaft angles.
Two links rule!:head:

[Mike]

You have a nice start going and Id hate to see you mess it up with a bad suspension.

[wickedfab]

ok? it has nothing to do with air at all, throw coilovers in there and Id still think it was wrong. The main functions of the suspension are being nulled by running the links backwards. Will it work? Maybe. Will it produce a superior suspension? No. A reverse setup offers absolutely no advantage to a forward setup, it does nothing but reduce braking performance, traction qualities, and proper pinion and driveshaft angles.

a revere setup allows me to keep the stock tank. i was ganna run a 3 link w/ panhard but i dont like to be a sheep. ;)

so .... let me ask again, do you know how antisquat works???

[wickedfab]

i think i got the suspension thig covered ;)

cant post a pic but heres a link

http://forum.sanjuanrockcrawlers.com/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=530&

[Mike]

so .... let me ask again, do you know how antisquat works???

I have a basic understanding, yes.

[496-TKO]

Nice fab work there!!

[mccustomize]

I am also starting a stockfloor bd, tube chassis on 22's and I WILL be running a wishbone, because I'm not a sheep, why, because it works...

[HAZARDOUS1500]

do you know how antisquat works???

sorry you lost me on that.....could someone let me know what i dont. :aniteef:

[LOWELL]

a revere setup allows me to keep the stock tank. i was ganna run a 3 link w/ panhard but i dont like to be a sheep. ;)

so .... let me ask again, do you know how antisquat works???
So you build a backhalf but your worried about moving your tank? My friend did the same thing a 50-50 with the uppers backwards and it just plain sux. The pinion arc is totally wrong. He has wheel hop. Just a bad design.

[low_clazz]

i say, if you got your mind set on the 50-50 than just go for it...hopefully it wont be a daily driver but if it is who cares? if you like the 50/50 and it goes with the idea you got then sh!t, its your truck! i love that back half and was planning on doing a tubular chassis on my truck now that i got a daily driver! i hope everything works out for the best!

[dapolice1]

I just don't understand why you are doing all that work and can't spend just a little more cash and build/ buy a custom fuel cell to fit on the frame behind the axle.

[Izzy]

i think i got the suspension thig covered ;)

cant post a pic but heres a link

http://forum.sanjuanrockcrawlers.com/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=530&
A rock crawler and a daily driver are 2 different animals. I'd imagine that thing probably has a telescoping driveshaft to compensate for the rearfacing bars.
How many bagged trucks with forward facing bars compared to rock crawlers do you see pull the driveshaft out of the tranny? I bet it would be around 1 in every 200.

[wickedfab]

update....

heres some pics.....

the pinion angle moves about 6 deg in the total height movement. so basicaly the pinion movement is fine....

and all the math on paper says the antisquat should work just dandy...we'll see on that;)

[wickedfab]

:gmcjoe:

[wickedfab]

:eyecrzy:

[wickedfab]

:nopity:

[wickedfab]

:eek:

[wickedfab]

:whatever:

[Jimmy P]

6 degress!! I dunno if id consider that fine....
Honestly the work looks badass but the reverse stuff just kills it for me. I dont care how nice something looks...if it doesnt perform as well, if not better than, stock i cant see the point in doing it. :dunno: but thats just me. I know the amount of work you have in this thing and I can respect that! :cool:

[Low88]

im more worried about the hell that the forward facing links are going to go through with the bags mounted off centered on them. I have seen the beefy ass square ones that jason sells tweak over time because of the torsion applied when lifting and dropping it.

But it looks nice..

[Izzy]

You are GOING TO break those rear bars. The heim faces need to be perpindicular with the ground not parallel just like the rear ones. You'll break them FOR A FACT with the way it's setup now. Those heims attached to the axle will only move a few degrees up with the way you mounted them.

