Don't want start an Arm debate.... Info Gathering...

[Ted Z]

I would like to go to mid length or long arms... I am at about 6.5" lift.

I like claytons kit very much, it looks like a nice setup.

I am going to make this myself i want to use johnny joints at one end and rubber or urethane at the other.

Looking for pics and info on what to do and not to do.

I in no way want this to become a "do or don't" thread.

 

[CRASH]

If you are VERY confident in your welding skillz, and your materials, I would use two lower arms mounted at teh centerline of the axle tube and one torque arm mounted to one of the old UCA mounts (I would prefer the pumpkin mount because of it's strength).

This will yield good travel, but will change teh pinion angle as the suspension cycles. If I were to build a "mid" arm design, this is what I would do.

For a true long arm (around 36" arms) I would use two main lowers and kick one upper off of the drivers side lower to the OEM UCA mount.

For both setups, I would use JJ's all the way around, since their is zero bind in both designs, and you REALLY don't want the thing flexing under braking.

CRASH

 

[Neil]

What about HIEM's

 

[Beezil]

Ted....

consider running only one upper.....

this is an exaggeration of the push-pull forces acting on the axle tube at work during stuff/droop cycles.....

most folks have a knee-jerk reaction to thinking that a heim joint solves this, it cannot.....I know you have a good visual mind for mechanics, so I'm sure you'll have an understanding of whats going on.

more pics to follow.

 

[Beezil]

some pics for your enjoyment.....

 

[RCP Phx]

You want to use all rubber bushings in front so they can reduce the binding issue.You can use JJ's for the frame mounts.Heres a good write up!Im building mine as we speak!

www.xjworld.4wdriver.com/longarm.htm

 

[Beezil]

rubber would solve the binding issue, yes, I mean, that what ford did on their radius arms, but for a suspension design to REALLY cycle with high-articulation, my personal opinion is to totally eliminate the binding by only running one upper.....constructed correctly, one upper will be plenty strong to maintain the configuration, and when you are done wheeling, throw in the other upper as if it were a swaybar disconnect device.....using "hard joints" like heims and J-joints, you don't have to worry about the "give" that would come from hard acceleration/deceleration forces.....IMHO, the best of both worlds....

oh yeah, ted.......I forgot to add.

long arms suck!

 

[ZPD]

I was going to post my website but RCP Phx already did.
Thanks RCP Phx!
My set up has worked flawlessly. My 12" shocks limit my travel.
Don't believe everything Beezil says. He is just an webslut anyhow J/K Beez

 

[RCP Phx]

, my personal opinion is to totally eliminate the binding by only running one upper.....constructed correctly, one upper will be plenty strong to maintain the configuration, and when you are done wheeling, throw in the other upper as if it were a swaybar disconnect device....

I agree with that,my buddies Ford has a "scissor"setup in his passenger side radius arm.You just pull the pin and away you go!

 

[REDXJ4FUN]

Well i just put my long arms on easter weekend. I did two lowers and one upper off the stock pumikin mount. The flex is unreal it maxs out my rock crawer shocks and my rubicon brake lines. The main problem i have seen is the fact that if you don't have the mount in the right place on the lower it will cause the pinion angle to change since lower arm will rotate since the super flex joint has so little bind in it. I'm going to move it as well as re doit to use a cut down spring bushing in staed of the RE adjustable uper that is on there right now. I need to work with it to balance out the front and rear on the trail it flexes alittle to muchh and easy compared to the rear.

 

[FarmerMatt]

The bind is not necessarily a bad thing. having some torque force transferred from one side to the other AKA sway bars can help the suspension work more balanced front to rear AKA Currie's antirock bars. With the Ford radius arms the bushings help to do this. I was running stock rubber bushings & found that the body control of my rig was dictated solely by the rear springs (at least that's the way it felt). The front end would flex all over the place, but if a rear tire went onto a tall rock the whole rig would lean over with it. I solve my front to rear balance issue by installing stiffer poly bushings in the front radius arms. This seems to transfer enough load to the other side on my rig to balance it out nice. This is all seat of the pants feels better to me stuff, but it's a little more food for thought.

Matt

 

[REDXJ4FUN]

I'm working on my own version of curries antirock for the xj. i'm trying to decide what bar to start with since i don't have a bunch of money to blow on this project.

 

[RCP Phx]

Your already wasting your money!Several guys out here have tried the Currie setup.You cant have the "Best of both worlds, only a piece of each".When setup for articulation they offer almost no antiroll,when setup for antiroll they limit articulation.Disco's are easier,cheaper,and work better!

 

[FarmerMatt]

Anti roll & balance are 2 totally separate & distinct concepts although they can overlap. The goal is to balance the rig so that the front works with the rear rather than one having more control on the body than the other. The easiest way to picture it is on a ramp. Drive up it forward with the drivers tire. The tire stuffs the passenger front droops & the drivers rear comes off the ground. The passenger front isn't pulling down on it's side hard enough to make the passenger rear compress enough to keep the left rear on the ground. a perfectly balanced rig should lift the pass. front & drivers rear at the same time. Now this isn't a perfect science & climbing angle, weight transfer, & uneven terrain have great effect over how this works, but I like how my rig feels better with more sway control in the front than what it did before. Flex is a non issue. I still limit out the 9012 ranchos just like before. The difference is in the amount of force needed to limit out the shock & the amount of force transferred to the other side. The antirock is only a tuning tool. Balancing can also be done by playing with different spring rates, but setting the bar to the next hole in the antirock bracket is much easier than have custom springs built. You also can get away with running a softer spring yet generate enough load top the other side to mimic a much stiffer spring.

Matt

 

[jalehman]

I agree completely with Farmermatt. Most of the Cherokees on the trail seem to have about 75% of the flex coming from the front end. From the drivers seat, rigs like this feel awful. I got softer rear springs and stiffer front springs. Feels very balanced now.