rear leaf spring idea

[shizza-my-nizza]

I like the idea of getting more articulation by mounting the rear leafs farther inboard but I don't like the idea of the loss of stability that is associated with doing so. So I was wondering if you guys think would happen if the rear leafs were mounted with rear eyes inboard and the front eyes in aprox the stock location. Do you think a system like this could give me more flex in the rear suspention with less loss of stability?

or am I just asking for trouble?

 

[Economos]

Im wondering what makes you think you can't achieve more wheel travel with the leafs in their stock mounts? What is your current setup and why do feel it doesn't flex enough?

From the looks of it in my mind, this is something that you wouldn't wanna do but that's about as much insight as I can lend. Maybe somebody who can better explain will chime in.

 

[Jared]

Nope.

 

[shizza-my-nizza]

Currently I am running RE1462's they work fine, I am just trying to get ideas together to do something slightly different with my next buildup. I will be building a 95 on full widths. Maybe I am just having a brain assgas: but if someone could try to explain why a setup like this would be a advantage or disadvantage. TIA

 

[Eagle]

Just as using longer shackles nets a lift equal to half the added length of the shackles, by moving one end of each spring inboard you move the axle mounting point inboard by half the amount (approximately) that you move the end of the spring. You will still reduce stability, just not as much as if you moved the entire spring inboard by the same amount.

Then there's the fact that the springs would be working at an angle to the axle. I would expect some binding at the shackles.

Doesn't sound like a great idea to me.

 

[Jared]

Using full width axles with the stock leaf spring locations will do the same thing. Either way, the spring is farther from the end of the axle, thererby increasing wheel travel.

Jared

 

[RobertF]

The binding of this un-parallel set up under compression and droop will limit articulation, not increase it.
The width of a leaf spring is what resists the twisting of articulation. The wider the leaf, the harder it is to twist it, much like a built in sway bar.
I wonder what a 2" wide leaf pack would articulate like compared to our 2 1/2" packs?

 

[gearwhine]

I can only see that helping as a sort of triangulation to help the axle stay centered under the car under hard turning...maybe for race cars...? However I've never seen race cars do it before...and I'm sure someone has thought of it before. But for offroading...I'd say just ditch it. _nicko_

 

[MaXJohnson]

big time binding at both ends of the leaf. You will always see semi-eliptic leafs mounted parallel to each other unless you come up with some sort of swiveling mount to replace the spring eyes.

 

[OT]

big time binding at both ends of the leaf. You will always see semi-eliptic leafs mounted parallel to each other unless you come up with some sort of swiveling mount to replace the spring eyes.

Would a Revolver shackle fit the bill?

 

[Ed A. Stevens]

Be aware that you will alter the roll axis angle, resulting in axle steer and potential binding between the two leaf packs (desirable in 60's era funny cars, but not seen anywhere else).

 

[massxj]

i would think that with the springs mounted like that as the move they would try to get wider at the perch when compressed and would not move much or break somthing and the other way around for droop