which would you buy?

[Frank Z]

I disagree with Frank, I want a modular setup, I do not want to have to drop my front suspension to get to my drivetrain. I am trying to figure out why he thinks it would be a disaster in the making? BTW TNT's new Y-link edition is suppose to be modular as well.................

Your allowed to disagree, I've no heartburn with that at all. Adding a removable section means 2 more areas with a failure potential. No matter unlikely it seems to you (in general) the potential is there. A single piece cross member makes more sense to me...and I'm putting my name on the finished product.

Dropping my cross member is simple. Chock the front tires, remove the bolts for arms at the cross member and pull them down about 2-3 inches. Remove the cross member mounting bolts....done. No need to remove any front end components at all.

 

[Skully]

Your allowed to disagree, I've no heartburn with that at all. Adding a removable section means 2 more areas with a failure potential. No matter unlikely it seems to you (in general) the potential is there. A single piece cross member makes more sense to me...and I'm putting my name on the finished product.

Dropping my cross member is simple. Chock the front tires, remove the bolts for arms at the cross member and pull them down about 2-3 inches. Remove the cross member mounting bolts....done. No need to remove any front end components at all.

I see where for those building a long arm system utilizing the cross member area might worry about strength. However your OE cross-member is held up with those same 4 bolts with no problems.

The XJ's are the only Jeep I have seen where most of the long arm upgrades utilize the tranny cross member for the mount points. Albeit the uni body is quite week compared to other models with a much stronger frame. My CJ I plated the side and welded on the control arm mounts directly to the frame, big difference with strength. With the right design on an XJ you can make the mounting points structurally strong enough to ensure strength of the whole setup. That is why I was interested in Poly performances mounting points. A crossover of frame strengtheners and mounting for a four link setup.

Ultimately Frank, you got a nice setup on your design and for strength. I just still do not see why you are were so convinced that a modular design to aid in servicing your tranny easier is weaker.

 

[Frank Z]

I'd have to completely redesign the mounting for the arms., and use thinner material on the arms in order to bend them for optimal geometry.

The first set I built had the frame side mounts directly below the frame rails. This meant greatly reduced clearance. I also had to angle the bushing sleeve on the axle end to get a proper fit. this meant that the arms were not perpendicular to the axle since the frame side joints were more outboard than the axle side. Fine on the road, but it did bind up a bit when articulating.

I'd also have to make a separate bolt on t-case skid. As it sits right now the skiplate can support the entire vehicle weight without bending.

FWIW, my design does not rely solely on the stock cross member mounting locations. It can be installed by anyone with basic hand tools, a drill, and a means of removing the existing LCA mounts.


I think we got off track here, my apologies to the OP.

 

[RZOSETH]

I've come down hard, (really hard) on my ArmZ, and on my cross member. All I've done damage-wise is remove paint.

I run your arms frank and this is about all that has happened to mine. a video of me on youtube has me droppin down cleveland rock hard on the tcase skid and it just got scratched.

i dunno, i think if youre gonna build it, BUILD IT.
if ya wanna know hows its gonna effect your daily commute, just leave it stock, ya you can build something that is good for daily driving and wheel the fun stuff while still being safe and capable, but who gives a rats ass, go all out and just do the damn thing, get some dents, remove some paint, test the damn thing out.



but thats my mentality/.02, and well, noone really cares lol

i like this get dents/ remove paint thing. i do this all the time!

to the OP
tnt is nice yes but i would go local. go with frank he helped me out tremendously. the ride quality of his set up on the road/trail is amazing. ive wheeled my jeep hard on penrose, holy cross, chinamans, spring creek etc. the past year and his kit is lasting longer than most of the other parts on my jeep lol just my .02 i vote for the longarmz! oh and im partial to rubicon express for springs and alcan for leafs!

 

[in4aride]

That's the pic I was trying to find skully!!!
The poly mounts are great and leave you open to just about any option for belly pan. And you can pull the upper pass. side link at trail head then toss it back on when done. It's a great bracket setup!!!

 

[Rockken]

I see where for those building a long arm system utilizing the cross member area might worry about strength. However your OE cross-member is held up with those same 4 bolts with no problems.

