Articulation

[blitz]

Rather than looking at a lift per se, I am looking at the maximum articulation I can get out of my 93/4 disco. Currently it is set up for towing but as I really am not doing that anymore with her I want to get better ground contact in more extreme situations.

Any ideas?

it has a 2" lift, and I am running 275/75/16's under her, no offset rims ior flares but they are coming.

I am also looking at caster corrected radius arms for her.

Also are rose joints legal?

[nicho]

If you have the cash QT have what looks like an awesome set up for big articulation but I'm sure a few guys on here could tell you how to do it cheaper with hilux shocks and patrol this and that..

[frantic]

2 suggestions:
Have a look at gwyn lewis in wales(u.K) i got his front and rear dislocation cones, rear hooks which catch the spring and +2in shock mounts. What this does is raise or increase the length of shock you can put in without losing your upward movement. You end up going from the standard 8in travel landie shock to a 12 in travel shock, i used OME 60070L which are a cruiser front shock for a 3in lift in them. i also used dobinson/suspension stuff springs but you already have that covered.
Normally if you fit a longer shock to a standard mount you must fit bigger bump stop blocks which restricts upward travel but with raised shock mounts you get both directions. Terrafirma have coppied some of gwyn lewis's stuff but is not the same quality.;)
Another option is to use an X-spring set up with longer/relocated shocks.
Also look at front/ rear driveshafts double card. or wide angle.

[uninformed]

#1, what determies articulation.....alot of things, but the biggest thing is the links and there geometry, NOT the springs or shocks...they are more for controling the springs. As you have a Disco 1 you will have radius arms + panhard up front and trailing arms + Aframe at rear. The rear is very flexy. The front is ok but is restricted to about a 10-12inch travel shock....Bushes: in the front the best IMO is to run Superpro at the chassis end of radius arm and OEM rubber at axle end....Castor correcting bushes rob articulation so rule them out...as for cranked RA you may be better using the stock arms and slotting the swivel housings and rotating to return the castor....the pinion angle will be better doing this. In the rear the trailing arm bushes at chassis end will be binding a little at stock height and worse at +2inch...this is where cranked arms are a good idea. Get them with some adjustment in the length and you can dial in your pinion angle. Once agian IMO Superpro at chassis and rubber at axle. Aframe is fine as is and I run Superpro at chassis. A good quality ball joint, like the MR Automotive adjustable/greaseable is a good idea.

setting the travel, Up and down and where they max out: Up travel will be determined by your front tyres at full lock at full stuff and seeing where they rub components....this is where bumostops and springs come into play. bumpstops will stop the axle going further up (remember to allow at LEAST 30mm for the rubber to compress under a heavy landing/bump) but make sure your coils are not "bound" ie fully compressed BEFORE the bumpstop is touched. Same with rear, look for rubbing...cutting may be an option.

Spring rates will allow different tunes to what you like as will shock valving. Longer shocks will need new towers as the closed length will probably be too long when at full up travel and stuff the shock. The rear shock mount at chassis is at a horrible angle....look at the disco 2 rear mount, this is a better angle.

longer brake lines will probably needed.

IMO is all about balance....no point having 3 inches of travel in the front and 30 in the rear...I prefer retaind springs for balance and traction.

cheers,
Serg

[wagoo]

A quick and cheap experiment that shows it isn't the std springs and dampers that is restricting front articulation, but the axle end radius arm bushings.
Drive up an articulation ramp or similar until a front wheel lifts, then try it with the right hand front radius arm bolt removed and notice how much further the vehicle articulates before wheel lift occurrs. you might want to disconnect the drooping wheels brake hose bracket from the body mount before doing this though.
While articulating, it would also be worth noting how much more level the vehicles body is.This demonstrates how a balanced front/rear suspension setup can provide greater stability in some circumstances in extreme terrain.
So called holey radius arm bushes can improve articulation to a degree,at the expense of short bushing life.But if noting how far the front of the radius arm that has had the bolt removed dislodges from its hanger during the experiment,this would indicate holey bushes could only make a cmparatively small improvement.
Bloody Hell! it has taken me 45 minutes to type out this post because the 'l' and the 'o' keys on my keypad keep freezing.
Talk about selflessness and dedication to helping out ones fellow man.:angel:
Wag0o.

