Relocation cones

[Patchy]

Hi ppl im in the process of lift and fitting longer travel shocks to my 110 defender while getting every thing together I notice there are polycarbonate relocation cones aswell as the normal steel one.

just wanting to get ppl thoughts on the poly cones if anyone has run them things im thinking is they must be lighter so if the inverted one are used fitted to the diff its got to be better for unsprung weight increasing on road driving plus they claim to be quieter.

Only thing I can think of they may get damaged easier so just wondering what ppl might think?

Cheer Brian

[isuzurover]

Do yourself a favour and just retain the springs top and bottom. Cones are for posers.

[Patchy]

Haha not that helpful my understanding is if the landrovers are able to flex like they can why not let them flex. Leaving tyres on the ground instead of floating in the air increases traction aswell as stability this with an ATB diff should be able to get me just about anywhere I want to go. So ill be a poser if that helps haha :p

[Wicks89]

Hey Patchy don't worry about the haters.

I used the Terrafirma hardware, including steel cones etc. In retrospect I think the Gwynn Lewis stuff is better, I have no experience with the poly cones.

The steel stuff isnt heavy enough to worry about and as far as noise goes, it is noisy but poly cones won't change it. 20% of the noise is the spring contacting the cone and the other 80% is the spring unseating/reseating. The poly cone wont change any of that. You can hear a disconcerting 'Twang' when it unseats if the spring is a snug fit in the top bracket, the cone wont change that either, as it's the spring itself 'twanging'.

Know what I mean?

Gwynn Lewis and TF both have the spring retained at the bottom, FYI. For me it all came down to price. I bought each component individually over a few months at the best price I could find. But I think hardware kits come pretty cheap.

[isuzurover]

Haha not that helpful my understanding is if the landrovers are able to flex like they can why not let them flex. Leaving tyres on the ground instead of floating in the air increases traction aswell as stability this with an ATB diff should be able to get me just about anywhere I want to go. So ill be a poser if that helps haha :p

If you see landies (or any other vehicle) with dislocation cones in action you will notice they are jerky and unstable when dislocating/relocating.

A dislocated wheel has no ground pressure. If you compared 2 identical (unlocked) landies, except that one had dislocating cones and one had the same coils fully retained, the dislocating landie wouldn't get any further, and may even be worse. Retaining the rear coils causes the front to work harder which gives more balanced travel.

In short - dislocating coils are for RTI ramp queens. You won't see dislocating suspension on a serious offroad competition vehicle.

[nat p]

hay mate,

Just installed lewis copies, the hook versions, The rangie keep popping out the springs, on the extreme stuff, We are running Procomp shocks and dobison progressive springs, nothing fancy but the shocks have huge travel. The set up is amazing, really happy, AND drives like my daily rangie. We have retained them on the bottom. We run twin lockers as well, just incase.

I'm new to the dislocation cone thing, Will let ya know when we go out next how it goes.

cheers nat

[Wicks89]

Sorry for the hijack here but:

"If you see landies (or any other vehicle) with dislocation cones in action you will notice they are jerky and unstable when dislocating/relocating.

A dislocated wheel has no ground pressure. If you compared 2 identical (unlocked) landies, except that one had dislocating cones and one had the same coils fully retained, the dislocating landie wouldn't get any further, and may even be worse. Retaining the rear coils causes the front to work harder which gives more balanced travel."

Acknowledge what youre saying about dislocated wheel with no ground pressure, thats accurate. But the fact that the wheel is on the ground provides you more stability, and in a similar situation a vehicle without as much travel is going to have that wheel in the air; which means that the only thing that will get you past that point is lockers. I'd take a dislocated wheel on the ground over wheels in the air any day.

[Patchy]

My thoughts are the same and I understand that the tyre thats dislocated wont have much force on it and will try to spin but still better than 2 feet on the air im looking at fitted ATB's front and rear so this small amount of traction should be enough to engage it in theory and when its not tracation control should help the rest...

also thanks ill have a look at the gwynn lewis gear seems to get good reveiws.