I agree about the round bars, brace them or they will break as well. :read:

[chevy6998]

Antisquat is term (racing) that defines the action of the rear suspension under acceleration, a 4-link would be designed optimally so that when you nail the pedal the power goes straight to the ground, and the rear of the vehicle doesnt "squat down", this is referred to as 100% anti squat and the tires are neither over or under powered. Now a 4-link thats not optimal would produce wheel hop and traction issues if you are + or - that antisquat sweet spot. (pardon the rhyme). As far as the reverse setup goes Its drivin a 4-link vehicle in reverse, not good. And I dont like anything triangulated period (cept for wish bone)!!!!! If all the hiems/bushings/joints are not in the same plane your really stressing **** out. Heims are gonna clack, should have used superpivots, and those bag bars are gonna bend like clay, round bars (columns) have the strongest compressive strength over any other type, but for lateral loads, YOU MUST USE BOX STOCK, my bag bars are 2x4 .25 wall (SUPERBEEF) im not screwing around in that dept!!!! Everyone is talking about the KP 6-link and I think its under built and should have used square stock (I'll never use round). Right now until someone totally reinvents the wheel a GOOD 4-link with a watts for lateral is the best setup out there, and cantilever the bags!!!

ps the work looks good, if its a trailer queen this thread is moot cuz well be in a pissing match for weeks, but if thats a daily youll be redoing it. It all looks great on the shop floor then you drive it, oooopppps. The factory didnt put leafsprings on them cuz they were board!!!! think about this, a 4-link function exactly like stock leafs but has way more mobility and better traction control.

[tony@air ride]

would any of you guys like some advise on this or do you guys want me to just sit quietly here in the corner....?

[thecodeman]

would any of you guys like some advise on this or do you guys want me to just sit quietly here in the corner....?
I like reading your posts tony:D

[ur2hi]

would any of you guys like some advise on this or do you guys want me to just sit quietly here in the corner....?

please teach us tony :worship:

[wkdspd]

well, Ive got the performance end of this suspension down cold and that thing is going to rock like a carriage and hop like a rabbit, Tony why dont you jump in here and lay down the pneumatic end of it...

[IH8FORD]

i love reading these posts you actually learn alot. cant wait for tony's post.

[wickedfab]

You are GOING TO break those rear bars. The heim faces need to be perpindicular with the ground not parallel just like the rear ones. You'll break them FOR A FACT with the way it's setup now. Those heims attached to the axle will only move a few degrees up with the way you mounted them.

I agree about the round bars, brace them or they will break as well. :read:

the heims with the missalignments have way more travel than i need. the frame side of the bar has like 25"+ of movement. and thats underestimated.


the lowers are already in the planning of getting braced ;) just had to get it together....

[wickedfab]

like said above im going reverse 4 link because everybody hates it and because "it doesnt work". if it doesnt work ill change it...but thats the oonly way to push to the next level. i have thought,did the math,drew it out etc...everything to get the link setup correct. and even got opinions of others that have built many link setups....

so if its not going to work please explain in detail to make me understand.......

either its ganna be me thats wrong and have to change it and look like a butt....or its ganna be all you guys thats wrong...?????....lol... well see in the next few days....but thats really the only way to learn .....right???? is to try things etc.....

[Smithers]

well, i dont know much about how this isnt gonna work, but i know that ive been told its not so great...i think it looks awesome, and if it does work, i gotta hand it to ya. I'm not gonna doubt you, but you can be our little guinea pig.
:gmcjoe:

[Izzy]

the heims with the missalignments have way more travel than i need. the frame side of the bar has like 25"+ of movement. and thats underestimated.


the lowers are already in the planning of getting braced ;) just had to get it together....
If it works for you that's fine but that's not how those heims are intended to be mounted.

[Jimmy P]

like said above im going reverse 4 link because everybody hates it and because "it doesnt work". if it doesnt work ill change it...but thats the oonly way to push to the next level. i have thought,did the math,drew it out etc...everything to get the link setup correct. and even got opinions of others that have built many link setups....

so if its not going to work please explain in detail to make me understand.......

either its ganna be me thats wrong and have to change it and look like a butt....or its ganna be all you guys thats wrong...?????....lol... well see in the next few days....but thats really the only way to learn .....right???? is to try things etc.....

im just curious what kind of math you did to come up with a reverse link

[wickedfab]

im just curious what kind of math you did to come up with a reverse link

figure out the cg..pretty much guestimate..then where you want the ic..then you pretty much have the angles of the links then built the mounts accordingly... :wink:

[thecodeman]

Hmm. Even Air Ride Technologies says reverse anything sucks....

"What about "reverse" 4 links? What happens when you run the bars backwards?

