Thread: A-frame ball joint

Thanks for that uninformed I'm now upto date haha...with the vertical separation I also believe it will become a bit to much and not really necsessary...personally I would like to make a 3,4link setup as you and myself have discussed in the past but trying to design it is a pain...I have quizzed an engineer recently and his reply was he will engineer a triangulated or parallel setup as long as it meets 2 main criteria:
1.components are made as strong or stronger than standard..
2.its sway while lane changing at 110kmh...

Interesting to see how your pinion angle was set as there is a lot of speculation on this...

Originally Posted by 85 county

i assume the double hex head bolts are Grade 8 but may be safe to swap to class 8.8. hard to tell POM + Metric etc.

this operation for me is best done, tranz brake on dif lock in and the bum jacked as high as you can until the rear wheels just lift or are about to lift off.

as i have a larger fuel tank even the double hex is a hassle, caps would be a real pain

Auh pretty similar to how I do it too...I'm no expert on bolts but I think they are 8.8 which I think are almost as good as you can get (grade8?) my concern is we would be extending the length but not increasing the diameter which I would be concerned about leverage forces placed on the bolts...it's all such a muck around
In relation to my comments on bolts do not hold me to it as I am most likely wrong but there was a few posts by bush65 and isuzurover awhile back that explained bolt grades etc etc that would be of great help right now

being that you live in NSW you are lucky. I recently read that there is a nissan long arm kit that uses the stock uppers and you install 300mm longer lowers with new chassis mounts. There was talk about the new relation between the uppers and lowers and how that would effect the pinion angle through bump and droop...it was said to be ok. All liked how the rigs drove and handled climbs.

Now this kit being for a Nissan, and the fact that there uppers are shorter than a LR, means that if you increased your lowers by 300mm you would not have as much a percentile increase as this kit, which would mean less of a pinion change so to speak. The Giggle-pin long trailing arms are 300mm longer than stock. I emailed them and they said they were happy with the pinion change through bump and droop.

I personaly would like to extend my trailing arms to mount at the rear outrigger for cab. On my truck this is about 200mm or so. I would be happy using the stock A frame. Im not looking for much lift though.

Then of coarse there is the front end to sort......but here it is just a dream. QLD = NO NO NO

BTW, do not take me as any expert. I am just some slow minded carpenter that knows enough to be VERY dangerous

Originally Posted by uninformed

being that you live in NSW you are lucky. I recently read that there is a nissan long arm kit that uses the stock uppers and you install 300mm longer lowers with new chassis mounts. There was talk about the new relation between the uppers and lowers and how that would effect the pinion angle through bump and droop...it was said to be ok. All liked how the rigs drove and handled climbs.

Now this kit being for a Nissan, and the fact that there uppers are shorter than a LR, means that if you increased your lowers by 300mm you would not have as much a percentile increase as this kit, which would mean less of a pinion change so to speak. The Giggle-pin long trailing arms are 300mm longer than stock. I emailed them and they said they were happy with the pinion change through bump and droop.

I personaly would like to extend my trailing arms to mount at the rear outrigger for cab. On my truck this is about 200mm or so. I would be happy using the stock A frame. Im not looking for much lift though.

Then of coarse there is the front end to sort......but here it is just a dream. QLD = NO NO NO

BTW, do not take me as any expert. I am just some slow minded carpenter that knows enough to be VERY dangerous

hahahahaha love the last quote lol
yeah i would personally preffer to extend upper and lower arms by roughly the same amount as i would think it would be weird especially on down travel but interesting with what you said about how they said the nissans felt fine
i have also been in contact with gigglepin recently as i was considering the extended trailing arms wich from what i can gather i would have to cutt off my rear outriggersor heavily modify as all the pics i can find seem to be D90's not 110's....i was even contemplating making my own (out of high quality components of course) getting them/mounting to chassis certified and then that will be sufficient for a road going 4wd but then i was worried about the aframe length but with what you have just said has thrown a twist on things and may be a option again...
as for the front end i just shake my head at it all the time and pretend it isnt there

on the gigglepin stuff, most I have seen are on 90's that have had their wheelbase extended to 100 inch. This accounts for 7.1 inch in the TA extension (being that a 90 is actually 92.9 inch wheelbase. So the rest is then the change in TA chassis mount. They tend to use a A frame extension using standard arms etc. They seem to get away with it on the challenge vehicles.

If you are worried about the pinion change you could spend a Sat doing a mock up. Remove your rear wheels, shocks, springs and TA's and then get some cheap SHS or CHS at the +300mm TA length. Run a bolt through it at the axle mount and one up at the chassis where you want to mount it. Move the axle through its full arc of bump and droop and see the pinion change. Then put in just the OEM TA's and do the same....youll see the difference.

One day I will try and do it.

good idea actually....the only thing is how to make the front flex really well im running the narrow RA's with superpro bushes at either end but apart from that nothing else different...as for the rear aframe extension i would never do it as i recon it would make things terribly weaker than standard and with side loadings i wouldnt be suprised if it was to bend or break (i asume you would be under the same imperssion)...i recon a custom made setup that was engineered would be more safe and stronger...

Regarding the original springs, here is the data from the Red90 list that is unfortunately not online anymore (that I can find). I saved it as a spreadsheet if you don't have it (PM your email)



Will get photos and actual measurements next week. They are not a progressive spring I just couldn't remember if they were 180 or 185 lb rate.


I am fairly sure lowering the top mount of the LL is the only safe way of adjusting for higher ride height. The critical part will be determining how far to lower it as it is attached to a lever at the bottom, so as an example dropping it 5mm may cause a 10mm raise in ride height.
Roll centres etc are waaaay over my head so i'm not keen to alter the ball joint end of things and thus change geometry.

thanks Mark, good stuff (pm sent)

Funny looking at those 2 spring specs with the load rating???

Im trying to figure out how much difference in "feel" the LL makes to ride, like over bumps etc. As im at 250lb now, if I just went to 180lb that would make it softer with a little more body roll (though I dont have the rear body of a 110 wagon so it wont be as bad). But If I add the LL with the 180's will I be back to the same "feel" or even harsher than the 250's

BTW, we are all missing the simple solution with extending the LL. I spoke to a much more knowledgeable member and he said that shaft extensions have been made and sold in the past .....what was old is new again haha