|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
November 1st, 2009, 12:41 pm
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
4 link
Sitting hear getting over the flu and my head doesn't seem to be working correctly.
When doing the 4 link calculator numbers in the rear the antisquat above 100% will raise the rear when on the gas. If I use this for the front is it just the same or the opposite. i.e. over 100% will cause the front 4 link to raise or lower when hitting the gas?
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
November 1st, 2009, 06:46 pm
|
#2 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Wa state USA
Posts: 9
|
Re: 4 link
it will be opposite. the front will squat.
__________________
JLC SN-FAB. com A thanks to supporting companys for S&N FAB team #198KOH 09 Superior axle, BC4x4.com, Bilstein shocks , Randy's custom exhaust, QA-1, Beard seats, Tom woods, Longfield super joints , BFG, Trailready, and Dynatrac |
|
|
|
|
November 1st, 2009, 07:17 pm
|
#3 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
Re: 4 link
Cool that's what I was thinking.
What sort of numbers are guys shooting for in the front? Right now my rear is set for 103%.
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
|
November 1st, 2009, 09:26 pm
|
#4 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 1,533
|
Re: 4 link
I cannot contribute to to front debate as I'm too old school (still rocking cheating radius arm setup).
Rear: I have my 3 link in the rear set at around 104 and am pretty happy with this number. I think being just a tad over 100 is a good territory to be in. Now I may be speaking out of my ass but wouldn't you want the front close to neutral as well and also matching the rear so you are not loading up your suspension with bind instead of turning your wheels? I guess what I'm saying is that one would shoot for a mirror reaction to the rear? I'm curious myself...
__________________
BORAT FOR PRESIDENT!!!! The Evil-ution - V2.0 - make it - 2.5 now ( .Y .) & )v( & (I) are cool |
|
|
|
|
November 2nd, 2009, 10:00 am
|
#5 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
Re: 4 link
I was thinking of going higher with the front i.e. 110-120% to bring the front end down for nasty climbs. But that may be too much.
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
|
November 2nd, 2009, 10:19 am
|
#6 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 1,533
|
Re: 4 link
Ha, ha! I guess that certainly will depend on your driving style. Knowing you... it may make sense to go in that direction
 For me for example I would not attack the hill as aggressively as you, but during technical climbs the nose down will mean harder time to get over stuff.
__________________
BORAT FOR PRESIDENT!!!! The Evil-ution - V2.0 - make it - 2.5 now ( .Y .) & )v( & (I) are cool |
|
|
|
|
November 2nd, 2009, 05:48 pm
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 54
|
Re: 4 link
I'd go a bit less and use a suck down winch!
|
|
|
|
|
November 2nd, 2009, 08:24 pm
|
#8 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
Re: 4 link
Ah, good point Jamie. Maybe I'll do that.
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
|
November 2nd, 2009, 09:13 pm
|
#9 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: vernon
Posts: 653
|
Re: 4 link
Suck down winches only take away from ground clearance.
 I tryed to get as close to 100 in the front and just over in the rear. It seems to work pretty killer on huge climbs with water in the front. I put a little extra nitrogen in the RR coilover. It seems to counteract the torque of the engine pretty decent. But you know all this stuff Dave. 
__________________
One of the Gear Centre Group nutcases. |
|
|
|
|
November 12th, 2009, 01:01 am
|
#10 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Langley BC
Posts: 764
|
Re: 4 link
Quote:
__________________
"TEAM BCC" new pile of parts being assembled. |
|
|
|
|
November 12th, 2009, 04:35 pm
|
#11 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
Re: 4 link
Pook, one thing I noticed on Curty's truck versus mine with high % is that my 4.0L stuck the tires and climbed. Curty's has way more power than the old 4.0L so it was actually breaking the tires loose and promoting traction hope. Might be something to consider with your new 5.3
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
|
November 12th, 2009, 05:21 pm
|
#12 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Langley BC
Posts: 764
|
Re: 4 link
its an easy fix if I want to move the uppers up at the frame end. Even with the new motor, I'm not a throttle happy kind of driver, I prefer to crawl things if I can...so I'm hoping it'll work out.
__________________
"TEAM BCC" new pile of parts being assembled. |
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 08:08 am
|
#13 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
Re: 4 link
So when running a true 4 link front (full hydro set up) what are guys doing for link ends. Can you get away with rubber at one end or are you going to end up with too much play and need something stiffer?
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 04:47 pm
|
#14 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Langley BC
Posts: 764
|
Re: 4 link
Hiems at every end. I think bushing will have to much give in the front suspension for my liking. Probably not an issue if your running a panhard though.
__________________
"TEAM BCC" new pile of parts being assembled. |
|
|
|
|
November 18th, 2009, 07:10 pm
|
#15 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 469
|
Re: 4 link
No panhard. That's exactly what I was thinking in regards to the bushings.
__________________
Dave "All four wheels must participate. LOCK UP YOUR AXLES!!" |
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
