Cantilever Suspension

[Stollenritter]

Thank you for the kind words, Natedog!

The cab/interior is a bit heavy and the rear needs some more weight. Xtra speed axles, steel wheels and the soft springs help a lot. I did some trail running and light crawling and it does good - not as good as my Cherokee but not to bad either. Body weight is more of an issue than the actual suspension setup. Anyway, it is a lot of fun and as the Toyo and the Cherokee are both SCX10-2 based, I have two matching rigs to go out for some crawling fun with my wife "thumbsup"

 

[MAC FAB]

I'll claim "newbie" here, so please enlighten my understanding. It seems the desired result here is flex, right???. Summit and Slayer are also prop rod rigs if you need more industrial sized HD parts. On track again now "thumbsup". So here is my question, being that I don't understand the rhyme to the reason here. I think I get that shocks are in the way, so run cantilever. Why not run a longer stroke shock and reverse the ratio, instead of being 4:1 or whatever in travel to stroke, be 2:1 stroke to travel, waaaaaay easier to tune your shocks, and run them inboard in the frame rails. Heck, a couple years back I was going to build a rc trophy truck that was cantilever, but run 2 shocks per side (dual cantilever). One for low speed compliance, and the other to continue with the big hits. Just about 4" of shock stroke when combined, mega travel. Twist-o-flex away, limit straps and bump stops if you exceed the rigs chassis limits. Is there any value to this concept or have I had too much coffee today?? One of the pics in this thread was close to, if not, 1:1 (jared86 build, see a few posts prior for pics), but still external on the chassis.

 

[1SLWMoFo]

My take at the cantilever suspension...
On my highly modded TF2 Marlin, as I was looking to be able to control torque twist and have a better suspension response on obstacles. I’ve always noticed that TF2’s on 3/4 links and coilovers tend to stuff the rear first and then the front when approaching and obstacle. They extend the front suspension as the rear compresses, and after bottoming out, then the front starts compressing. This tends to get the truck out of balance. So the cantilever helps on this by giving me the ability to heavily adjust preload on the back, preventing torque twist and forcing the front to contract more or less at the same time as the rear. The ride is very much more controlled and I can adjust the height without touching the preload.

Used Revo 3.3 long travel rear rockers. Custom 1/8 aluminum mounting plates screwed in to the TF2 chassis where the rear cross member and electronics box attach to.


Shock mounted directly to chassis as well. Used M3 spacers as needed.


Height adjustment done through a titanium RC10 turnbuckle and some shorty M3 rod ends. They attach to a custom stainless steel lower shock mount that I had fabricated a few months back for an upright rear shock relocation.

 

[1SLWMoFo]

At full stuff on bare chassis... my custom mounts hit the 4 link axle truss at full compress and stop the rocker from compressing even more, but under normal use this does not affect as suspension travel does not reach those limits (further pics will show this).




Cantilever suspension at rest on bare chassis (with body on, the shocks compress slightly).




Bare chassis full suspension articulation. Those are 3 2.2 Wildpeaks from a stock Honcho.

 

[1SLWMoFo]

“Fully” compresses with body on, but you can see how the fender well limits the travel as it sits on the tire. The tire kids stuffs in under real world use, but not that much. This is no issue at all as the rig still has plenty of articulation, but more importantly it is has a much more controlled ride and its more predictable.




I have another shot of this from the front, but for some reason it does not want to load (edit: added the pic). Still, I only used one wheel in the upright position, instead of three (one on top of the other). This makes up for around 2-1/4 wheels stacked up. Still, some good flex.
My plans to further enhance the cantilever system is to make my own rockers out of a single 1/8 aluminum plate (like the rocker mounting plates) or out of 1/16 stainless. On either option I will be using M3 flanged bearings as pivots with new mounting plates that will allow for almost no interference with the axle truss (and tire to rocker interference, as right now there is just a little).
Hope this actually helps some of you looking into the cantilever setup.

 

[Brake Weight]

Nicely done.

 

[1SLWMoFo]

I have to say that I am really impressed with the way the suspension responds to the terrain on the tests I have done so far, but the real test would be at my not-so-local HS track (RRW Krawl Zone in FL). I may be able to test there next week and if so, I’ll post some pics and maybe a small vid (not big on vid editing).

One thing I’m not liking is how bulky it looks, but for sure after I make them in metal, they will be slimmer and better looking (and more than likely lighter).

