Flex from suspension

[HAK]

I notice yesterday at the expo that the equip defender rear spring was not connected to the chassis rail it obviously guides back into position where the car is level I was wondering does Disco do the same :o

[PAT303]

you can buy cones that direct the coil back to position,I am going to get some for my fender.The disco's the same. Pat

[Bush65]

Given shockies with enough travel, the axle can droop enough for the springs to dislocate. With long travel some use cones to guide dislocated springs bach into place.

Dislocating springs is good on travel ramps but not so good off road.

IMHO it is better to retain both the top and bottom of the springs. You can still get long travel, but at max droop the spring is stretched beyond it's free length.

Retained springs offer greater stability. Much better on side slopes than dislocated springs.

They also make the flex front and rear better balanced. Retained springs induce more flex in the front and reduce the body lean.

With front radius arms and dislocating springs, most of the flex is in the rear and the body leans over more, with the front axle (bad on cross slopes).

[jessie_xa]

TRY HERE i have purchased a set for front and rear works bloody well
http://www.paddockspares.com/pp/OFF_ROAD/HD_Suspension_Parts/Rear_Disclocation_Cones_(pair)._To_fit_Defender_11 0.html

they also do lots of other stuff as well. when buying in make sure the purchase is under $1000

[Tusker]

Given shockies with enough travel, the axle can droop enough for the springs to dislocate. With long travel some use cones to guide dislocated springs bach into place.

Dislocating springs is good on travel ramps but not so good off road.

IMHO it is better to retain both the top and bottom of the springs. You can still get long travel, but at max droop the spring is stretched beyond it's free length.

Retained springs offer greater stability. Much better on side slopes than dislocated springs.

They also make the flex front and rear better balanced. Retained springs induce more flex in the front and reduce the body lean.

With front radius arms and dislocating springs, most of the flex is in the rear and the body leans over more, with the front axle (bad on cross slopes).

x 2.

Did you notice the 90 near the Equipe car. Scorpion Racing stuff, all the flex was coming the rear, almost none at the front. For after market kits these two vehicles couldn't have been a better contrast.

Regards
Max P

[Guru036]

x 2.

Did you notice the 90 near the Equipe car. Scorpion Racing stuff, all the flex was coming the rear, almost none at the front. For after market kits these two vehicles couldn't have been a better contrast.

Regards
Max P

x3

Thats why on my Series II/Defender The springs are captured front and rear. And with a 3 link setup in the front I get even travel front to rear, very stable.

[HAK]

Mmmmmmmm so its not a good thing so it better to have longer softer spring that are attached :o

[spudboy]

x3

Thats why on my Series II/Defender The springs are captured front and rear. And with a 3 link setup in the front I get even travel front to rear, very stable.

Tell me more about the three link setup on the front.....

[isuzurover]

x 2.

Did you notice the 90 near the Equipe car. Scorpion Racing stuff, all the flex was coming the rear, almost none at the front.

A retained rear often forces the front to work more, which is a good thing.

[discowhite]

A retained rear often forces the front to work more, which is a good thing.

so does the right spring rates!
http://inlinethumb54.webshots.com/3829/2990336000100509853S425x425Q85.jpghttp://inlinethumb60.webshots.com/5435/2163104250100509853S425x425Q85.jpg
http://inlinethumb27.webshots.com/3354/2043275580100509853S425x425Q85.jpg

yep dislocated springs are absolute crap dont even go there!!!!!
i really wish ide left the sway bars on! just dosnt work at all:angel:

cheers phil

[isuzurover]

so does the right spring rates!

yep dislocated springs are absolute crap dont even go there!!!!!
i really wish ide left the sway bars on! just dosnt work at all:angel:

cheers phil

My point was the design of the rear is a lot more amenable to articulation than the front - so most coillers (d2 excepted) have much better rear travel than front - regardless of what spring rates you have.

I bet if you secured both ends of your coils and drove through that again, there would be little or no difference to overall travel, but the front would be flexing a bit more than it is.

Some people like dislocated springs - fine - IMHO they make a landie less stable on side slopes etc.

Who said anything about sway bars???