[blitz]

In no particular order:

Cranked trailing arms sounds good.

longer schockie tower makes sense (and obviously brake lines)

caster corrected radius arms V slotted swivel hubs, I need to research as I dont think I get how slotted hubs can be better? or I am just slow tonight


If you have the cash QT have what looks like an awesome set up for big articulation but I'm sure a few guys on here could tell you how to do it cheaper with hilux shocks and patrol this and that..

So Nicho when I googled QT I mostly got Queensland Time umm can you elaborate?

gwyn lewis, now I hate you :D he is making all the sort of stuff I am sort of thinking of.

the geometry was why I was thinking of the rose joints as they give more movement than a rubber bush

well I will ponder all you have written

[uninformed]

pinon angle: think of how the vehicle is set up stock from the factory....if the front axle articulates or goes into down travel the stock angles for the pinion/Tcase work ...now adding longer springs is just pushing the axle down.....it gets to a point where at about 2.5 + inch lift on the springs you will need a double carden propshaft like in the front of a Disco 2...now rotating the whole front axle so it returns the castor lost due to the spring lift, only worsens the pinion angle and the proshaft wants to bind etc....so leave the RA's and the axle case alone and just rotate the swivel balls back....after all it is the swivel balls with the king pin bearings that set the castor.....

[uninformed]

A quick and cheap experiment that shows it isn't the std springs and dampers that is restricting front articulation, but the axle end radius arm bushings.
Drive up an articulation ramp or similar until a front wheel lifts, then try it with the right hand front radius arm bolt removed and notice how much further the vehicle articulates before wheel lift occurrs. you might want to disconnect the drooping wheels brake hose bracket from the body mount before doing this though.
While articulating, it would also be worth noting how much more level the vehicles body is.This demonstrates how a balanced front/rear suspension setup can provide greater stability in some circumstances in extreme terrain.
So called holey radius arm bushes can improve articulation to a degree,at the expense of short bushing life.But if noting how far the front of the radius arm that has had the bolt removed dislodges from its hanger during the experiment,this would indicate holey bushes could only make a cmparatively small improvement.
Bloody Hell! it has taken me 45 minutes to type out this post because the 'l' and the 'o' keys on my keypad keep freezing.
Talk about selflessness and dedication to helping out ones fellow man.:angel:
Wag0o.


Careful Bill,

doing that creates a very dodgy rig on and offroad....while the body may be more level on the ramp, from everything I have read from those who have done it and also run a single pinned/hinged RA say that they articulate like buggery but are as unstable as the american dollar. These were popular on the ford RA rigs in the USA abot 10 years ago....very few run them now.

[wagoo]

Careful Bill,

doing that creates a very dodgy rig on and offroad....while the body may be more level on the ramp, from everything I have read from those who have done it and also run a single pinned/hinged RA say that they articulate like buggery but are as unstable as the american dollar. These were popular on the ford RA rigs in the USA abot 10 years ago....very few run them now.

You are of course correct Serg. But I was not and never would advocate using a hinged RA or removing a bolt to gain extra offroad flex.Just offering the idea as a very quick and easy means of demonstrating which suspension components are really restricting articulation.After re reading that post I realise I was not clear on that point.
I can't see large articulation improvements being available with std length RAs without reorganising everything.Adapting Glen Dobbins X link design may be an option where space for an upper link for a 3link conversion isn't available.
Wagoo.

[uninformed]

No worries Bill, I think I miss read a little. A guy over on pirate, cut one of the bushes off the axle end of one RA for his rover and re welded it on so it was closer... He seemed to think it worked ok.