 

[JatoTheRipper]

My take at the cantilever suspension...
On my highly modded TF2 Marlin, as I was looking to be able to control torque twist and have a better suspension response on obstacles. I’ve always noticed that TF2’s on 3/4 links and coilovers tend to stuff the rear first and then the front when approaching and obstacle. They extend the front suspension as the rear compresses, and after bottoming out, then the front starts compressing. This tends to get the truck out of balance. So the cantilever helps on this by giving me the ability to heavily adjust preload on the back, preventing torque twist and forcing the front to contract more or less at the same time as the rear. The ride is very much more controlled and I can adjust the height without touching the preload.

Used Revo 3.3 long travel rear rockers. Custom 1/8 aluminum mounting plates screwed in to the TF2 chassis where the rear cross member and electronics box attach to.

Shock mounted directly to chassis as well. Used M3 spacers as needed.

Height adjustment done through a titanium RC10 turnbuckle and some shorty M3 rod ends. They attach to a custom stainless steel lower shock mount that I had fabricated a few months back for an upright rear shock relocation.

Very nicely done! Good looking TF2 as well! "thumbsup"

Do you have more photos of your custom mounting brackets and exactly how you have the rockers mounted?

 

[1SLWMoFo]

Very nicely done! Good looking TF2 as well! "thumbsup"

Do you have more photos of your custom mounting brackets and exactly how you have the rockers mounted?

Thanks Jato. I’m really enjoying it now, after all the mods I’ve done to it (specially the suspension mods). Speaking of that, here are the pics you want...

This is a view of the right rear plate mounted to the frame and the rocker to it. Notice the washer. It is there to make clearance and prevent the rocker from rubbing against the chassis.


The right rear plate. Left rear is identical, but you can see where the rocker spindle mounts and how that hole needs to point forward on the chassis.


What would be the view of the inside part of the chassis if it were mounted. When mounted, the two top holes are leveled on the chassis, thus moving the spindle hole forward which helps a lot on clearing the axle truss mounting end. The washer before the lucknut is there just cause I had two extra ones and, what the heck, doesn’t hurt to have it there.

 

[MAC FAB]

Thats awesome. Then you only other limiting factor would be angularity of the rod ends, or does their ~25* of movement allow for sufficient movement?

 

[1SLWMoFo]

Thats awesome. Then you only other limiting factor would be angularity of the rod ends, or does their ~25* of movement allow for sufficient movement?

I’m not too sure if understand correctly what your asking. Are you talking about the ride height adjuster turnbuckles? Are you asking if they limit the vertical travel of the wheel, or the rotation movement of the rockers?

I mean, The rod ends themselves are not binding at all against anything at all. And the only thing that really make contact and limits travel is the aluminum mounting plates against the part of the 4-link truss that bots to the axle itself. On TF2’s, the 4-link truss is a separate part from the axle itself, as they come with a leaf spring setup from factory. The 4-link is an optional “upgrade” that bolts right up to the rear axle on the same spot where the leafs mounted at. So basically, the parts take up more space where they are screwed at, which is exactly the parts that hit my custom rocker mounting plates.

Maybe a picture would explain myself way better...

 

[1SLWMoFo]

Hope these help out...

 

[MAC FAB]

Hope these help out...

Top pic looks to tell it all, maxxed out on the rod end's range. Could be the perfect storm, max flex in that pic as well?

 

[1SLWMoFo]

Ohhhh, I get you now (feeling a bit dumb at the moment �&#56853. You meant rod end on the pushrod/height adjustment rod. Although I haven’t actually checked if it is actually maxed out on rodend angle at full compression, for my particular setup and real life use it doesn’t really matter as the fender well literally sits on the tire way before the suspension maxes out.
Also, what I see as a real advantage on the system is the torque twist reducing ability and the separate ride height adjustment that you get with the cantilevered action.
Also, I’m thinking of making some changes that could actually enhance the system. I may very well go smaller on the shocks, say from 90mm to 80mm (used the 90 as that was what I had at hand) since I’m not making use of the full shock travel, and then make new mounting plates that move the rocker spindle forward on the chassis to account for the shorter overall shock length. This will allow for no truss/plate interference, better suspension response and preload adjustability, better pushrod angle, and increased ride height adjustment.

 

[JatoTheRipper]

Thanks Jato. I’m really enjoying it now, after all the mods I’ve done to it (specially the suspension mods). Speaking of that, here are the pics you want...

This is a view of the right rear plate mounted to the frame and the rocker to it. Notice the washer. It is there to make clearance and prevent the rocker from rubbing against the chassis.

