4 PARALLEL front link setups w panhard

[hozer]

I guess I just repeated myself. Well anyway I mocked it up last night and the plan seems to work.

 

[doublej]

With parallel 4links the main thing to watch is the mounting positions.
If your to high or to low (not enough separation between the upper and lower) then it will fight the panhard.

 

[minicrawlerguy530]

If you can get it to work go for it man"thumbsup"

 

[hozer]

Double j, do you mean it will fight the panhards slop from front to back as the links shorten and lengthen the wheelbase during cycling?

 

[doublej]

Double j, do you mean it will fight the panhards slop from front to back as the links shorten and lengthen the wheelbase during cycling?

Yep.

 

[The Doc]

I hope nobody gets their panties in a bind over this thread. To me, these are the kind of threads where you actually learn something and get some useful information. "thumbsup"

I'm cracking up though, because there's an ADD research minded member out there somewhere who is reading all this information and pulling his hair out!:lmao:

Best advice...Read, reasearch, and experiment on your own. You'l find out quickly if things work or not on your own particular setup. And keep in mind, the scale game is a game of Millimeters...There are a lot of little numbers that all make a big difference. Angles, lengths, play in rod ends, inboard, outboard triangulated, four link, three link, y link. It's enough to fry your chip.

Then again, servo on the axle is a nice trick!:lmao::lmao::lmao:

WOW, yea I'm laughing.

 

[The Doc]

Lets set it straight, jeeps front 4 links BIND!!! The next time you flex your jeep stop and get out and look at the upper bushings at the axle, they are pushing and pulling. If they didn't bind than they would not be pushing and pulling hard on the bushing......and you would not have to replace the bushings every so often or weld the passenger side axle bracket because its trying to rip off the axle. You DO not run especially a V link on the top and a track bar, shit will not work right and it WILL have bump steer!!! unless you have no travel. I know people like to try stuff, but when you post a pic of something that isn't set up right you have to be ready for people to tell you that, if everyone just agrees with you you'll never know the correct way it should be.. Its not that were beating people up, some of us are trying to help people set up stuff right. The way you check bump steer to see if your geometry is right is to set it on a table and push the suspension down and pull it up and look to see if the tires are staying straight, if they even just slightly turn left or right you have bump steer...... Let me explain it this way, take your arms and bend them at your elbows forward. Take your index finger and your 2nd finger and make a V, now raze one of your arms bending from your elbow and tell me what your fingers are doing. One V is horizontal and one is facing up, that's what your links are doing trying to twist your housing, a 3 link wont do this. Does this help you understand how the suspension works.

 

[doublej]

Nope - reading that felt like trying to cross elbows to wipe my ass.

 

[klampykixx]

i understand.

but its not correct. (edit: its not wrong either, but its not correct in this instance)

i understand the example of the arms/fingers pointing up and down, but the four link acts as a wrist joining your hand(axle) to the arm (links)

a jeep has four links. not two radius rods. they are unequal length upper vs lower with this idea being that the axle moves up and down in its range of movement as smoothly and squarely as is possible. there "should" be very little twisting of the axle/mounts relative to the opposing links throughout the range of articulation. otherwise things like rose joints/heim joints would shear off the chassis mounts when it flexed.

ultimately a three link would give the absolute minimum binding but would potentially not be as strong as a four link for one obvious reason.

 

[The Doc]

Nope - reading that felt like trying to cross elbows to wipe my ass.

:lmao:well then you didn''t get it :mrgreen:

i understand.

but its not correct. (edit: its not wrong either, but its not correct in this instance)

i understand the example of the arms/fingers pointing up and down, but the four link acts as a wrist joining your hand(axle) to the arm (links)

a jeep has four links. not two radius rods. they are unequal length upper vs lower with this idea being that the axle moves up and down in its range of movement as smoothly and squarely as is possible. there "should" be very little twisting of the axle/mounts relative to the opposing links throughout the range of articulation. otherwise things like rose joints/heim joints would shear off the chassis mounts when it flexed.

ultimately a three link would give the absolute minimum binding but would potentially not be as strong as a four link for one obvious reason.

I understand what your saying, but try to run johnny joints or rod ends on both ends of the arms on a jeep 4 link. It won't work thats why you have to run bushings on at least the axle side of the arms, to get it to flex. Because the set up doesn't cycle right from the get go :mrgreen: Yes....if you brake one link of your 3 link your in trouble, I know :mrgreen:

And lets face it, we push suspensions to do things they were not made to do from the factory :mrgreen:

 

[War Pig]

I have found that parallel lower links that are spaced far apart have a lot of axle swing when they articulate. I have been running triangulated lower links (narrow at the chassis and wider at the axle) for years with a 3-link and they have always worked great. I guess my question is why make it more complicated with an extra link? BTW, I've never broken a 3-link so don't tell me to do a 4-link because it's stronger.....it may be stronger but unnecessarily so. A 3-link just allows for so much easier link placement and flat out works.

 

[hozer]

It works unless your ax2 transmission is sitting there between the rails and the link can't rise up....

 

[War Pig]

It works unless your ax2 transmission is sitting there between the rails and the link can't rise up....

You mean like this?





Or this?



Maybe this?



Or this?



All rigs I have built with a 3-link front and panhard with the motor/trans mounted between the frame rails.

Notice the triangulation of all the lower links.....it can be done!

 

[sam63]

What Tim failed to mention of all the rigs he has built over the years none of them have ever worked :lmao:. Im not sure why so many guys on here fight this concept. Just because that's what they see on their daily drivers maybe? I think a lot of rc scaler dudes would benefit greatly by looking at some of the 1:1 crawlers and how they are built.

Btw: Tims an OG from way back and his shit flat out works.

 

[War Pig]

What Tim failed to mention of all the rigs he has built over the years none of them have ever worked :lmao:.

Im not sure why so many guys on here fight this concept. Just because that's what they see on their daily drivers maybe? I think a lot of rc scaler dudes would benefit greatly by looking at some of the 1:1 crawlers and how they are built.

Btw: Tims an OG from way back and his shit flat out works.

I'm not that old......but thanks Sam.

 

[The Doc]

Or this 3 link set up.

 

[War Pig]

Very nice and simple.......I like it!

 

[hozer]

Sigh.....


Yes, I am a noob and you all are well known OGs..... But with all do respect I refer back to my OP. factory ride height on 35's (1:1 look) using an AX2.

I didn't see any AX2s in those pix and most look like they have 10 mm of up travel at best. This is going to be a trail runner. I want more travel for soaking up the hard landings.

I know the 3 link is a great RC solution and a great 1:1 solution for crawlers, but I'm not building a rock crawler w crazy flex.

Thanks though for the spirited responses.

 

[War Pig]

Sigh......an AX2 trans is 1" longer than any one of those transmissions. It can easily fit in any of those spots. I run most of my rigs 30% up travel 70% droop. I could jack it up a bit and run all up travel if I wanted to. What we are saying is that it can be done with triangulated lowers.

Like this one. Full uptravel. Looks like a trail rig with 35's.

 

[doublej]

Most rigs do not have crazy flex. Look at short course RCs. Built to bash way faster and soak up way more than you'll ever throw at your crawler..... Less travel than your crawler.

IMHO - from 1:1s to crawlers. ANY of the mentioned designs could be set up to work just as well as the others.
Does one way have benefits over another? Sure... That's life ain't it.

The perfect setup ain't there, nor is the perfect rig. But knowing how your rig will react 99% of the time will even have you keeping up with WarPig.