[nicho]

qtservices.com its a Uk based company who do a heap for the landrovers they also make the Wildcat a defender based (sort of) Dakar type rally beast



So Nicho when I googled QT I mostly got Queensland Time umm can you elaborate?

[T1ASLAV]

Regarding the flexy type suspension set up one of the lads on here, Gekkos, put the Equipe4x4 stage 1 or 2 kit in his 110 and that flexes unbelievably well on the tracks I tried to follow him on.
I fitted the Equipe trailing arms and an +2 adjustable ball joint to my truck and the difference was amazing although I find now the front will need to be looked at as it is nowhere near as good.

[Bush65]

No worries Bill, I think I miss read a little. A guy over on pirate, cut one of the bushes off the axle end of one RA for his rover and re welded it on so it was closer... He seemed to think it worked ok.
IIRC, that radius arm setup was made by KC and the landie was Bucks, but he eventually went to multi link. I have pics if wanted.

The so called superflex radius arms that are sold in Aus for Nissans improve articulation by the same means - Standard RA on side, closer bushes in radius arm on the other side.

[wagoo]

IIRC, that radius arm setup was made by KC and the landie was Bucks, but he eventually went to multi link. I have pics if wanted.

The so called superflex radius arms that are sold in Aus for Nissans improve articulation by the same means - Standard RA on side, closer bushes in radius arm on the other side.

I have a hybrid that was given to me that I just discovered has a hinged radius arm on the left side with an extra pin to lock it in the normal position.
I haven't really played much with this vehicle as I prefer my portalled Landey, but 'unloading' on offcambers that this modification is often criticised for interests me. Does anyone have any links to discussion on other forums that define the problems encounted with these?
Wagoo.

[uninformed]

there will be plenty on pirate, I would think some in the LR forum and some in the general if not ford forum...they were popular on Broncos over there untill they got wise to the instability...I think Sam aka stranerover has spoken about them some what on outerlimits as he ran one on a RR he had...

[uninformed]

Bill, check this one out...one of many:

Home made wristed arm? - Pirate4x4.Com Bulletin Board (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php't=211891&highlight=hinged+radius+arm)

they also call them wristed arms over there....

in that thread they talk about the difference between the ford design and the LR design ... something about the chassis end sof the RA's on the fords being closer together makes it more "ok" than the rover....Sam mentions some pretty average handling faults offroad with his hinged arm.

[Hall]

My old hybrid has a rangie chassis. Has a 4 link rear. Longer trailing arms with rose joints at the chassis end and standard rover bushes on the axle. Has four shock absorbers on the rear. Two 380 mm travel shocks and standard ones mounted on the trailing arms. Limit straps are also fitted. Taller spring towers and longer springs. To keeps some sort of stability on road a rear sway bar has been fitted. This needs to be disconected any time you are on tracks. Front is a three link with panard arm. Longer radius arms with rose joints and rover bushes, same as the rear. Taller spring towers and longer springs. Only one set of 380 mm shock absorbers. All engineered. Found the rear springs too long and will be soon going to a shorter set with dislocation cones. Front spring are a good length. But need dislocation cones. Has excellent flex. In fact a tad to much. On side angles it want`s to lean way over. Rose joints are of a automotive grade used in racing cars. Found this out when I got the r.w.c Only problem with rose joint are they don`t last all that long and are not real cheap.
Cheers Hall

[rrturboD]

Interested in all your observations and proposals for the front of a RRC.
I setup the rear with x-eng arms and springs, using modified Terrafirma upper shock mounts, and +6" toyo front shocks on rear, plus long brake line. The rear works REALLY well now, so looking to improve the front, although vehicle now goes so much better, maybe I'll put up with following the front wheels and just let the rear do the articulation.

Photo of the resultant flex see http://www.aulro.com/afvb/90-110-130-defender-county/121742-show-us-your-flex-post1464778.html#post1464778

[wagoo]

Bill, check this one out...one of many:

Home made wristed arm? - Pirate4x4.Com Bulletin Board (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php't=211891&highlight=hinged+radius+arm)

they also call them wristed arms over there....

in that thread they talk about the difference between the ford design and the LR design ... something about the chassis end sof the RA's on the fords being closer together makes it more "ok" than the rover....Sam mentions some pretty average handling faults offroad with his hinged arm.