The right rear plate. Left rear is identical, but you can see where the rocker spindle mounts and how that hole needs to point forward on the chassis.

What would be the view of the inside part of the chassis if it were mounted. When mounted, the two top holes are leveled on the chassis, thus moving the spindle hole forward which helps a lot on clearing the axle truss mounting end. The washer before the lucknut is there just cause I had two extra ones and, what the heck, doesn’t hurt to have it there.

Thank you. I can see the photos in your last post, but not this post or the one below it. I'm getting Photobucket errors and now it says you deleted them. It might just be me though.

Is anybody else having this problem?

 

[1SLWMoFo]

Strange, me as well... let me check my photobucket gallery

Edit...
Go ahead and reload the page, it should be fixed now. I had moved the pics to a separate folder without thinking that changes the link. Anyhow, it’s good now.

 

[JatoTheRipper]

Strange, me as well... let me check my photobucket gallery

Edit...
Go ahead and reload the page, it should be fixed now. I had moved the pics to a separate folder without thinking that changes the link. Anyhow, it’s good now.

That fixed it. Thanks for sharing! "thumbsup" Your mod is done well and I really like it. I would like a second TF2 to make it a performer like yours while keeping my other one stock.

You could get some Rit dye and make those cantilever arms black if you wanted to hide them a little better.

 

[1SLWMoFo]

That fixed it. Thanks for sharing! "thumbsup" Your mod is done well and I really like it. I would like a second TF2 to make it a performer like yours while keeping my other one stock.

You could get some Rit dye and make those cantilever arms black if you wanted to hide them a little better.

Thanks for the recommendation, Jato.
Thought about that, just as they do with the red SCX10ii axle covers. Not sure though, cause if I make rockers like twin 1/16 stainless plates, try and replicate some small dimple holes on it, then separate the plates with M3 silver spacers... that should look really nice!
Anyways, I’ll update the post if I do the mod on the cantilever system.

 

[OGTrout]

Bumping this oldish thread because I didn't think my question required its own.

I've running the Xtraspeed cantilever kit on my rig, I can't really complain about the links/rockers etc, I did think the setup looked like it wouldn't be so strong as they seem kind of far from the rails but it seems to be fine. The included shocks aren't so great, I was never able to make them "slow" even with heavy oil, and they often struggle to support the heavy body I run (although I sometimes find the softness is helpful). Anyway, I've made some changes to my truck and I realised that I can fit the longer shocks I had on before.

Is anyone able to tell me what effect running the longer shocks would have? I can't really get my head around it and obviously I'd probably best of just going for it/seeing what works etc. My guess is that I wouldn't be using the shocks to their full potential/travel unless I mount them a bit short in which case they'd be very sprung.
I don't really know a great deal about tuning suspension, let alone one with a rocker in the middle of it.

 

[crawlinwithacat]

Bumping this oldish thread because I didn't think my question required its own.

I've running the Xtraspeed cantilever kit on my rig, I can't really complain about the links/rockers etc, I did think the setup looked like it wouldn't be so strong as they seem kind of far from the rails but it seems to be fine. The included shocks aren't so great, I was never able to make them "slow" even with heavy oil, and they often struggle to support the heavy body I run (although I sometimes find the softness is helpful). Anyway, I've made some changes to my truck and I realised that I can fit the longer shocks I had on before.

Is anyone able to tell me what effect running the longer shocks would have? I can't really get my head around it and obviously I'd probably best of just going for it/seeing what works etc. My guess is that I wouldn't be using the shocks to their full potential/travel unless I mount them a bit short in which case they'd be very sprung.
I don't really know a great deal about tuning suspension, let alone one with a rocker in the middle of it.

I had the exact same problem as you when I was running the Yeah racing/dinky RC cantilever kit. The shocks are too short and the springs therefore need to be way stiffer making it hard to tune. I think (I am takin a guess here;-)) that the longer shock will allow more ability to fine tune it. You are also able to make the shock piston "float" at a position inside the shock body just like you would in an upright shock. The shorter shock/stronger spring will tend to stay fully extended as opposed to a slight droop like a full-size upright upright. And when you tune the short shock for that slight droop, the cantilever makes it way too soft of a suspension. So you tighten the spring preload but it becomes TOO springy and tends to push the rig over when one rear wheel is elevated and the front on the same side is and inch off the ground. See where i'm going? A longer shock will make the suspension more tuneable and "plush" if you know what I mean.

This is just my experience with a similar kit and my theories as to why it behaves like it does. Apply them how you will, maybe @Natedog will chime in here too"thumbsup"