Cheers Brian

[Vern]

Have a look at the Mega flex cars like grimaces, psimpson etc...all retain there springs.
Check out the superior engineering front arm thread. Mine are now retained, makes the front work more.
Dislocating springs definitely look cooler:D

[modman]

Any muppet can make the a frame rear of a Landy flex a 12" shock
Making/forcing the radius front to flex 12" is the challenge
Dc

[rrturboD]

I went for the X-Eng X-Springs which retain pressure on the ground, without dislocating anything ... seem to work a treat in rough conditions.

[Wicks89]

Just had a look at those X Eng units. genius Idea. Do you relocat the shocks to run them on the front?

[Patchy]

I went for the X-Eng X-Springs which retain pressure on the ground, without dislocating anything ... seem to work a treat in rough conditions.

Cheers mate glad you came along just done a bit of google these look the go best of both worlds only neg ppl say is they can be a bit noisy once full of crud but cones get the same rep so a little more savings and these should sit nicely in the deefa just wish exchange rate would get better... But until then I'll retain my springs

cheers Brian

[rrturboD]

I initially bought a set for rear of my RRC, along with the raised shock mounts, which I raised further,
(see http://www.aulro.com/afvb/modified-zone/200991-raising-top-shock-mounts.html)
and a set of poly bump stops (I cut them down) plus and long travel shocks.
The combination works extremely well.
(see http://www.aulro.com/afvb/90-110-130-defender-county/121742-show-us-your-flex-10.html)

I have another set for front (along with airbag RRC shock towers and diff housing), but have not yet fitted. My experience with rear means that I may want to extend the shock towers to give complete compression, using close to standard bump stops.

I'd try rear only, then check the improvement prior to doing front as well.

[Patchy]

Haha was just about to ask you about what your doing with the fronts might run cones on front and these on rear and see how it goes and like you change over if I need them. Just waiting on a quote for postage now haha so much for waiting :D

[clive22]

I agree with Isuzu Rover having changed from dislocation cones to flexi coils fully retained at the rear, together with superior flexi arms up front.

Remember the dislocation cones effectively halves your spring rate on the up (return stroke), so the back kicks up and/or rotates about the center ball pivot twice as much with cones compared to located rear springs. The improvement in ride & stability is compelling.

Locating both ends improves the ride and stability off road, forcing the front to flex more - hence the superior arms so it respond to the increase in cross axle rotation. Running 520mm progressive springs rear means no loss of real droop as the rear axle is heavy enough to pull the upper softer lighter coils down.

Choose long springs retained top and bottom for chassis balance during articulation, ride and stability



Clive

[Patchy]

Doesn't this all come down to compromise and what would suit a certain build plan and vehicle use...? My understanding with a soft long spring is yes great articulation and offroad ability with out the use of cones but poor road handling and load carrying ability this is fine for a soul purpose car.

I probably should have clarified what I use my 110 for thats daily work when not in my work ute, weekends gets used down the beach fishing and if the winds are no good for that its find some nice rutted tracks in the hills for a play with the odd long weekend or weeks away loaded up with camping gear getting away from it.

This is why at first i was leaning to cones but have now switched to trying the x-eng x-springs after being told about these done a bit of research and they seem to be the happy middle ground.

Cheers Brian

[clive22]

What you say sounds right on paper.

But I've found that having cones & unretained springs means the whole back of the truck rolls and kicks around and/ or up and down on or off road.

When retained, as the truck rolls when changing direction the outside is tied down with captured springs and this increase in roll resistance forces the front to articulate. This increases vehicle stability over bumps and changes of direction.

I would never go back to cones, even for off road performance.

Clive

[Wicks89]

Well well well,

This thread has turned out to be very interesting. I cant say that I had considered or even ever heard of the X-Eng setup but I think thats where my money would be for best useable flex offroad, though it does seem like the invention of a mad scientist/engineer.

Obviously nor myself or any of the guys on here who are proponents of retained springs are going to just change what we've got based entirely on what someone has said on the internet. BUT I would agree the vehicle can have some pretty jerky characteristics as weight is transferred while moving when using a dislocation kit.

However, I think that the argument for retaining the rear springs in order to force the front to work more is limited. The single best thing you can do to improve flex in the front is use superflex arms or similar, as the actual hardware is what limits the front most when compared to the rear.
So to my mind you're always going to have a mismatch front to rear unless you go down the 3 and 4 link paths.