NO NO NO!!! By the way, did we say NO?! It doesn't matter what the truck magazines say... DO NOT run the 4 link bars backwards! Here's what happens... When the top bars are run backwards, the diverging arcs of the upper and lower bars will create such a massive pinion angle change that under extreme amounts of suspension travel, you may actually pull the driveshaft out of the transmission! If you want to see this effect for yourself, get a sheet of pegboard and a couple of yardsticks... simulate the scenario for yourself. The second effect of running the upper bars backwards is completely screwed up handling dynamics. With a normal 4 link, when you hit the brakes, the suspension geometry wants to lift the rear of the vehicle... therefore trying to "plant" the rear tires and assisting the braking action. When the upper bars are reversed, this dynamic is eliminated or even reversed... when you hit the brakes the suspension actually unloads the tires thereby massively reducing available braking performance. This is not our opinion... it is simply physics.

We don't know who thought up this "backwards" 4 link stuff but apparently it was originally used to provide clearance for an airspring sitting on top of the lower bars that pointed to the front. The truck magazines picked it up, the readers took it as gospel, and the rest is history."

[wickedfab]

Hmm. Even Air Ride Technologies says reverse anything sucks....

"What about "reverse" 4 links? What happens when you run the bars backwards?

NO NO NO!!! By the way, did we say NO?! It doesn't matter what the truck magazines say... DO NOT run the 4 link bars backwards! Here's what happens... When the top bars are run backwards, the diverging arcs of the upper and lower bars will create such a massive pinion angle change that under extreme amounts of suspension travel, you may actually pull the driveshaft out of the transmission! If you want to see this effect for yourself, get a sheet of pegboard and a couple of yardsticks... simulate the scenario for yourself. The second effect of running the upper bars backwards is completely screwed up handling dynamics. With a normal 4 link, when you hit the brakes, the suspension geometry wants to lift the rear of the vehicle... therefore trying to "plant" the rear tires and assisting the braking action. When the upper bars are reversed, this dynamic is eliminated or even reversed... when you hit the brakes the suspension actually unloads the tires thereby massively reducing available braking performance. This is not our opinion... it is simply physics.

We don't know who thought up this "backwards" 4 link stuff but apparently it was originally used to provide clearance for an airspring sitting on top of the lower bars that pointed to the front. The truck magazines picked it up, the readers took it as gospel, and the rest is history."


yesyesyes lol

ummmmmm again....the pinion does not change..it will not pull the drivline out of the tranny...if its designed right the pinion is cool....im not sure what designs you have seen ????mine works quite well

the planting of the tires and the truck unloading under braking is called antisquat and antidive....thats where you figure the cg...center of gravity...and is...instant center...and you will come up with as...antisquat...and the rc...roll center...is where the trianulation in the links occurs...

so again if its wrong...please explain how it will be effected...instead of just saying its not going to work...i cen give you specs if you want,,....link lengths...mounting heights..angles etc...then you can tell me how its not going to work....

[Mike]

I thought when you plot out the links to determine stuff you need to find a point following along the top and bottom links to where the come together. Where is the point if the links point in opposite directions?

[tony@air ride]

I had this big ass reply written out and then when I went to post the damn thing I deleted it........ Oh well here we go again......
Ok man.... the first thing I have to do is give you props on the fab work. Obviously I am not there but from the photos, it looks b1tch man! now onto to tech happy stuff :)
First thing is first.... the first thing that I would change would be to pull the upper bars and face them forward. When ever you have two bars forward and two bars reverse you have created two converging arcs. With your converging arcs attaching at two points on your rear end you are going to end up with excessive pinion variable. Excessive pinion variable will lead to ill handling traits, premature drivetrain component failure and vibration because you can not effectively get driveline cancelation. Now another thing you can not do with this type of set up is plot any kind of an instant center. A reversing the bars also tends to reverse the load path of the vehicle under acceleration and decelleration due to the pick up points of the chassis. So realistically your IC, AD, and AS, is out the window.......
The next thing I would change would be the pivoting plane of the heim ends. Even though your typical heim end will give you 20 degrees of articulation, the main problem with the angle of plane that yours are in is that you are going to drastically reduce the life of the heim end because through normal suspension travel you have a the bearing surface almost constantly exposed to the elements. Once it gets contaminated the teflon or kevlar lining is going to wear like pig. Really though, if this were a street diven vehicle, you should change those out for a poly or rubber bushed rod end.
The next thing which is also concerning the rod ends is the location at which they are attached to the rear end housing itself. Your two attachment points for both your upper and lower bars on the axle need to be respectively within the same vertical plane as each other. The way yours is on the back side of the axle tube, roughly 90 degrees from your lower mount is more than likely going to cause you problems down the road. Is what you will probably experience is the axle tabs ripping off or bending. Due to excessive rotation of the axle, your load path, instead of traveling through the bar to the frame mounts will be directed towards that joint. Also by moving that close in relation to the lower bar, you will amplify the deflection value of the heim ends.
Again man..... not hear to preach or to bash ya man, I could even care less on who's stuff you are running.... I am only trying to help you out. Also think of it this way. Why would you go through the work of making that sexy back half and then compromise the suspension just to stick the ugly stock tank back in there?