Yeah, well I don't think I'll pull the pin and experiment with it in that case.But a variation on the theme that I saw on a Jeep many years ago was where, instead of the left hand Radius arm being bolted to brackets welded to the axle housing, it was bolted to a concentric sleeve that could rotate around the axle tube. All axle end bushings were replaced with sleeved down less compliant eurathane bushings, so that torque reaction under brakes and accelleration was still constrained by the beefed up brackets on the right hand side of the axle.I don't know for certain but I don't think this setup would produce the same instability that Sam mentioned when attempting to reverse out of a tippy situation.In fact, aside from reduced roll resistance this should behave like a normal radius arm arrangement with the exception that castor angle change with body roll is doubled, as it would be with a 'One Link' or torque tube(Unimog) setup.
Of course this modification if it worked satisfactorily is easier to do on the round seamless axle tubing of the Jeeps Dana front end than it would be to a LandRovers slightly eccentric seamed axle tube, but it is still do able and maybe less work than making a copy of Glen Dobbins X link.
Wagoo.

[Bush65]

IIRC, that radius arm setup was made by KC and the landie was Bucks, but he eventually went to multi link. I have pics if wanted.

The so called superflex radius arms that are sold in Aus for Nissans improve articulation by the same means - Standard RA on side, closer bushes in radius arm on the other side.
BTW this was done many years before the superflex arms.

Pics:
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2012/09/1156.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2012/09/1157.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/08/238.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2012/09/1155.jpg

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2012/09/1154.jpg

[wagoo]

Well, It was going to happen sooner or later, and I couldn't resist the temptation to pull the pin on the wristed radius arm and go looking for trouble. I was lying under the hybrid looking at the arm, trying to visualise the forces,whether torque or gravity induced that would cause the suspension to unload on steep up or downhill off cambers,that could be blamed on the wristed arm and not the lack of roll resistance associated with any type of flexy suspension design. I came up blank.
Now, my property has lots of steep offcambers leading into gulleys and dry water courses, and i have higher than reasonable expectations of what a vehicle should be able to do. I tried everything I could think of to catch it out but failed. I ended up driving along a water course with 45degree banks on both sides and turning sharply right to obliquely climb the bank at an ugly angle until I reached the tipover point at full articulation.Nothing silly happened, so I selected reverse gear and attempted to move.That was when it wanted to tip over, so with the winch of my other vehicle, I pulled the chassis over so that the wrist pin holes lined up, refitted the pin, backed off the winch and noticed the chassis sitting a few degrees more level.I tried reversing again. Same thing happened, propshaft torque wanted to tip it over on the left side. Forward gear, propshaft torque pushes the chassis into the slope. On the Pirate link Serge posted, Sam spoke of the vehicle wanting to fall over when attempting to reverse off an obstacle that he thought he was going to tip over on when driving forward. Based on the results of my fun and games today, IMO it was because the extra articulation allowed the vehicle to obliquely climb the bank until he reached the tip over point.Regardless of the radius arm arrangement, when a vehicle is leaning to the left at the point of overbalancing, then reverse gear propshaft torque will tip it over.

As a funny aside. I tried the same trick with my portalled Landy a bit further along the gully where the bank was a bit steeper and higher because she has a wider wheel track and longer stroke dampers. Unbeknown to me the hose clamps holding the left front spring in place had broken, allowing the spring to fall out on the ground when the left wheel drooped to maximum articulation. All was going well until the left front wheel started climbing the bank, at which point the chassis would lean on the spring.But there was no spring to lean on,so the chassis kept leaning over, until much to my surprise she fell heavily on her side. When I pulled her back on her wheels with the hybrid and refitted the spring and backed off the winch rope, there was no way that I could tip her over by hand again even using the open door as a lever.
My conclusion is that anything we do to gain better front articulation will by necessity reduce roll resistance, and I'm not so certain that the wristed arm is any worse than a 3link, one link or torque tube in that regard.
Wagoo.

