D2- 35's worth the effort vs higher CG?
- Thread starter gmookher
- Start date
I'm guessing they went to that for improved road handling :ack:
Too bad it seems like the Wrangler is the last true off-roader for sale anymore.
Too bad it seems like the Wrangler is the last true off-roader for sale anymore.
EricTyrrell said:
I hope you just mean as a brand new vehicle here in the US.
Watt's or not, my D2 kicks Wrangler's ass' on a regular basis. It may not be a D1, but it's still pretty damn good.
Howski said:
Absolutely wrong. I maxed out flex before the watts limited it. Bilstien 12 short bodys. The radius arms are the limiting factor.
You can get a longer watts but it will not let you flex any more, just "droop" lower per say.
The benefit of rhe watts is for the air suspension. It keeps the axle centerd in all positions.
Yes, new. LR4, Land Cruiser, 4 Runner, Xterra, Patrol, G550... Glorified mall cruisers. The two current greats, the Defender and FJ70 aren't even sold here. Outlook isn't good for the defender either. The DC100 concept looks like a big shiny turd and it's going to be made in India and share the Tata Aria platform. You guys know the story though.
Last edited:
ptschram
Well-known member
Frank-call me, I'm intrigued by what you're up to.
My three-link parts are done but i just don't have the time to mess with it. Waited ten years to get to this point and this is how I end up.
My three-link parts are done but i just don't have the time to mess with it. Waited ten years to get to this point and this is how I end up.
Howski said:
You are correct in that it limits travel, and by limiting travel, can limit flex in a highly lifted truck solely because it gets extended in certain situations. .NOT the design. The radius arms are the real limiting factor. THey work off of binding against themselves. Using bushing squish for differentiation. I was not being harsh towards you directly, there is just a lot of misinformation out there on this subject.
there is a lot of misinformation out there.
the radius arm is best explained like this......
1) put your elbow at your hips.
2) position your forearms parallel to the ground, palms up.
3) put a steel pipe in your hands, holding the pipe with dear life with your thumbs wrapped tight.
4) now have someone force one end of the pipe down....pushes your spine to that side that someone is pushing down, sort of like your trucks cab.
that is a radius arm.
now do the same thing, but make a fist, hold the pipe between your thumb and first knuckle of the index finger of your fist.....that's a link.
so yes the radius arm is a limiting factor. but how do you center an axle removing the radius arms kyle? you have to get rid of the watts link. which is the limiting factor on a d2. HOW DO YOU ELIMINATE THE RADIUS ARMS WITHOUT ELIMINATING THE WATTS?
the radius arm is best explained like this......
1) put your elbow at your hips.
2) position your forearms parallel to the ground, palms up.
3) put a steel pipe in your hands, holding the pipe with dear life with your thumbs wrapped tight.
4) now have someone force one end of the pipe down....pushes your spine to that side that someone is pushing down, sort of like your trucks cab.
that is a radius arm.
now do the same thing, but make a fist, hold the pipe between your thumb and first knuckle of the index finger of your fist.....that's a link.
so yes the radius arm is a limiting factor. but how do you center an axle removing the radius arms kyle? you have to get rid of the watts link. which is the limiting factor on a d2. HOW DO YOU ELIMINATE THE RADIUS ARMS WITHOUT ELIMINATING THE WATTS?
Last edited:
seventyfive said:
With a 6 link, two perpendicular on either side of the axle where the radius arms are now. Its been done, not so much with the off road crowd though.
seventyfive said:
I am not seeing what you are asking?
Many toys use and unequal length 4link with Panhard setup in the rear.
Or, you can use a panhard instead of the WATTS, just like the flexless front on a d2.
OR keep the watts with a un-triangulated 3link.
or this jeep JK setup, unequal length 4link with watts. i know orientation is different, but that is because it gets drug across rocks there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYMT4II9cSM
or the all new bad whatever Rallyfighter, has a watts in the rear.
http://image.fourwheeler.com/f/edit...lly-fighter-features-a-watts-linkage-to-l.jpg
Last edited:
kyle,
i'm not discounting anyone's knowledge. i apologize if that's how it seems. my point is the watts is great for street rods, muscle cars, or solid axle race cars...it keeps the axle absolutely centered to the frame.
if you get rid of the radius arms, which i agree 100% with you thet are biggest limiter, you need to add a panhard or upper a triangular upper link set up. or keep the watts, but why would you want to keep the watts when you want maximum drop and still keep the body flat? a panhard is an option, but if it isn't done properly now you added a radius from side to side.
personally, the upper a-arm or four link is actually the easiest and best solution. with 12" reservoirs, my rear was binding on the (rte) watts.
i'm not discounting anyone's knowledge. i apologize if that's how it seems. my point is the watts is great for street rods, muscle cars, or solid axle race cars...it keeps the axle absolutely centered to the frame.
if you get rid of the radius arms, which i agree 100% with you thet are biggest limiter, you need to add a panhard or upper a triangular upper link set up. or keep the watts, but why would you want to keep the watts when you want maximum drop and still keep the body flat? a panhard is an option, but if it isn't done properly now you added a radius from side to side.
personally, the upper a-arm or four link is actually the easiest and best solution. with 12" reservoirs, my rear was binding on the (rte) watts.
well, I guess a fair logical flow may make me ask, why not a longer, more elevated watts link that allows more travel and still stays centered?
one of the drawback of panhard appears to be a sweet spot for center, and the limits are less than cenetered- full squich to one side and full droop to another
I'm clueless as to how significant or not one design is to another from a "whats least tippy" perspective, which is what I want to know. Where are the vehicle engineers on the forum?
one of the drawback of panhard appears to be a sweet spot for center, and the limits are less than cenetered- full squich to one side and full droop to another
I'm clueless as to how significant or not one design is to another from a "whats least tippy" perspective, which is what I want to know. Where are the vehicle engineers on the forum?
I've fucked with my Watts links quite a bit, I've made adjustable ones and have altered there length. Using the stock mounting locations and center pivot, no more than 11 ¾" of linear axle travel is possible. Simply put Watts isn't a good option for all out travel.
seventyfive said:
I see now what you are trying to say. yes, it is not wise to keep the watts if you are not running RA's. But i would think that it would just be included in the redesign.
I would encourage 4link, the rear a arm makes it have a funky roll axis feel.
gmookher said:
yes and no, i would not use any of their stuff based on reviews. plus it will be all custom for a D2 because the offset pumpkin and abnormally narrow frame rail spacing.
KyleT said:
Somebody on here should start something similar for discos... I'm surprised there isnt companies that do all custom links and suspension parts. Everybody is doing the same old boring bolt on shit