The XJ's are the only Jeep I have seen where most of the long arm upgrades utilize the tranny cross member for the mount points. Albeit the uni body is quite week compared to other models with a much stronger frame. My CJ I plated the side and welded on the control arm mounts directly to the frame, big difference with strength. With the right design on an XJ you can make the mounting points structurally strong enough to ensure strength of the whole setup. That is why I was interested in Poly performances mounting points. A crossover of frame strengtheners and mounting for a four link setup.

Ultimately Frank, you got a nice setup on your design and for strength. I just still do not see why you are were so convinced that a modular design to aid in servicing your tranny easier is weaker.

The mounts are vulnerable with this type of setup. My heeps setup has the LCAs mounts hanging under the subframe and I've come down hard on the driver side and bent it. And before you say it, my heep has been subframed from front to rear.

 

[jdxj]

Ultimately Frank, you got a nice setup on your design and for strength. I just still do not see why you are were so convinced that a modular design to aid in servicing your tranny easier is weaker.

I think that Frank is just simply saying that he will not build one. I tend to agree with him. But the plain and simple point is that if he don't wana make one he don't have to. No need to argue with him he ain't gona change his mind if he doen't want to build one thats his right!

 

[Skully]

The mounts are vulnerable with this type of setup. My heeps setup has the LCAs mounts hanging under the subframe and I've come down hard on the driver side and bent it. And before you say it, my heep has been subframed from front to rear.

You mean you think Poly's frame strengthener / arm mounts is weak or the fact the mounts are hanging down below the frame? Most of the long arm upgrades for XJ's hang down below the frame. Just beefy mounts................

Agree the XJ needs some plating / frame strengtheners to make it not so vulnerable. I have a frame crack I had to brace and strengthen couple years ago after I discovered my XJ was rear ended in its lifetime.

Sometimes I miss my solid frame..........................

I think that Frank is just simply saying that he will not build one. I tend to agree with him. But the plain and simple point is that if he don't wana make one he don't have to. No need to argue with him he ain't gona change his mind if he doen't want to build one thats his right!

Who was arguing?

He made a statement saying the modular sub-frame is weak and I wanted to know why in his long experience with XJ's why he thought that. In the end it is easier to make a super beefy sub-frame and the amount of time spent designing a modular setup that would be strong enough is not worth it or the cost. Yes, how often do you have to remove you tranny as Chris said unless you got hit by the bad luck train.................:looney:

Back to the OP, Loren, before you take your mild mannered XJ to the extreme get some of the basics (rocker guards, Franks are really nice, and a locker) out of the way first and see what you need next then move to the long arms.

 

[Frank Z]

He made a statement saying the modular sub-frame is weak and I wanted to know why in his long experience with XJ's why he thought that.

You misunderstand my comment.

I'm refering to the risk of hardware failure from a shear vs.tension standpoint. I simply don't want to build a crossmember with that possible failure mode built into it.

I never said that module designs were weak, I'm commenting on my design only.

There are pro's and cons to every design out there, mine included.

 

[xjcase]

Loren, whatever you end up going with - just know that you've got some free help puttin' it together anytime

 

[loren mcclellan]

Oh I totally agree....and a clutch.... that lil trip we did made a difference in how my clutch feels now... so clutch, u-joints, and a lock right and sliderz are the next move (hopefully I can find a job and get this done before next spring):dunno:

 

[loren mcclellan]

Loren, whatever you end up going with - just know that you've got some free help puttin' it together anytime

right back at ya bro.... I enjoy it, but not by myself... I'm to old and fat for that !!!!!:laugh3: BTW... did the springs finally settle into the grommets ok?

 

[ColoradoRaptor]

There's nothing for me to prove. I won't build a multi-piece cross member because the risk of failure is a risk I'm not willing to take. Others might, I won't.

Back to the original topic.

Everything is a risk, including getting out of bed! Saying something is a risk is a matter of personal opinion until proven otherwise!

 

[Frank Z]

Read the entire thread Ira.

 

[Starboard M]

Personally, I'm happy with 4 attachment points at the axle vs. 3.

What about the two frame mounts on a radius arm versus three or four on multi link suspensions.... ?

a 4 link is all good times too, just impartial to y-link

What drove you to that conclusion? Why such hate on radius arms for a beginner looking for a basic long arm setup? What kind of measurable gains will someone on 33s and one locker gain going from an easy off the shelf radius arm to a custom 3 link?

