thanks I forgot load leveler.
Any idea how much the LL would limit flex? Not having one on my Def, I always thought a good working load leveler not a bad idea as it lets you run softer spring rates....
Printable View
thanks I forgot load leveler.
Any idea how much the LL would limit flex? Not having one on my Def, I always thought a good working load leveler not a bad idea as it lets you run softer spring rates....
Serg,
Not sure that answers my question ... I'll rephrase it. I want to know by cranking the trailing arms, how much extra travel I am seeing regardless of the shocks and springs. So if we were to just look at the cranked arms in isolation of everything else - without any other limiting factors - how much additional travel are we getting from cranked vs straight?
Cheers, Simon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by isuzurover
Yup, mine still has the leveler ... I was talking to a Landy mech yesterday and he didn't seem to think the leveler was much use or made much difference being on there - it was explained to me that the LL acted as a big sway bar. I am not 100% sure of what function it has, if any, in regards to flex and articulation ... any help here? This thread here makes me think it's better to keep the LL ---> http://www.aulro.com/afvb/technical-...eveller-3.html
BTW, My truck also has one of the greasable A frame ball joints from MR Automotive ... am I to understand that the A frame BJ can play some role in articulation?
Simon.
I remember Mick Garner once telling me he had a RRC up on a hoist, and when he cut off the load leveller the whole axle dropped a few inches. So it must form some restriction...Quote:
Originally Posted by uninformed
Apparently once the suspension is lifted they don't work anyway, so no point keeping it there.
As you have a lift it won't be doing much. Except for adding extra weight and limiting articulation (possibly).Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikirocker
The a-frame BJ is the main limiting factor in the rear suspension.
All things in isolation, I suspect changing to bent trailing arms in your case will provide no increase in articulation. It may increase bush life though. If the trailing arms are limiting articulation, the bolt at the chassis end will bend :D I have seen that happen plenty of times on very flexy setups.
AFAIK the load leveler is more of a self pressurised shock, which when load is placed in the vehicle it reacts and keeps the ride height (to a degree) I would think more like increasing spring rate than sway bar...but Ill leave it to those that know to explain better.
As far as fitting cranked trailing arms and nothing else...unless your chassis end bushes are completely flogged out, which you would know, as the vehicle has some funky handleing on the road going from accleration to braking...I cant see them making a noticable difference to articulation...I would guess that your spring/shock/LL will be the place to look for better performance.
Regarding the A frame ball joint, while some feel the need to change it out in extreme articulation set ups, it is not nesseccary. Guys in the USA who race and crawl with extreme set ups have had good results with the ball joint. It is pretty good by design and not just for articulation, its primary job is to locate the axle lateraly....plenty of rose joints etc have been put in its place and located wrongly which is quite dangerous.
You have a good ball joint and I would think it fine for your purposes.
cheers,
Serg
out of curiosity I wonder if one could be modified to work with lifted set ups/more travel???Quote:
Originally Posted by isuzurover
I recall there arepeople who have fitted spacers to do that. There are also those who have fitted a (gemini?) coil in place of the load leveler.Quote:
Originally Posted by uninformed
Ok, so the only purpose of fitting cranked arms then is to relieve the stress on the bushes after a lift? This would indicate that these expensive items are only there to save on something that costs 1/20th their price. It was explained to me that they in fact do contribute to better down travel though, which is why I was asking "how much additional down travel are we getting?"
Simon.
Simon your missing the point a bit...they will allow more down travel on a lifted vehicle due to the bush not already being compressed some (take a look at a stock rover,even then the bush is compressed some) BUT I would hedge a bet that in your case they are not the limiting factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikirocker
what spring rate are your springs? what travel shocks do you have? Are the springs retained? what ends do the shocks have ie eye or pin? are you using the stock chassis end shock mount?
So what Im saying is if you are getting the most out of the springs/shocks/A frame and using stock arms you would get some more out of cranked....
Also, if you have a rear difflock fitted and use it offroad on some articulating climbs, there is the possibility of pretzeling the stock TA's....which could lead to alot more $$$ than a pair of new arms....