Thread: D2 watts link to D1 Aframe conversion

Shouldn't bee too hard, if you can get all the bits from a donor Rangie or D1 (pre-90 Rangies have bolt-on mounts on the a-frame so brackets would bneed to be fabricated to the D2 chassis probably the best option). It would have to be engeneered for legality reason as you would expect but if done well I can't see a problem.

I have no idea why LR persist with crap ideas like this, rather change an a-frame ball joint every few years than persist with the crap watts linkage.

Good luck with it, will watch with interest.

Trav

are you sure you are going the right way?
there's plenty out there that don't need to go that far.
perhaps buy a d1 for playing.

how about a v8?

I think they do it Trav, because it is far better idea in theory on the road. It is probably also cheaper.

As Trav says I dont think it would be hugely difficult to do, although again you would be wise to speak to an approved Engineer first.

I would assume the provision for mounting the A frame isnt in the D2 chassis so that would require some work

Trav i was thinking down the same lines as in difficulty i dont think it would be that hard but the benifits would be hugely gained

Harry thought of that option too but really want to stay with the D2 TD5

Pete ofcourse the engineering side would be checked on first ,as where the chassis crossmember is located on the D1 where the A frame is connected the D2 has a same size crossmember in the same position ,i would also consider strenghing the crossmember for precautionary measures

i think all i need now is to do the sums and measurements for this project and weigh up the money which has been spent on the D2 + this project to the cost of full new set up of a rangie or a D1
cheers kelvin

Originally Posted by harry

are you sure you are going the right way?
there's plenty out there that don't need to go that far.
perhaps buy a d1 for playing.

how about a v8?

Why, thinking of selling yours Harry? Are you getting soft in your old age enjoying the economy of a tdi

Trav

Hi Kelvin
What is your watts link doing, is it hitting the bracket that retains it on the diff housing? I know with mine, it didn't because the shocks wouldnt allow it. But if you go longer shocks you have to go longer brake lines and abs lines.
What about a panhard rod in the rear? A few people have done this in the US, with great success, afterall patrols and others run a rear panhard and they still get good rear articulation. It would be much easier than an a-frame set up. Have u looked at the kinked that Rovertyme offers for the watts link, it is supposed to give u much more articulation, others like Slunnie have simply made a notch in the bracket which retains lower link on the rear axle.

Ill try to dig up a photo of a d2 with a panhard rod in the rear.

I would talk to Slunnie, he seems to be getting a fair bit of rear travel out of his d2

How much flex are you after?

There are lots of things in the back of a D2 that will affect the articulation and provide limitations.

The watts linkage doesn't restrict articulation in them, so changing this to a panhard or an A-frame isn't going to give you anything. If you are running 10" shocks then just notch the watts linkage mount on the axle for clearance. If you're getting into some good long travel shocks then you'll need to get some cranked watts linkages like those from Rovertym engineering in the US.

The D2 is balanced a lot better than the older suspension designs because it runs radius arms in the front and the rear. The rear ones are slightly shorter but the heavier rear mass will force them to articulation. It also means the rolling resistance of the suspension is very similar front to rear so they articulate with a well balanced body rather than everything coming from one end like in many of the setup classis vehicles.

I think that to make a Rover A-frame fit into a D2 there would be a bit of stuffing around especially as there is a specific Xmember that the A frame mounts to in the D1 which is angled. I would be much more inclined to use an aftermarket or custom A-frame.

Anyway, the limitation really comes down to the radius arm design of the suspension as to make it articulate it has to force/crush the bushes between the radius arm and the axle. There are options there and SuperPro bushes reportedly flex very well to increase suspension articualtion.

If you want to engineer more suspension travel into the rear end, I really would look at the radius arms, not the watts link. Something that I would look at doing very carefully is setting the rear up as a 5-link setup using the watts linkage instead of a panhard rod. This would mean that the each side of the axle would have the radius arm replaced with another link containing 1 bolt at the chassis and 1 bolt at the diff. The directly above it another link that is the same length and parrallel to the one below and mounted with one bolt at either end.

Another option is to do as above, except with a single central upper link and keep the watts linkage.

Link geometry and calculations are complex as there are a lot of factors to consider. But if it were me, I would alter it to the above setup. There are infinite variations, but you would want to do a lot of learning and calculating with it, as if you get it wrong you will turn the vehicle into a pig on and off road.