[Jimmy P]

yesyesyes lol

ummmmmm again....the pinion does not change..it will not pull the drivline out of the tranny...if its designed right the pinion is cool....im not sure what designs you have seen ????mine works quite well

the planting of the tires and the truck unloading under braking is called antisquat and antidive....thats where you figure the cg...center of gravity...and is...instant center...and you will come up with as...antisquat...and the rc...roll center...is where the trianulation in the links occurs...

so again if its wrong...please explain how it will be effected...instead of just saying its not going to work...i cen give you specs if you want,,....link lengths...mounting heights..angles etc...then you can tell me how its not going to work....

you said the pinion changes 6 degrees in an earlier post!

-Your front lower bars are not strong enough to support the bags...they will bend.
-the rearward bar axle mount joints are mounted incorrectly. The way you have them set up is equivalent to trying to open a house door by prying the bottom of it toward the roof. They were not designed to pivot that way and will not last. I cant even see any benifit at all to mounting them the way you did.
-as the axle moves up and down the front bars are pulling the bottom of it forward and the back bars are pulling the top of it backwards. This is not good.
-I understand that you are trying to be different and prove that this will work and is better than a standard forward facing setup but its like trying to prove that the earth is a cube...its just not going to happen. Physics prove that your method is not a correct suspension setup. Ever wonder why no street cars, race cars, street rods or anything that is professionally set up for similar conditions that your truck will see run reverse links? Dont you think of all the engineers and professional designers someone in the past 100 years would have used that setup if it worked correctly?

[thecodeman]

Reverse mounted tri-canti two links rule too :head:

[lowryder99]

hey codeman, do you think you can build me a 1 link? Like just one huge metal bar welded to my diff? That way I only have to buy one bag and valve and then I can finally afford to do air!

PS. Wickedfab, your work looks great, just hope you take some of these guys advice, tony is hella experienced!

[TBdeaux]

Dude, I'm not here to complain about the 4link being reversed, but you frame idea is rockin dude! I love how the frame is under the axle. I've seen one truck like that, but the frame was flat with the rest of the truck's frame. Mad props to ya on that.

[Beyond Static©]

Dude, I'm not here to complain about the 4link being reversed, but you frame idea is rockin dude! I love how the frame is under the axle. I've seen one truck like that, but the frame was flat with the rest of the truck's frame. Mad props to ya on that.


Haha, I posted that under dad's s/n. :twak:

[chevy6998]

update....

heres some pics.....

the pinion angle moves about 6 deg in the total height movement. so basicaly the pinion movement is fine....

and all the math on paper says the antisquat should work just dandy...we'll see on that;)
I could be wrong but if the pics with the shocks are the truck when its airred out, what happens when it get airred up, wouldnt the shock collapse at ride height and then be extended when its layed out, that the way it looks because the frame is below when it lifts it drive towards the axle thus collapsing the shocks? anyone else see it?

[chevy6998]

heres why reverse top bar dont work
http://img201.exs.cx/img201/6611/dannysilverado40br.jpg

[Beyond Static©]

I could be wrong but if the pics with the shocks are the truck when its airred out, what happens when it get airred up, wouldnt the shock collapse at ride height and then be extended when its layed out, that the way it looks because the frame is below when it lifts it drive towards the axle thus collapsing the shocks? anyone else see it?


yep, youre correct. I was noticing that too when he posted pics. I wonder how that affects ride quality?

