upper link geometry..

[pitcher2103]

ok, first off i understand it. what i am not sure about is having lots of anti squat, 100% or less than 100% in the rear

what i have not done is try it every which way. my center of gravity is decent now with decased mamba micros and a bjv4 on my xr10.

i am thinking around 100% in the rear and less than 100 up front may be good for sidehilling. i have not been able to test it much, but i have seen changes in my rig when i change link geometry.

with >100% in the rear is wants to raise the rear while rear digging, and i don't like that very much, but less than 100 may work well. with the front i like the upper links high on the chassi but it wants to raise the front high tire on sidehilling.

any thoughts? i'm around 5 and a half pounds right now.

most people i see who have good success seem to either be great drivers or have their upper links low on the chassi side.



i have virtually no added weight in the rear, crawled quite a bit in the last year and tested on the same spot, and just seeking advice from any confident person who has tested more than i have.

[opek]

When the rig squats it pulls the tire into the chassis. So lifting a tire could be a squat issue or a roll center issue among other things I don't quite yet understand. When I watch the well set up moa rigs move around they never extend the suspension due to acceleration, they always squat down.

[OKJeepin]

oops, disregard my vote, meant to click on the bottom one instead of the third one! I never was good at following directions...

[Duuuuuuuude]

Originally Posted by pitcher2103

what i have not done is try it every which way.

Then that is what you need to do.