Btw - nice 90

[dobbo]

so does the right spring rates!


yep dislocated springs are absolute crap dont even go there!!!!!
i really wish ide left the sway bars on! just dosnt work at all:angel:

cheers phil


Your right Phil, but now you've completely wrecked the car, I know you wont be happy until you have a stock standard car. Tell you what. I'll be generous offer you $1001.50

[discowhite]

My point was the design of the rear is a lot more amenable to articulation than the front - so most coillers (d2 excepted) have much better rear travel than front

i agree 100%
the comparrison between a 3 link front an a std rover setup is like chalk and apples!
the front of a rover has so many binding points its hard for it to flex. my front at the moment is limited by the tyres stopping on the shock towers.



I bet if you secured both ends of your coils and drove through that again, there would be little or no difference to overall travel, but the front would be flexing a bit more than it is

i have but not with the current setup. i did it when it had standard springs and longer shocks, honestly i couldnt tell the differance except for the banging sound on relocation:eek: maybe the noise was resetting my brain.



Some people like dislocated springs - fine - IMHO they make a landie less stable on side slopes etc.


i own a 90 im used to unstable;)



Who said anything about sway bars???

my attempt at sarcasim.....dobbo got it:angel:

cheers phil

[Guru036]

No one said that dislocated couldn't be setup to work well, Just the D90 with the scorpion kit isn't. All rear flex.

Yours has been setup well and spring rates look to be spot on(going by the photo). Would be interesting to see how more balanced it would be with the rear captive. But as you said its hard to get much more travel out of the front end design

Here are some pictures of my car during testing. I run a 3-link with panhard rod in the front end and 3-link with A-frame in the rear. I was running standard Range Rover front springs front and rear, but now use 1" lift versions in the front but standards still in the rear

[HAK]

i agree 100%
the comparrison between a 3 link front an a std rover setup is like chalk and apples!

cheers phil

whats this 3 link business I,ve hear 4 link but whats 3 :eek:

[mcrover]

The main problem with dislocating springs is with stability on side slopes but the other thing is that there isnt really much advantage with having you wheel hanging down unloaded as as soon as it has drive it will lift and you will get very little drive from that wheel.

Yes it looks good with that much flex but it's not much real advantage off road.

Well there's my 2 cents worth..:D

[Bush65]

whats this 3 link business I,ve hear 4 link but whats 3 :eek:
A free body (in space) has 6 degrees of freedom. Translation in three directions (x,y,z) and rotation about 3 axii (xyz).

An axle needs to be restrained to have only 2 degrees of freedom. 1 translation (vertical movement) and 1 rotation.

4 links are required to restrain the other 4 degrees of freedom.

What is generally referred to as a 3 link, has to have a 4th link, which is the panhard rod. BTW some people erroneously call radius arms plus panhard, a 3 link. A radius arm is not a link - by defenition a link can only resist a force aligned with it's axis (clearly, a radius arm can resist axial plus rotation at 1 of it's ends).

The 3 link plus panhard has 2 lower links (like the rear lower links of a rover), a single upper link (which may be offset to clear the engine) and the panhard.

The offset of the upper link can be designed to counter the torque roll when climbing a hard obstical (can be the difference between rolling or not).

Alternatively, some front, 3 links have 1 lower link, 2 upper links and a panhard. The disadvantage of this arrangement is the single lower link has to resist high compressive loads when braking in an emergency.

When braking the front lower links are in compression and the upper links are in tension. For equilibrium, the compression force in the lowers is equal to the braking force plus the tension in the upper link.

Edit
The radius arm front suspension resists more than 4 degrees of freedom (over restrained). They only work because of give in the bushes. As soon as the bushes stop flexing the suspension binds. This is why the front suspension does not articulate as well as the rear.

4 link plus panhard suffer the same problem, but the total flex of the bushes can allow more articulation than radius arms.

A good, triangulated 4 link can be designed without any handling or articulation problems, but is difficult to get the geometry of upper links right with the engine in the way.

The good thing about radius arms is, they can be designed for good anti-dive during braking. A 3 link plus panhard can be designed for the same amount of anti-dive. With 4 link plus panhard, it is more difficult to get good ant-dive and good articulation (depending on the bushes).

[HAK]

A free body (in space) has 6 degrees of freedom. Translation in three directions (x,y,z) and rotation about 3 axii (xyz).

An axle needs to be restrained to have only 2 degrees of freedom. 1 translation (vertical movement) and 1 rotation.

4 links are required to restrain the other 4 degrees of freedom.