[ur2hi]

it will not pull the drivline out of the tranny

i know 2 people whose driveshafts have fallen out because of there reverse 4 links

[wickedfab]

I had this big ass reply written out and then when I went to post the damn thing I deleted it........ Oh well here we go again......
Ok man.... the first thing I have to do is give you props on the fab work. Obviously I am not there but from the photos, it looks b1tch man! now onto to tech happy stuff :)
First thing is first.... the first thing that I would change would be to pull the upper bars and face them forward. When ever you have two bars forward and two bars reverse you have created two converging arcs. With your converging arcs attaching at two points on your rear end you are going to end up with excessive pinion variable. Excessive pinion variable will lead to ill handling traits, premature drivetrain component failure and vibration because you can not effectively get driveline cancelation. Now another thing you can not do with this type of set up is plot any kind of an instant center. A reversing the bars also tends to reverse the load path of the vehicle under acceleration and decelleration due to the pick up points of the chassis. So realistically your IC, AD, and AS, is out the window.......
The next thing I would change would be the pivoting plane of the heim ends. Even though your typical heim end will give you 20 degrees of articulation, the main problem with the angle of plane that yours are in is that you are going to drastically reduce the life of the heim end because through normal suspension travel you have a the bearing surface almost constantly exposed to the elements. Once it gets contaminated the teflon or kevlar lining is going to wear like pig. Really though, if this were a street diven vehicle, you should change those out for a poly or rubber bushed rod end.
The next thing which is also concerning the rod ends is the location at which they are attached to the rear end housing itself. Your two attachment points for both your upper and lower bars on the axle need to be respectively within the same vertical plane as each other. The way yours is on the back side of the axle tube, roughly 90 degrees from your lower mount is more than likely going to cause you problems down the road. Is what you will probably experience is the axle tabs ripping off or bending. Due to excessive rotation of the axle, your load path, instead of traveling through the bar to the frame mounts will be directed towards that joint. Also by moving that close in relation to the lower bar, you will amplify the deflection value of the heim ends.
Again man..... not hear to preach or to bash ya man, I could even care less on who's stuff you are running.... I am only trying to help you out. Also think of it this way. Why would you go through the work of making that sexy back half and then compromise the suspension just to stick the ugly stock tank back in there?


tony thnx for the props...and thnx for your 2cents...with the links oppposite ways your right about the arcs making the pinion fawked. but the way it is designed at ride height the pinion doesnt move ...well maybe 1 deg or so...until its almost layed out..then it goes up like you imagine...about 6 deg off of ride pinion angle...but im not going to be driving at speed layed out.;)

so with that solved we move on the the heims...imho heims sawk ass...yes they will wear out but not because the way they are mounted...just becuse of being weathered....we'll see how long they last. with the teflon or whatever is inside of them...they will see ummm lets say5000lbs of force..i have no idea but its a wild guess.....thats 5k of force wearing out the teflon no matter what way they are mounted right??? the ball will move in the cup the same either way they are mounted.... do you kinda understand my logic... ???? either way they still sawk..

i kinda understand what you are sying about the mounting...with the upper on the tube and the lower 7 " under there is ganna be more force on the upper than lower under accelaration....its beef tho should be fine...i kinda compare building thisa to rockcrawlers...if it lasts on a crawler with 42s..60s..and a sbc...it should handle a basic street driven truck that sees no abuse..just dd...

so on to the as,is etc....

so lets say the links point forward at 10 deg down...mounted directly on the axle tube about 3" abouve the center line...under accelaration its ganna pull that link up at 10 deg...with a link going back angled up at 10 deg...the axle is ganna push that link up 10 deg..same plane as the foward mounted link..???
so im my theory its ganna work???am i worng and if so can you please explain this in detail..???

and for the gas tank...the stainless one is in the works;)

[wickedfab]

Dude, I'm not here to complain about the 4link being reversed, but you frame idea is rockin dude! I love how the frame is under the axle. I've seen one truck like that, but the frame was flat with the rest of the truck's frame. Mad props to ya on that.

thnx bro

[wickedfab]

I could be wrong but if the pics with the shocks are the truck when its airred out, what happens when it get airred up, wouldnt the shock collapse at ride height and then be extended when its layed out, that the way it looks because the frame is below when it lifts it drive towards the axle thus collapsing the shocks? anyone else see it?

yup thats the way are setup....im running rancho 9s....shoule be cool....if not ill get some shox i can revalve

[wickedfab]

heres why reverse top bar dont work
http://img201.exs.cx/img201/6611/dannysilverado40br.jpg

umm i dont get it????looks cool to me even tho the pinion is a little steep....
the joints look close to the same so there shouldnt be a huge vibe...???

i dont know about the notch tho???unless im missing the frame going under.

i have a few customers that run 26 deg of driveline angle at speed and its cool....my cruzah is at 24 deg with a 24" shaft and its cool...

