*NEW* 4-Link Long Arm Upgrade

[winkosmosis]

Personal opinion. Absolutley no advantage over a 3-link, for my use that is. I had a couple of customers interested in a 4-link for Jeepspeed type applications. Where flex isnt such a concern as much as strength at high speeds. Of course 4 links are stronger than 3 in any case. It all depends on what you want to do.

The 4-link utilizes the stock rubber bushing on the UCA axle mounts. This will give enough "squish" to compensate the triangulation fighting with the panhard.

I ran the numbers using the same mounting point location on the crossmember (the LCA mounting point) for the upper and lower arms to simulate a radius arm setup. It came out with 161% antisquat, now that is a high number! You are sure to have unloading issues then. I've found that 90% or lower antisquat numbers can increase wheel hop and make you feel like you dont have a solid connection with the ground.

I'm looking at the CAD images on your website. How come you use the passenger side UCA mount? I've read that it's weaker than the pumpkin UCA mount. And since the trackbar mounts on the passenger side, wouldn't it be better to distribute forces more evenly by using the pumpkin for your UCA?

 

[O-Gauge Steamer]

Looks a lot like the BDS kit but beefier and a removable crossmenber would be nice. I think about that every time I ever have had to take mine apart and use 6 jack stands to hold everything up. Looks like a great design. I am very happy with mine and I am running about 7" of lift and run about 6" of up and down travel.

The BDS crossmember holds the CAs. So,,,,,,, if you have to drop it you are back to all together too many jackstands. I will be getting this just as soon as I can save up my SSDI. Yah, disabled, old, white haired and GRUMPY. Damnit

 

[snowboard3r411]

i personly would like to send you my comanche as a dooner to try this new set up haha. this set up looks sweet

 

[redrider2911]

I'm looking at the CAD images on your website. How come you use the passenger side UCA mount? I've read that it's weaker than the pumpkin UCA mount. And since the trackbar mounts on the passenger side, wouldn't it be better to distribute forces more evenly by using the pumpkin for your UCA?

On the 3-Link it uses a mount that i make on the passenger side, not the stock mount. There are a couple reasons I go on the passenger side... more room away from drivelines. although the stock drivers side mount is stronger I am not personally a fan of the stock rubber joints, I like heims so I made a custom mount on the passenger side. This mount is also the same mount I use for the track bar converesion so less welding needed. As for the track-bar vs control arm, On a 3-link there is no inherent bind between the two so it doesnt really matter what side you mount it on. Some people say the pumpkin side has more torque... This is not true, the side the tires have more traction on has more torque, there for Idealy the perfect single upper mount would be dead center.

Now on a 4-link, I give the option to upgrade the passenger mount or run it stock. I do this for two reasons, the torque is applied at two mounts now so the force is distributed, so that stock upper mount should be alright. Not to mention most guys running short arms still use that stock mount and there is even more force on it on a short arm than on a long arm... Another reason I give the option is because the guys running the disconnect axles actually have a fully cast mount that is quite strong. And lastly, on a 4-link you have to atleast have two rubber or poly joints to take the "squish" caused by the binding that comes with a 4-link, there for it isnt necessary nor suggested that you run heims on both ends of the upper arms so the stock mounts will do.
That was long winded. I hope I answered your question.

 

[redrider2911]

i personly would like to send you my comanche as a dooner to try this new set up haha. this set up looks sweet

As of now it looks like Snyder will be volunteering his rig since he lives in the area. After we test everything out the product will be available for purchase. I appreciate your interest.

 

[snowboard3r411]

As of now it looks like Snyder will be volunteering his rig since he lives in the area. After we test everything out the product will be available for purchase. I appreciate your interest.

oh but its a comanche now come on lol j/k but hey it was worth a try now lol cant wait to see a final product

 

[MG2000XJ]

Will there be some sort of internal bracing on the belly pan?

 

[redrider2911]

Will there be some sort of internal bracing on the belly pan?

Are you talking about something to help the rigidity along the length of it, running drivers to passenger side? The 45 degree bends along the whole length of the crossmember on all sides prove to be plenty strong, this is 1/4" plate. I forgot to take pictures while doing it, but I used a 2 ton floor jack placed under just the tcase skid section and jacked the jeep up until there was no weight on the springs on the drivers side. (If I had a jack that would go high enough I would've jacked until the drivers side tires were off the ground.) This was on the 3-Link crossmember which is close to the same design and there was not any twisting or bending of the parts.
This will protect your drivetrain if and when you came down on rocks and absolutely has no problem supporting the drivetrain's weight.

Thanks for all the questions and interest guys.
I posted this in the modified tech section because there is more traffic... Would half of you guys give your input if I put my future products in the "product development" or "vendor advertisements" sections?
Just curious. :dunno:

 

[snowboard3r411]

Heck ya man and give some love to the Comanches lol a rear 4 link would kick ass.

