| Author |
Message |
    
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Sunday, September 22, 2002 - 10:32 pm: | 
|
I've been trying to come up with a new design for the front raduis arms on a RRC. One of the main points of my new design would be to allow the use of fat tires(265mm) with no rubbing on the radius arms.
Larry, from the Rover Clubhouse mentioned that the new shaped RR had bent front radius arms. So I went by the dealer today and dove under a 4.6RR and they do indeed have bent front arms. The Control arms look just like the ones on a RRC, except for a suprisingly large bend where the tire would move when you turn the streering wheel.
So has anybody ever tried to fit the second generation RR control arms to a RRC??
Randall |
Ali
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 08:23 am: |
|
Larry,
Are the chasis mounts identical to the RRC? If there's a bend inward on the 4.6 arms then the axle housing mounts are prolly more inward than the RRC, no?
Just wondering. |
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 09:27 am: |
|
Ali
I looked at this on a 4.6 at the dealer:
The mounting holes were arranged simularly(but I didn't measure), and the radius arms looked simular as well. But the arm itself was definatly angled coming out of both mounting points. The angles meet right where the tire would fit on full turn.
Surely someone out there has held this arm up to a RRC/Disco/D90 to see if it would fit. Anybody tried this??
Randall |
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 24, 2002 - 04:26 pm: |
|
Per chance I stumbled into this today:
www.wehenrys.com/rockware/shop/sep10.jpg
It's Rockwares latest "In the Shop" page, which shows an example of control arm that is angled to allow fatter tire.
Rockware makes really good stuff, so this has to be feasable. |
hendrik
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 01:52 am: |
|
cool idea. (one (eh..me) take things for granted too often)
but don´t the mountings on the axle sit closer to the tire than on the RRC on that pic ? So the arm itself (due to the mounting bracket on the chassis) would be at the same place as on RRC. I´m no engineer so I might be allowed to think that the lateral mounting of the arm on the axle would force the arm to do more movement and thus stress the RRC arm-chassis bushes more (Heim joint might tolerate that better). |
Ali
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 07:11 am: |
|
I took a loot at Rockware's arms. Matt makes some killer stuff but having a bent arm makes me wonder how it would hold up in extreme situations. Specially during a compression scenario like hitting an obstacle at a decent rate of speed. |
JB
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 10:19 am: |
|
Randall - hows your BW install coming along ?
Those blue bent radius arms would do better with a support welded right at the curve. That looks like a buggy built to crawl not haul so they may care less about speed banging. You could always use offset spacers for the wheels to limit rubbing but you might not want that wide boy look...how bout a homemade 3 link which would just remove them altogether... ( j/k R.S.) |
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 06:20 pm: |
|
The 4.6RR has bent front arms, so they must be OK in the worst possible senerios. My guess is they moved the arms outboard some from the RRC posision, and are using 255mm wide tires. So they had to bend the arms. The rear arms are not even made of steel on the "new shaped RR".
I would be comfortable fabricating bent arms in my shop, than playing with fire on a three link system. The front control arms that I have now give me about 150 extra points on an RTI ramp, better balance between front/rear suspension,and no real safety issues. But after I put them on the truck(two years ago) suddenly it occurred to me that I now had a larger turning radius *#%!
My vibration problem:
Let's just say that there is no klunk in my driveline...at all, which is wierd, but very nice. The truck is drivable now up to 70mph(was down to 35mph before the TC swap). And on thursday evening I will be swapping out the front diff. Stay tuned.
Randall |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 25, 2002 - 07:07 pm: |
|
4.6 arms are forged that way. |
hendrik
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 09:07 am: |
|
Randall, what kind of "arms" do you have now ?
I thought you had a new diff if not a complete new front axle already. Why changing again ? |
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 02:08 pm: |
|
Hendrik
Hinged arm: www.d-90.com/prod/hinge.html
You can see that the arm is wider right where the edge of the tire will rub on full lock. I feel certain that I could make arms myself that are offset enough to clear fat tires(especially after seeing the 4.0/4.6 arms).
My vibration started when I drove away from the diff installation. Everything has been tested by substitution, except for the diff assembly, and the vibe is still there. Not even I have a $1400 diff laying around to swap, so it's the last thing.
My advice to all: Get your diffs from GBR. That $100 I saved at "a local speed shop" has cost me big time!!
Randall |
Ali
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 02:09 pm: |
|
Randall, was it you who had the hinged front arms? |
JB
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 03:27 pm: |
|
So the clunk is not normal after all ?!?!? That dealer lied to me then ;)
I can't speak for Randall but I believe Chuque Henry had hinged arms on his d-90 and may be going that way with his g-wagen build-up, www.wehenrys.com |
Randall Smith
| | Posted on Thursday, September 26, 2002 - 07:19 pm: |
|
Ali:
The right side arm is hinged, the left is solid. But I would like for both arms to be offset.
JB:
I doubt that the driveline made a loud bang when new. Wondering how long clunk-free will last. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page