[wickedfab]

i know 2 people whose driveshafts have fallen out because of there reverse 4 links

that sawks....

[dapolice1]

I won't ever knock anyone for trying something new. Just take everyone's advise for what it is and WHO they are and go on. I am in agreeance with them on this issue, but I have been at odds a time or two.

There are in SOME cases where you can OVERengineer something, and by the same measure there are times you can OVERbuild something to compensate for the lack of specific engineering values.

On yours I am in agreeance with the reverse being a bad design for a daily driver. What these guys are telling you is that you will have MAJOR issues with longevity of your parts. The Heims will wear at an increased rate because they are at an overextended angle to begin with. They are designed to occasionaly go to one extreme or another, but you have them at an extreme all the time.

In the end it is yours and you have to be happy. I would like to see the 24 degrees pinion angle. If someone is driving at that angle they are an idiot. I just wanna be there when they drop a driveshaft at 70 mph. Or worse it come through the floor. GM recommends zeroing out pinion angles or a MAXIMUM of 3 degrees.. Your playing with fire if your driving one greater than that.

[tony@air ride]

tony thnx for the props...and thnx for your 2cents...with the links oppposite ways your right about the arcs making the pinion fawked. but the way it is designed at ride height the pinion doesnt move ...well maybe 1 deg or so...until its almost layed out..then it goes up like you imagine...about 6 deg off of ride pinion angle...but im not going to be driving at speed layed out.;)

Sure.... if the truck remains static at ride height your pinion angle will never change. I have a program that plots four links out and the least amount of pinion variable I have ever come up with through a nominal 5.5" travel was 12 degrees. That is completely unacceptable. So you may want to double check your measurements. Remember that even average daily driving will require a minimum of 5-6" of suspension travel. That is about 3.5" of compression stroke and 2-2.5" of extension stroke.

so with that solved we move on the the heims...imho heims sawk ass...yes they will wear out but not because the way they are mounted...just becuse of being weathered....we'll see how long they last. with the teflon or whatever is inside of them...they will see ummm lets say5000lbs of force..i have no idea but its a wild guess.....thats 5k of force wearing out the teflon no matter what way they are mounted right??? the ball will move in the cup the same either way they are mounted.... do you kinda understand my logic... ???? either way they still sawk..

You are right, on a street driven vehicle heims are not a great idea to use on any of your locating bars. I am only expressing to you that the direction you have them mounted and the direction that they are pivoting you will be seeing accelerated wear.

i kinda understand what you are sying about the mounting...with the upper on the tube and the lower 7 " under there is ganna be more force on the upper than lower under accelaration....its beef tho should be fine...i kinda compare building thisa to rockcrawlers...if it lasts on a crawler with 42s..60s..and a sbc...it should handle a basic street driven truck that sees no abuse..just dd...

Not necessarily, your daily driven truck see's more abuse than one of those trucks and lets face it, rockcrawlers are built to be broken and they are serviced, inspected, components replaced after every run. They are also built to go slow and have but loads of uninterupted articulation with not one building aspect of the truck considered for pavement.

so on to the as,is etc....

so lets say the links point forward at 10 deg down...mounted directly on the axle tube about 3" abouve the center line...under accelaration its ganna pull that link up at 10 deg...with a link going back angled up at 10 deg...the axle is ganna push that link up 10 deg..same plane as the foward mounted link..???
so im my theory its ganna work???am i worng and if so can you please explain this in detail..???

