When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Looks like you can make it work although it certainly doesn't appear to be a great way to mount a diff when not utilizing a notch and quite honestly questionable even when . I have no doubt it's a very technically sound method just not so much a visually pleasing one to me at least . I do believe you could shorten the lower axle brackets a bit without any adverse consequences and my guess would be the front drop brackets will be mostly hidden by the running boards and box . JMHO
There would be no adverse effects if you moved your lower link up in the bracket or ground the bracket down to move the mounting hole up. Doing that and angling it up would almost do away with your spacer block. I have installed many lower axle mounts on high HP rock crawlers where the mount barely hangs down from the axle tube for ground clearance. Something like this.
My thoughts exactly . With 2 mounting points upper and lower the only twist you will get would be the compression of the rubber insulators . Will the shortening of the bottom affect the diff plane when moving ?
Looks like you can make it work although it certainly doesn't appear to be a great way to mount a diff when not utilizing a notch and quite honestly questionable even when . I have no doubt it's a very technically sound method just not so much a visually pleasing one to me at least . I do believe you could shorten the lower axle brackets a bit without any adverse consequences and my guess would be the front drop brackets will be mostly hidden by the running boards and box . JMHO
I certainly agree with the aesthetics of such a mount. lol That was kind of a start trying something approach. Based on your suggestion and Allout5151 my next step will be to shorten the rear bracks some and see where that leaves me. Thanks
There would be no adverse effects if you moved your lower link up in the bracket or ground the bracket down to move the mounting hole up. Doing that and angling it up would almost do away with your spacer block. I have installed many lower axle mounts on high HP rock crawlers where the mount barely hangs down from the axle tube for ground clearance. Something like this.
Thanks, I am going to shorten the rear brackets either by additional mounting holes or cutting them down. I really can't lean them as the rear portion with the holes is where the coil overs attach. I guess I could lean them a little and then lean my coilovers back a little. I might need to do that lean anyway to clearance the axle tubes.
My thoughts exactly . With 2 mounting points upper and lower the only twist you will get would be the compression of the rubber insulators . Will the shortening of the bottom affect the diff plane when moving ?
It will affect it slightly due to the actual shortening of the lower link if he only drills a hole and mounts it higher on that bracket. If he were to shorten the bracket so the mounting hole is still out front it should be close. The rear end on a pickup doesn't travel very much (not like a rockcrawler) so diff angle plane is not a huge concern, only if you are going to put loads in the bed causing the suspension to compress.
OK guys so I took your advice and raised the mounting point of the rear of the lower control arm. I was able to get rid of most of the big blob welded to the bottom of the frame but still ended up a short piece. I am down to a 4 degree up on the lower control arm. This also helps with the angle of the upper control arm to put my anti squat X where I think it needs to be. I did have to C-notch the crossmember that the front upper control arm brackets will be mounted to for clearance of the drive shaft under full suspension travel. I may still have to C-notch a factory bracket ahead of this one also but will hold off on it till I can get better measurements. Not ideal but better than what I had there.
Glad you're winning . I certainly don't see anything wrong with that . Once the decision to go 4 link was made there was always going to be an exposed front mount of some type .
That looks better. I would like to see the axle bracket. Do you have a 4 link calculator? If not, you could give me some measurements and I could put them in mine and give you some numbers. What I would need is:
Distance between lower frame mounts side to side
Distance between upper frame mounts side to side
Distance between lower axle mounts side to side
Distance between upper axle mounts side to side
Distance between upper axle and upper frame mount holes(link length)
Distance between lower axle and lower frame mount(link length)
Height from ground to lower axle mount hole
Height from ground to upper axle mount hole
Height from ground to lower frame mount hole
Height from ground to upper frame mount hole.
Glad you're winning . I certainly don't see anything wrong with that . Once the decision to go 4 link was made there was always going to be an exposed front mount of some type .
YES! I think I am. I spent all morning stringing and measuring Instant Center after having determined where my Center Of Gravity was. By my quick calculations I have come up with a Anti Squat value of 115% as it sits right now. I think I want a little more weight transfer to the back though. Changing the upper control arm angle to 3 degrees down instead of 4 ( I have 4 now) will lower the Anti Squat value down to about 96%. Do you have opinion on Anti Squat percentages on these old trucks? Thanks
I would be tempted to say "only with a full load of gravel" as that is what they were built for, ... but that would be rude, inconsiderate, and dumb, so I won't. .
100% antisquat is neutral. Depends on what you are going to do with the truck. This is an except from a site. 4-link settings of 100% Anti Squat should accelerate the car w/o any raising or squatting of the rear of the car. ~4-link settings with MORE than 100% Anti Squat will Raise the rear end and hit the tires HARDER. ~4-link settings with LESS than 100% Anti Squat will cause the rear end to Squat and hit the tires SOFTER.
100% antisquat is neutral. Depends on what you are going to do with the truck. This is an except from a site. 4-link settings of 100% Anti Squat should accelerate the car w/o any raising or squatting of the rear of the car. ~4-link settings with MORE than 100% Anti Squat will Raise the rear end and hit the tires HARDER. ~4-link settings with LESS than 100% Anti Squat will cause the rear end to Squat and hit the tires SOFTER.
Thank you. I did find a calculator on a Mustang site. I think I will do my 96% setup and probably come out at 100%. lol
I am assuming that " hitting the tires " is referring to traction and " harder " means less traction harder on the tires . So this would come down to preference ( smoke jobs or go like stink ) , hp and tire size considerations .
In theory "hitting the tires harder" refers to driving the axle and tires into the ground creating "more" traction but this also creates less weight transfer and can cause good smoke shows. There is so much that goes into setting up a good suspension for launching, but for our old trucks that are used as a non race vehicle, anything around 100% will be fine.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.
.