[uninformed]

Bill, did you try some steep down hill decents also....sounds like they could have been a problem to?

[wagoo]

By the way, if any of the Melbourne based members here are sceptical of the results below, they are more than welcome to come to my property in Dixons Creek sometime for a repeat test.
Wagoo.

[wagoo]

Bill, did you try some steep down hill decents also....sounds like they could have been a problem to?
Tried everything Serg, left hand down, right hand down,Upside down;)perpendicular to the slope, everything I could think of.I'm quite prepared to damage this vehicle in the name of science:)
Wagoo.

[uninformed]

due to torque reaction of propshaft, would it mater which side RA you hinged?

[wagoo]

due to torque reaction of propshaft, would it mater which side RA you hinged?
I don't think so Serg. As far as I can tell ,hinging the arm merely eliminates roll resistance. I think people do the left arm because they believe the right arm being close to the diff has better control over torque reaction, but to my mind that could only be true if the axle housing was torsionally flexible.
Wagoo.

[Bush65]

I don't think so Serg. As far as I can tell ,hinging the arm merely eliminates roll resistance. I think people do the left arm because they believe the right arm being close to the diff has better control over torque reaction, but to my mind that could only be true if the axle housing was torsionally flexible.
Wagoo.
Bill, do you think the side where the panhard is attached to the axle plays a part?

In the pics of buck's defender that I posted above, kc put the modified radius arm with lower torque resistance on the right side, whereas in a rh drive vehicle I would have done the opposite.

[wagoo]

Bill, do you think the side where the panhard is attached to the axle plays a part?

In the pics of buck's defender that I posted above, kc put the modified radius arm with lower torque resistance on the right side, whereas in a rh drive vehicle I would have done the opposite.

I don't really know John, but the same thing happens with leaf sprung vehicles too. Any vehicle that I've had with right angle drive differentials is more stable exiting the right hand side of a ravine than the left side . I'd be interested to know whether vehicles such as early Merc G wagons and MK Bedfords with contra rotating propshafts go in those situations. Does the torque reaction from the front shaft cancel out the rear?.How about transverse engines front and rear?:cool:
Wagoo.

Edit, sorry John i wasn't concentrating. I honestly cannot see or imagine any forces acting on the hinged arm that could possibly cause either side to unload. aside from lack of roll resistance. Any crownwheel torque reaction at the axle housing would just make the arm 'scissor' a small amount, but there is no jacking force applied by the arm to that side of the truck, either in forward or reverse.

[SuperMono]

Wagoo, I have just realised who you are :)

No wonder you know what you are talking about.

Regards
Stephen
LROCV 709

[wagoo]

Wagoo, I have just realised who you are :)

No wonder you know what you are talking about.

Regards
Stephen
LROCV 709


No Stephen,I'm afraid you are mistaken.I'm not the Messiah. I'm just a very naughty boy.;) According to my wife anyway.:(
wagoo.

[wagoo]

Bill, do you think the side where the panhard is attached to the axle plays a part?

In the pics of buck's defender that I posted above, kc put the modified radius arm with lower torque resistance on the right side, whereas in a rh drive vehicle I would have done the opposite.


