Thread: Rearend links- 4 link, 3 link, parellel, angled???

Tweet

I want to tell all you how much I am digging this discussion. You all are really helping me work through this. Much thanks. Couldnt have done it without you.

Ok, enough of the mushy stuff.

These 5 pictures show the suspension in 3 positions.
Full bump.
Full droop.
Ride height. (which is at 1/3 bump, but sounds like I need to set it up more like 1/2)

I have these shocks. They are QA1 adjustable. 17" eye to eye with 5.5" of travel.

I can change any of this and so far it sounds like I need to change-
1. shocks to be at 50/50 or close
2. The legnth of the rocker????
3.????

The rocker has no collisions or binds.
I am comfortable with 5.5" total wheel travel (full droop to full bump)

Ok, Techinspector, get crackin! I want a full report on my desk in the morning...... or the afternoon......... ok, by friday ...... or whenever.

"I have these shocks. They are QA1 adjustable. 17" eye to eye with 5.5" of travel."

17" eye to eye what? extended? compressed? halfway?

"I am comfortable with 5.5" total wheel travel (full droop to full bump)"

You can have 5.5" or 6" or whatever you want. You just have to build the proper ratio into your rocker arm and make the arm long enough to prevent acute angles and decreasing spring rates on bump.

17"eye to eye fully extended with 5.5" of travel making them 11.5 eye to eye fully compressed.

I have to think about that " and make the arm long enough to prevent acute angles and decreasing spring rates on bump" part. Not sure what I would change.

So----wouldn't it be simpler to just mount the shock to the rear axle in a more normal matter????? seems like it would fit

I see. With a longer reach on the rockers, the pushrod and shock stay closer to being inline with the travel of the rear end.

"No acute angles". Duh, now I get it.

Jerry, At this point I just might. The reason for moving the shocks to this location and using all this mechanism was to put the shocks in a place that had room for them and then have room for a watts link. Today I will take a look to see if I can impliment Techinspectors revisions, but will also take a look at going back to the shocks in the rear of the axle with a panhard bar.

I am known to make things overly complicated once or twice. But its allways cool.

Is there room to put the shocks in front of the axles and still use a watts? Maybe put the watts link behind the rear end housing? Hard to tell from here without seeing what you have to work with room wise.

I have started the watts link, and I think there is room for the shocks in front. Going to work that out and see what I can come up with. Not a lot of room for the shocks too behind the axle.

I guess a Watts is cool, and limits lateral displacement of the rear axle to virtually nil. However, a 30" Panhard bar would allow only 0.104" displacement at full extension or compression of the suspension (2.5" each way.)

While I believe that Panhards are less than optimal, I'm firmly convinced they're far from an abomination (sorry Tech . . . just had to . . .).

They're commonly used and work very well on street driven cars with minimal suspension travel.

Not saying you should use one - just a thought.

Just a little update and a big THANK YOU to all who participated in this thread.

I have been grabbing a couple hours here and there and have the frame mounts made and will be starting on the rearend brackets tomorrow. It all is looking good and I will get some pics up soon.

Here is a couple pics of the progress.

Nice pics looks real good there. I am impressed with the time taken on the frame rails. Might want to look at using a bigger notch bar though. LOL

I got it together and checked travel, pinion angle and shock travel. Everything looks good.
No panhard or watts yet, Still trying to decide. I would preferr a Watts.

Lookin' good dog.