 

[sunburned]

Are you talking about something to help the rigidity along the length of it, running drivers to passenger side? The 45 degree bends along the whole length of the crossmember on all sides prove to be plenty strong, this is 1/4" plate. I forgot to take pictures while doing it, but I used a 2 ton floor jack placed under just the tcase skid section and jacked the jeep up until there was no weight on the springs on the drivers side. (If I had a jack that would go high enough I would've jacked until the drivers side tires were off the ground.) This was on the 3-Link crossmember which is close to the same design and there was not any twisting or bending of the parts.
This will protect your drivetrain if and when you came down on rocks and absolutely has no problem supporting the drivetrain's weight.

I'd throw a brace or two in there anyway, it's worth it just for the extra strength. My TNT belly pan is 1/4" plate too and braced heavily on the inside, but I've still put some good dents in it from hard drops. Remember, on the east coast we have lots of tall pointy rocks that like to get up into the undercarriage and screw things up, so the stronger the belly armor, the better.

 

[87manche]

Heck ya man and give some love to the Comanches lol a rear 4 link would kick ass.

well, I have the option of a 4-link because there's a fuel cell in what's left of the bed. Stock Comanches would likely have to have a three-link in the rear to clear the fuel tank on the driver side. And you'd have to find a way to package a panhard in the back. Likely something from the passenger side frame rail to the drivers side of the axle.
Definitely would have to get rid of the stock load sensing valve, it's all in the way.

 

[redrider2911]

Someone come drop off their comanche for a month or so and Ill get it done and on the market. The most I have done on a comanche was a friend of mines. He bobbed the bed and cut off the rear lights, after getting frustrated with it not starting after that he gave me a call and after looking around I guess your ground is worked into your rear light assemblies some how. lol 4-Link might be a little more difficult though eh?

 

[87manche]

Someone come drop off their comanche for a month or so and Ill get it done and on the market. The most I have done on a comanche was a friend of mines. He bobbed the bed and cut off the rear lights, after getting frustrated with it not starting after that he gave me a call and after looking around I guess your ground is worked into your rear light assemblies some how. lol 4-Link might be a little more difficult though eh?

Yes, the fuel pump grounds through the drivers tail light harness.

My junk could sit at your place for a month. Where are you at? Bear in mind that it's not stock, but the frame is untouched from the rear axle forward, and you can clearly see where the tank was, it was the larger tank, so if you can clear the 23 galon, you can clear the 18. Also, it's a LWB MJ, the SWB MJ has a different rear frame part. Probably more SWB wheelers out there than LWB wheelers. Since it's been described as a land yacht or schoolbus repeatedly.

 

[MG2000XJ]

I'd throw a brace or two in there anyway, it's worth it just for the extra strength. My TNT belly pan is 1/4" plate too and braced heavily on the inside, but I've still put some good dents in it from hard drops. Remember, on the east coast we have lots of tall pointy rocks that like to get up into the undercarriage and screw things up, so the stronger the belly armor, the better.

My thoughts exactly, if I bought it I'd throw in my own bracing if it was not an option.

 

[redrider2911]

Yes, the fuel pump grounds through the drivers tail light harness.

My junk could sit at your place for a month. Where are you at? Bear in mind that it's not stock, but the frame is untouched from the rear axle forward, and you can clearly see where the tank was, it was the larger tank, so if you can clear the 23 galon, you can clear the 18. Also, it's a LWB MJ, the SWB MJ has a different rear frame part. Probably more SWB wheelers out there than LWB wheelers. Since it's been described as a land yacht or schoolbus repeatedly.

PM sent

 

[redrider2911]

My thoughts exactly, if I bought it I'd throw in my own bracing if it was not an option.

Ill see what I can work out, there isnt much room for cross bracing without losing clearance. You guys are just trying to drive the price up. lol I havent heard anyone complain about the lack of bracing in RE or RC skid plates and crossmembers so I didnt think there was a customer demand, and I havnt had any issues with mine... It is all about the customer being happy though right.

 

[snowboard3r411]

Lol I have a stock short bed and a long bed u can have both lol

 

[Boostwerks.com]

:hint: 4-link rear kit :hint:

 

[redrider2911]

:hint: 4-link rear kit :hint:

lol Around here alot of the guys like the stability from leafs in the back. Sidehills and such... So I havent taken the time. You know, R & D moneys and other factors. What would you like to see? what dont you like? Something that would have to incorporate with this crossmember or seperate mounts? Im guessing your wanting a triangulated 4-link, dont know if there is room for a double triangulation.

Let me know your thoughts guys.

 

[Goatman]

antisquat describes the suspensions performance under acceleration. Higher anti squat number means more pressure the suspension puts onto the tires, hooking them, but a too high anti squat ends up with wheel hop and really bad suspension manners when you "unload" the suspension. It becomes very apparent in hilclimbs and such.

This means something in the rear, it means almost nothing in the front. For the front what matters is anti-dive, related to anti-squat but deals with how the suspension reacts to hard braking. The 3 link calculator doesn't mean much for the front........or at least it doesn't mean enough for most to have any idea of what the numbers mean.