John,Something you might like to calculate and discuss.
I was just rethinking a statement on my earlier post, where I said I could not visualise any forces either torque or gravity induced that would cause the wristed arm to unload the suspension on that corner, and I still believe that to be true, the arm is passive aside from for/aft location of the axle But when looking at it from another angle, what forces on an unhinged radius arm contribute to stability? RAs are all about antisquat/antidive.When the front axle is pulling, the torque reaction forces from the axle housing impart a downward force at the radius arm chassis mounting points. The wristed arm on the left can not pull down on its side, wheras the normal radius arm would pull down on the right, so the vehicle should theoretically lean to the right,depending on how much tractive effort the front axle had to contribute to climb a steep offcamber right hand down gradient.Propshaft torque should also contribute to right hand lean. So although not borne out by my earlier tests, I can imagine the vehicle being less stable than with standard RAs in that scenario than the opposite one, where the steep off camber puts the vehicle in a left hand down attitude.In this instance the right side radius arm would pull the right chassis rail down, once again assisted by propshaft torque, but the left wristed arm wouldn't pull its side down which should lead to a more stable situation,compared to standard RAs.
So, is it swings and roundabouts ? And are there any disadvantages compared to an offset(either side) 3 link? And is there a case for putting the wristed arm on the diff side to counter propshaft torque?
Wagoo.

[Bush65]

John,Something you might like to calculate and discuss.
I was just rethinking a statement on my earlier post, where I said I could not visualise any forces either torque or gravity induced that would cause the wristed arm to unload the suspension on that corner, and I still believe that to be true, the arm is passive aside from for/aft location of the axle But when looking at it from another angle, what forces on an unhinged radius arm contribute to stability? RAs are all about antisquat/antidive.When the front axle is pulling, the torque reaction forces from the axle housing impart a downward force at the radius arm chassis mounting points. The wristed arm on the left can not pull down on its side, wheras the normal radius arm would pull down on the right, so the vehicle should theoretically lean to the right,depending on how much tractive effort the front axle had to contribute to climb a steep offcamber right hand down gradient.Propshaft torque should also contribute to right hand lean. So although not borne out by my earlier tests, I can imagine the vehicle being less stable than with standard RAs in that scenario than the opposite one, where the steep off camber puts the vehicle in a left hand down attitude.In this instance the right side radius arm would pull the right chassis rail down, once again assisted by propshaft torque, but the left wristed arm wouldn't pull its side down which should lead to a more stable situation,compared to standard RAs.
So, is it swings and roundabouts ? And are there any disadvantages compared to an offset(either side) 3 link? And is there a case for putting the wristed arm on the diff side to counter propshaft torque?
Wagoo.
For front radius arms, assume we are looking at any (left/right, or normal/hinged) arm from the right side of the vehicle - then vehicle forward direction is left to right.

During forward acceleration front radius arms will be in tension (in order to pull the vehicle from their chassis mounts). To resist anti-clockwise rotation of the axle housing (reaction to torque at the tyres) normal radius arms will pull down on the chassis mounts. If one arm is of the hinged type then the normal radius arm alone must supply practically all of the torque resistance (greater pull down on the chassis mount that side) - hinged radius arms can resist a little rotation by virtue of the resistance to rotation provided by the flexible bush, but this can be ignored for practical purposes.

The hinge joint of hinged radius arms is usually (when made from a stock radius arm) a considerable distance behind the axle housing. Given the direction of the tension force acts along a line from the chassis mount to the hinge, the tension tends to resist the torque on the axle housing when the axle is articulated so the side with the hinged arm has drooped down while that with the normal radius arm is near the bump stop. When the axle articulates in the other direction, the tension in the hinged arm can (depending on suspension geometry) add to the torque acting on the axle housing, and the normal arm then has to provide more resistance (greater pull down on the chassis mount that side).

During axle articulation, if either type of arm is inclined upward from chassis to axle mount (or hinge joint), there will be a component of this tension acting upward at the chassis mount and downward at the axle mount. This will be opposite when the arm is inclined downward - this component will then subtract or add to the downward force on the chassis mount by the normal radius arm.

[farmport]

Just a little trick-haven't seen it in this thread yet so apologise if its already covered.
When raising the rear suspension(like I have on my defender) the A member pulls the top of the diff forward causing more severe tailshaft alignment and the more severe the angle of the A frame gets compared to the tailshaft the worse this gets and the more backwards and forward movements occur with suspension travel. Adjusting diff/tailshaft alignment using adjustable radius arms doesn't change this effect (but does save unis)as the radius arms are so much longer than the A frame.
I found a good compromise was to machine up 4 spacers and use them to raise the A frame ball joint 50mm above the standard mount position on top of the diff.