I am not ssure I am getting this here but I think you are refering to plotting your instant center...? If that is right then your anser is no. The reason it does not work like that is because your chassis pick up point is behind the axle thus that is where your load is directed to. So essentially the only theoretical loading the axle will see would be the weight from that point backwards.

and for the gas tank...the stainless one is in the works;)
B1tchin man..... that would be a dogs but if you stuck the factory cell back in there. and now that you are installing a cell, you can turn your upper bars around the proper way :)

[chevy6998]

I was messing with this design into Autocad 2005 (my oocupation BTW), this is for a chevy truck LWB, using the top bars in reverse, much like a watts link, but the bars are all in the same plane and the lateral movement would be controlled by a watts link.

http://img114.exs.cx/img114/6657/reverse12ws.jpg

This second image uses a coventional same length bar parallel 4-link, with panhard or watts or whatever for lateral control.

http://img51.exs.cx/img51/8428/4link14if.jpg


The first design with the reverse bars uses a canti bag over on the bottom bars and gets 16.7" of lift, The pinion angle at the rear rides 1 degree out at ride height and 2 degrees out when truck is layed out, at the tailshaft it runs 11 degrees total through full range (unavoidable in a variable height suspension) but if you do the math and for what Tony said about 5.5" cycle rate for normal driving conditions, the ratio of angle stress is only .6586 degrees per inch of vertical travel (tailshaft pinion)(5.5x.6586= 3.6 degrees)
The wheel base does change 1.66" overall but the tailshaft movement is kept at .46" overall.

Now the second conventional design needs to be bag over axle or soem other bag mount, this example is only shown at 12" of lift. The pinion at the rear angle rides 1 degree out at ride height, and rides 8 degrees out when layed out, and the tail shaft run 10 dergrees through 12" of lift reference to .83 degrees per inch of lift, the wheel base only changes .1166", but the tailshaft changes .86", in any event both tailshaft changes are minimal.

Now I just did this basically for numbers purposes (not arguing that reverse is better cuz look at my previous post) and the placement of bars in the first design are pretty accurate using measurements based on a 1500 LWB, the second coventional design are somewhat arbitrary and the mounting points for the 4-link are high on the frame (couldnt measure a truck at work) but you get the idea of how a parallel creates pinion issues at both ends of the drive shaft. Now Im am suprised at the numbers for the reverse top bar setup, which to me would seem to have better advantages, now I dont know anything about antisquat or roll center for these designs. I just did this for visual purposes, everyone comment as you wish. This is not necessarily in wickedfabs defense but maybe this is why he chose this design the only major differences would be that no heims are used and the mounting points on the axle are correct at 180 degrees center to center vs. 90 degrees. And nothing is triangulated. when you open these picture make sure windows doesnt compress them to you browser and they are at 100% size for clarity!!

[thecodeman]

Hmm.

[wickedfab]

well heres another update.....

its done kinda ...still needs the finishing touches on the bed,,,,,

the reverse tri 4 link works fawkin killer...drives better than the leafs,,,no wierd axle wrap or hop....driveline vibrates a tad.....but i havnt adjusted it yet to be at the correct angle...i have no worries boiut that,,,,...

so to all you not believers...........all i have to say is hahaha...it works,,,

:word:

[Jimmy P]

well heres another update.....

its done kinda ...still needs the finishing touches on the bed,,,,,

the reverse tri 4 link works fawkin killer...drives better than the leafs,,,no wierd axle wrap or hop....driveline vibrates a tad.....but i havnt adjusted it yet to be at the correct angle...i have no worries boiut that,,,,...

so to all you not believers...........all i have to say is hahaha...it works,,,

:word:

as long as you are happy with it

[belmont]

good for you.

[Toolman]

It works but for how long? This is kind of like the post from the guy that got cheap bags. Only to post a week later that he blew a bag.

Only time will tell if it REALLY works. :read:

[Beyond Static©]

It should work fine for him. If you've seen some of the local crap I've seen that holds up, this reverse 4link will be fine. It may not handle the best, but its by far nicer than a ghetto welded 2link.

[chevy6998]

Well, if anyone read my earlier post, if the numbers are right it could work very well, assuming the heims were changed and the axle mounting point were changed, the only thing you cant do with a Z-link setup is hit sides, which is the fatal flaw to the design (opposite converging arcs), since the axle itself rotates to stay inline with the drive shaft, when one wheel is down and the other is up binding would occur much like a two link, no im sure it would flex well enough to handle day to day drive occurances, especially better than a two link, and that raises the question of what is more important in a linked suspension, full unbinded articulation, or the perfect pinion angle. I read a book on circle track race car suspension design, and the z-link is a very popular setup. any who good luck, I geuss there has to be a COLUMBUS for everything, lol.