Thousands of people run radius arms with great success.

i think its funny eveyone here with their horrid luck and the bad situations....
a y-link attached to the xmember, you bend the xmember you move the bottom linkm but oh wait, the upper link is attached to the bottom link, now the whole thing is in jeopardy. do you run a risk of being screwed if your one upper link fails on a 3 link, yes, thats why you carry spares, and one piece of dom or a few heims is a lot easier to carry and replace than an entire ylink setup.

true 4 link or 3 link or dont waste your time

Who the hell carries spare links? Show me one person who has bent a well built link and needed to swap it on the trail. Please dont show me a guy who bent a .188 walled 1.25''OD links.

The black and white of it all is that none of our beloved lifted XJ's is street legal. If the State Legislature ever got serious about enforcement of altered suspension........ we'd all be fawked.

Wasnt that ruled to be unconstitutional, and altercations are now allowed? I seem to recall a huge thread about that on CO4x4 a couple years ago.

The mounts are vulnerable with this type of setup. My heeps setup has the LCAs mounts hanging under the subframe and I've come down hard on the driver side and bent it. And before you say it, my heep has been subframed from front to rear.

That right there is my biggest beef with most long arms offered for Cherokees. RE, RC, IRO, Franks and countless others all mount below the frame and I couldnt imagine trying to wheel with them.

For a DD/Weekend warrior I would go with Franks arms because he is local and makes a good product. If you find yourself wanting something more in an off the shelf package go with Treks.




This summer I finally found just how scary the radius arm unloading was, and will be doing a front suckdown winch before I do anymore waterfalls! oopspants:

 

[Frank Z]

What about the two frame mounts on a radius arm versus three or four on multi link suspensions.... ?

9/16" bolt through 1/4" plate with a generous amount of edge distance on either side of a massive TeraFlex Joint....I'm okay with that.

 

[YELLAHEEP]

Originally Posted by YELLAHEEP
The black and white of it all is that none of our beloved lifted XJ's is street legal. If the State Legislature ever got serious about enforcement of altered suspension........ we'd all be fawked.

Wasnt that ruled to be unconstitutional, and altercations (I think you meant "alterations") are now allowed? I seem to recall a huge thread about that on CO4x4 a couple years ago.

I believe the law was essentially de-criminalized, but it's still on the books as justification to charge "Operated an Unsafe Vehicle".

Basically, if you get into an accident with a vehicle with altered suspension and the accident investigation can even loosely tie the cause of the accident to the altered suspension....... it'd serve as grounds to decide fault, deny insurance claims, provide grounds for civil suit...... it could get ugly.

 

[xj-grin]

Wasnt that ruled to be unconstitutional, and altercations (I think you meant "alterations") are now allowed? I seem to recall a huge thread about that on CO4x4 a couple years ago.

I believe the law was essentially de-criminalized, but it's still on the books as justification to charge "Operated an Unsafe Vehicle".

Basically, if you get into an accident with a vehicle with altered suspension and the accident investigation can even loosely tie the cause of the accident to the altered suspension....... it'd serve as grounds to decide fault, deny insurance claims, provide grounds for civil suit...... it could get ugly.

Its C.R.S. Section 42-4-233, and yes it has been determined to be unconstitutional, in that the "flat prohibition against any motor vehicle suspension system alteration... is unconstitutionally overbroad." People v. Von Tersch, 505 P.2d 5 (1973). That case is specifically cited in the annotation of the statute. While the notes for the statute indicate a 1975 revision and a 1994 revision of the statute, the language appears virtually identical to that in the Von Tersch case that was deemed unconstitutional. The Von Tersch case remains good law, having been cited only once since its entry, in People v. Sequin, in which the court distinguished the State's regulation of vehicles assembled from parts as being appropriate, as opposed to regulating modification of a vehicle by an owner, which remains unconstitutional.

While I don't think an unconstitutional statute would figure prominently in an insurance investigation, there is no question in my mind (as a former insurance adjuster) that the insurance company would try to pin liability on faulty modifications if it could.

/hijack.