[uninformed]

Just a little trick-haven't seen it in this thread yet so apologise if its already covered.
When raising the rear suspension(like I have on my defender) the A member pulls the top of the diff forward causing more severe tailshaft alignment and the more severe the angle of the A frame gets compared to the tailshaft the worse this gets and the more backwards and forward movements occur with suspension travel. Adjusting diff/tailshaft alignment using adjustable radius arms doesn't change this effect (but does save unis)as the radius arms are so much longer than the A frame.
I found a good compromise was to machine up 4 spacers and use them to raise the A frame ball joint 50mm above the standard mount position on top of the diff.

good idea, but doing so will raise the roll center and rasie the antisquat %, which has already been raised buy lifting the vehicle with longer springs....what you can do is make an adaptor that rasies the arm portion of the A frame and leaves the ball and fitting at stock postion. you can also make adjustable length trailing arms and dial the pinion angle back in....

[Grimace]

what you can do is make an adaptor that rasies the arm portion of the A frame and leaves the ball and fitting at stock postion. you can also make adjustable length trailing arms and dial the pinion angle back in....

Hey I always have done this to relieve the angle on the ball joint.
It's been a while since I brushed up on my knowledge of suspension geometry but I believe it changes nothing with regards to the suspension geometry or characteristics.
While it seemingly changes the angle of the upper a frame links the points of interest in calculating geometry are all still the same, yeah?


good idea, but doing so will raise the roll center and rasie the antisquat %, which has already been raised buy lifting the vehicle with longer springs...
I prefer the method of spacing down the a frame mounts at the chassis as opposed to spacing up the ball joint mount itself.
Thus lowering roll center and increasing anti squat which seems to work effectively on rovers with the square rear cross member.

[uninformed]

Hey I always have done this to relieve the angle on the ball joint.
It's been a while since I brushed up on my knowledge of suspension geometry but I believe it changes nothing with regards to the suspension geometry or characteristics.
While it seemingly changes the angle of the upper a frame links the points of interest in calculating geometry are all still the same, yeah?

correct, the bushes and ball joint center remain in stock location so nothing changes geometery wise


I prefer the method of spacing down the a frame mounts at the chassis as opposed to spacing up the ball joint mount itself.
Thus lowering roll center and increasing anti squat which seems to work effectively on rovers with the square rear cross member.

While it would increase the antisquat, it would not change the roll center as the ball joint center is still in stock location. I would think raising the AS on a lifted vehicle which will already have its AS raised and if running bigger tyres raised again even more, not be the best idea.....IMO



cheers,
Serg

[blitz]

Just a thought.

with a 2" spring lift does it tension the sway bars? would 2" block under each mounting point bring them back to 'standard'

[wagoo]

Just a thought.

with a 2" spring lift does it tension the sway bars? would 2" block under each mounting point bring them back to 'standard'

No the swaybars are only tensioned with bodyroll/articulation not spring lift, but lowering the mounting points will prevent the swaybar links from running out of travel and overcentreing.
Wagoo.

[Tyresqueal]

No the swaybars are only tensioned with bodyroll/articulation not spring lift, but lowering the mounting points will prevent the swaybar links from running out of travel and overcentreing.
Wagoo.

Agreed - I removed my rear swaybar from my 5dr D1 after fitting a two inch lift as I was finding that the swaybar links would rotate 180 degrees and then bind against the rear spring seat and tear out the rubber bushes. When doing my research on lifts I never heard mention of this happening before so I guessed it was just my setup. I always planned to put in a custom spacer, but now I'm used to the extra on-road roll and appreciate the extra axle movement when off-road, so probably won't bother.

[nicho]

I removed my front sway bar because when flexing I found my front drive shaft was hitting it. I will eventually make a spacer for the sway bar but only when the engineer says its time to test.