What is generally referred to as a 3 link, has to have a 4th link, which is the panhard rod. BTW some people erroneously call radius arms plus panhard, a 3 link. A radius arm is not a link - by defenition a link can only resist a force aligned with it's axis (clearly, a radius arm can resist axial plus rotation at 1 of it's ends).

The 3 link plus panhard has 2 lower links (like the rear lower links of a rover), a single upper link (which may be offset to clear the engine) and the panhard.

The offset of the upper link can be designed to counter the torque roll when climbing a hard obstical (can be the difference between rolling or not).

Alternatively, some front, 3 links have 1 lower link, 2 upper links and a panhard. The disadvantage of this arrangement is the single lower link has to resist high compressive loads when braking in an emergency.

When braking the front lower links are in compression and the upper links are in tension. For equilibrium, the compression force in the lowers is equal to the braking force plus the tension in the upper link.

Edit
The radius arm front suspension resists more than 4 degrees of freedom (over restrained). They only work because of give in the bushes. As soon as the bushes stop flexing the suspension binds. This is why the front suspension does not articulate as well as the rear.

4 link plus panhard suffer the same problem, but the total flex of the bushes can allow more articulation than radius arms.

A good, triangulated 4 link can be designed without any handling or articulation problems, but is difficult to get the geometry of upper links right with the engine in the way.

The good thing about radius arms is, they can be designed for good anti-dive during braking. A 3 link plus panhard can be designed for the same amount of anti-dive. With 4 link plus panhard, it is more difficult to get good ant-dive and good articulation (depending on the bushes).

So in the short your comprimsing something wether it be dive under breaks or articulation or vise versa

[dobbo]

A free body (in space) has 6 degrees of freedom. Translation in three directions (x,y,z) and rotation about 3 axii (xyz).

An axle needs to be restrained to have only 2 degrees of freedom. 1 translation (vertical movement) and 1 rotation.

4 links are required to restrain the other 4 degrees of freedom.

What is generally referred to as a 3 link, has to have a 4th link, which is the panhard rod. BTW some people erroneously call radius arms plus panhard, a 3 link. A radius arm is not a link - by defenition a link can only resist a force aligned with it's axis (clearly, a radius arm can resist axial plus rotation at 1 of it's ends).

The 3 link plus panhard has 2 lower links (like the rear lower links of a rover), a single upper link (which may be offset to clear the engine) and the panhard.

The offset of the upper link can be designed to counter the torque roll when climbing a hard obstical (can be the difference between rolling or not).

Alternatively, some front, 3 links have 1 lower link, 2 upper links and a panhard. The disadvantage of this arrangement is the single lower link has to resist high compressive loads when braking in an emergency.

When braking the front lower links are in compression and the upper links are in tension. For equilibrium, the compression force in the lowers is equal to the braking force plus the tension in the upper link.

Edit
The radius arm front suspension resists more than 4 degrees of freedom (over restrained). They only work because of give in the bushes. As soon as the bushes stop flexing the suspension binds. This is why the front suspension does not articulate as well as the rear.

4 link plus panhard suffer the same problem, but the total flex of the bushes can allow more articulation than radius arms.

A good, triangulated 4 link can be designed without any handling or articulation problems, but is difficult to get the geometry of upper links right with the engine in the way.

The good thing about radius arms is, they can be designed for good anti-dive during braking. A 3 link plus panhard can be designed for the same amount of anti-dive. With 4 link plus panhard, it is more difficult to get good ant-dive and good articulation (depending on the bushes).



It took me 4 times reading it but I think I get it now.

[Bush65]

So in the short your comprimsing something wether it be dive under breaks or articulation or vise versa
There is no good reason why a 3 link plus panhard suspension should compromise anti-dive or articulation.

However a link plus panhard is another matter.

One problem with 3 link plus panhard is body roll (sway) on the highway. Because of the way radius arms are over constrained, the axle tube twists and resists sway. Changing to suspension like 3 link plus panhard is like removing a big sway bar for on highway driving.

[discowhite]

Yes it looks good with that much flex but it's not much real advantage off road.



DONT FOLLOW ME YOU WONT MAKE IT:p

cheers phil

[PAT303]

Phil that piece of track your on is the most photographed track in the land.Every second mag has a pick with some mucho four wheeler going thru it. Pat

[Grimace]

I reveresed up it in a lada once.
I had retained the springs prior of course.