I wont put **** on someone else's setup but heres why I think my setup works:

My 130 came with some HD 2" springs already in it, so it can be loaded right up and the springs barely deflect, which in my books is a positive. By fitting the dislocation kit it allows me to keep those heavy springs and improve the droop in the rear and the front.
Theres a weight difference front to rear when the ute is unladen, meaning, the front will always sit flatter than the rear when unladen, and retaining my rear spring wont change that, as the weight in half an axle housing and a tyre isnt enough to equalize it.
So what? So I'd rather that rear wheel be in contact with the ground and not free-spinning in the air waiting to shear an axle. though if I'd seen the X-Eng springs Id have those instead of disloc cones.

Anyway, I know that the ride in my 130 is harsh and can be jumpy/bumpy and jerky offroad, but thats the way I like it, and Id rather have the solid springs than soft flexy ones with a sway bar which to me just = more bushes to replace at rego time.

Prepared to admit retained flexy coils probably work better, though I suspect mostly in RRC or Defender 90" setups than in 110 or 130 setups. Interesting to read about the different setups and ideas though, so thank you all.

[nigelbuilding1984]

I used to have cones then I retained top and bottom. Now it flexes an extra 35mm and it makes the front flex more.

[Wicks89]

Nigel,

That's cool but seems a bit like black magic to me :P. Do you mean that since retaining the rear spring it's flexed an extra 35mm?

Surely you've changed other stuff like gone to flexy coils, or changed your control arms as well as retained them?

Cheers, wicks

[Tombie]

My thoughts are the same and I understand that the tyre thats dislocated wont have much force on it and will try to spin but still better than 2 feet on the air im looking at fitted ATB's front and rear so this small amount of traction should be enough to engage it in theory and when its not tracation control should help the rest...



also thanks ill have a look at the gwynn lewis gear seems to get good reveiws.



Cheers Brian


Not how it works..

2 feet on the ground may be more stable - but NOT when dislocated.

That's like both feet on the ground and a broken knee on one leg! :D

Cones are a stop gap fix for mediocre suspension design.

[clive22]

Landrover surely didn't have 12" shocks etc in mind when they designed the suspension, meaning the springs are not ideal located for long travel set-ups.

My preferred method would be to cut, shut & raise (say 50mm) the rear upper spring mounts so longer (& retained) springs could be installed, without the commensurate increase in ride height.

This means pulling off the body and welding up the chassis, which is all doable, but probably only really going to happen when a lot of other things need doing under there.

The object is too keep the rotational stiffness of the F&R axle's similar, ride height gain minimal for the travel and maximum droop


Clive

[Patchy]

Cheers for the help everyone and some good advice in the end I change my setup a bit and am now going to be running the X-Eng X-Spring in the rear and cones on the front for anyone interested the x-springs delivered to my door dont come in the cheapest at $440 but you get that sometimes... at the moment I have the front all fitted up with the cones and rear spring are retained at the mo until I get a present from the post man.

Just on a side note I've got longer brake lines but have been looking for ABS wiring extensions only thing I can find is a disco 2 set my guess is this will be the same as a td5 defender but can anyone confirm that b4 I purchase a set.

Cheers Brian

[ice4x4]

[QUOTE=

In short - dislocating coils are for RTI ramp queens. You won't see dislocating suspension on a serious offroad competition vehicle.[/QUOTE]

These guys seem to do OK....

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Twins%C4%B0kizler-Land-Rover-Discovery-TD5/854108664607137?pnref=lhc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1gkqXNJ2fo

[Tombie]

These guys seem to do OK....

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Twins%C4%B0kizler-Land-Rover-Discovery-TD5/854108664607137?pnref=lhc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1gkqXNJ2fo

One things for sure... They can't drive for **** :cool:

Watched in slow motion, they have a cone or internal bump stop, but I suggest as a precaution rather than articulation - because those very soft coils they're running don't appear to dislocate at all...

Found a 2nd video, they get a little dislocation, but appear to be binding up as they approach max.

Those vehicles are over heavy and unstable anyway with the stupid lift...

[Slunnie]

...

[Slunnie]

These guys seem to do OK....

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Twins%C4%B0kizler-Land-Rover-Discovery-TD5/854108664607137?pnref=lhc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1gkqXNJ2fo
That's a lot of Disco2!!!! Big tyres for LandRover axles!