Superior Engineering Superflex arms for Rovers.

No worries Grimace, I certainly didnt take it that way. Its good to have your imput here, you do more offroad KM than me.

I also have a DC front shaft in a 2.5 inch lift. Mine is a stock Disco shaft and I have stock arms. It was put in because my original non DC shaft produced a vibration once the lift was put in. It works ok for me, but in saying that its also probably not the best practice or set up.

Longer trailing arms, and in fact longer RA's have been something I have wanted to do for years, but engineering has always been a hurdle. These were never about flex but about drivability so to speak. This may be something I can now get sorted.......but of coarse only having one vehicle and no $$$ makes it tough.

Grimace, are your RA the older narrow type or the later wider type?

Greg, make with the updates :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uninformed

Grimace, are your RA the older narrow type or the later wider type?

Greg, make with the updates :p

---

I have the wider type in my vehicle.

Just for reference I have attached some photos showing the difference in flex ratio front to rear with the holey bushes and the standard bushes.

Front holey bushes and cranked arms, cranked rear trailing arms, standard link geometry. Standard bushes at chassis end.
EDIT: More info, spring ratios are 220lb front, 186lb rear and retained top and bottom all round.
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/5...0138245091.jpg
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/136...arbor16037.jpg
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...013/08/601.jpg

In all three of these images I was not at full flex and the vehicle drove all without the locker engaged so there is a bit more to be had but the main point is to show just how much difference the radius arm bushes effect the suspension characteristics.

In the next two photos, one is unlocked climbing and still driving, the second is in a wombat hole where I was at full flex in the rear, tyres still on ground but no forward traction without the locker engaged.
These two images alone shows the rear end working a lot harder then the previous images above (meanwhile the front is doing bugger all);
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...013/08/602.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img832/7196/fft6.jpg

While the car still worked fairly well offroad, it was no where near as compliant with the terrain as it was with the holey bushes installed.

I will be reporting back to this thread with some comparisons once the SF arms have been tested (if given the chance)

Also hope Greg doesn't mind me mentioning this, in regards to any updates. I spoke with him late last week and he is currently doing further testing on all the combinations of bushes and should have some more details once he has completed & compiled all the details for direct comparison.

Cheers
Grimace

OK guys sorry for the slow replies, I have had an ultra4 stuck on the hoist for a week trying to sort it out :mad:

I have 1 set of measurements to do in the morning to finish my assessment of the arms and then I can finalize my report and start full production. Its been a mission! but i have some great results and hopefully everyone likes the final products. I will post up the full report by the end of the week and hopefully the first lot of steel hits the CNC mid next week :)

The products ready for official release as of next monday will be: (suit RRC,disco1,def)
0", 2" radius arms and superflex arms
4140 Tie rods and draglinks
Bolt on adjustable steering damper brackets (suit patrol/cruiser style pin-pin)
Eye-Eye rear Trailing arms w/ adapter

coming soon (release in 3-4wks)
Long Arm rear Trailing arms w/ weld on mounts + engineering paperwork
Raised front shock towers
Pin-Pin rear Upper shock mounts.

cheers
Greg

Are the RRC radius arms narrow or wide?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by isuzutoo-eh

Are the RRC radius arms narrow or wide?

---

Looks like the arm material is 32mm. The bush ring is wider, its width im not sure. Would the Disco 1 that is Greg's donor vehicle have the early or late arms???

Pin ends change also on the stock arms dont they???

D1 I think have wide arms, AFAIK the pin end does change but don't know how significantly.

D1 and later (post 1986) RRC have the wide RA bushes (50mm)
the early (pre 86) RRC were equiped witht he narrow RA & bushes (45mm) if my memory serve me correctly.

As for the pin ends at the chassis I can't recall exactly but I believe all narrow RAs from RRC have the smaller pin diameter?

There may have been a county variant that was also different again, but having no experience with county RAs, I would be guessing the configuration.


edit: Where is Trav (aquarangie) when you need him!!!?? He probably knows the month, let alone the year, the changes were made :D

I thought it was 45mm for the wide and 40mm for the narrow???

I didn't think the Superior radius arms retained the pins. Are they not eye ends?

Slunnie, post #44. The talk about going to a Toyota style bush at chassis end was in reference to the Nissan arms. Greg also mentioned somewhere here the SE pin end isn't exactly rover but they have a bush that will allow it to bolt in.

The question is will it suit the early style arm mounts?