Mud-club
Vehicle & Technical => Discovery => Topic started by: Dave on November 08, 2005, 18:56:30
-
Has any one got pics of how dislocating cones fit. How they sit inside the spring and on the top. Basically how they are held in place. Cheers.
-
dave,
the cones sit in the top ring, the cone sits below it and there is a big washer sorta thing and then there is a bolt that goes through the washer and in the middle of the cone
like pic below
hope it helps :D
-
Thanks Dan i just carn't get my head around why the cone will not go up. I take it that the bottom of the spring holder is smaller than the cone
-
Thanks Dan i just carn't get my head around why the cone will not go up. I take it that the bottom of the spring holder is smaller than the cone
no problem mate.
the spring slips over the cone so the cone is held in one place by the bolt the cone is smaller that the spring so the spring can move smoothly on and off the cone,
if u send me a PM i will post some pics i have just took of dads so u get a better idea :D
dan
-
Hi dave its Derrick at lrs 110 springs have a bigger internal diameter so the rear cones are of diffrent sizes make sure you have the correct ones
-
SOmething like this when fitted :
(http://www.devon4x4.com/galleryimages/2ee57640a4869e179891c774efdb6e23.jpg)
-
Thanks Derrick i have not got any yet looking to make some, bit of a project.
-
I have just made a set, the cone is on the bottom, part of the bottom spring seat.
The sping is then clamped in place on the top.
seems to work well.
wizard :twisted:
-
Now that's called thinking outside the box.....
-
Why are they called dislocation cones, when there sole duty is to help spring relocation.
Also is there any reason why the spring is always attached to the axle and not the vehicle?
As having the cone on the axle and the sping on the vehicle seems to make more sense to me.
-
Why are they called dislocation cones, when there sole duty is to help spring relocation.
<cheer> <clap> <cheer>
Also is there any reason why the spring is always attached to the axle and not the vehicle?
As having the cone on the axle and the sping on the vehicle seems to make more sense to me.
Just my personal view, but I think there is less likelyhood of the spring being displaced and missing the locating cone at the top than at the bottom when you are dragging your axles through the mud.
-
Why are they called dislocation cones, when there sole duty is to help spring relocation.
Also is there any reason why the spring is always attached to the axle and not the vehicle?
As having the cone on the axle and the sping on the vehicle seems to make more sense to me.
Shhhhhhh!
Now you've done it.....
:)
-
tim maybe you should add "dislocation cones" to the expletive deleted list
:wink:
mike
-
I actually think there is also an element of 'because that is where they have always been'
Gon2Far started showing a system with the springs on the chassis at the start of this year, which probably made people start to question it.
-
tim maybe you should add "dislocation cones" to the expletive deleted list
<giggle> Do you think that would be an abuse of power :-)
Maybe I could just get the system to swap 'dislocation' with 'relocation' 8)
-
I have been told that they relocate better on the bottom. I personally have scorpion ones and they work really well. I wouldnt want to be without them or you find yourself using the hilift to pop them back....not good.
The bottom ones have been around for a while and you are right they are on the gon 2 far system.....have a look on here for a similar idea but the yanks dont often do cones they do some weird stuff instead!
http://www.safarigard.com/
hit products ...look at that ford!
-
Maybe I could just get the system to swap 'dislocation' with 'relocation' 8)
Go on, I dare you :lol:
-
sorry, but I just cant resist this.......
Call them what you like, but they still do little for traction - they just save you having to put the spring back.
:wink:
-
Call them what you like, but they still do little for traction - they just save you having to put the spring back.
YAY!
/me cheers
FINALLY...someone understands :-)
-
OK guys, I can't resist this either (by the way I'm laughing)....
Why is it that everyone who states cones do nothing to aid traction have either LSD's or Lockers ?
And yes I do get your point that "it's not the actual cone that gives you traction" blah, blah humbug
-
Er.....
Lost : The plot.
If found please return to Mace.
What the HELL has a relocation cone got to do with traction?
-
Andy,
me laffing too ;-)
but seriously I would have said that about cones even if i didnt have a locker. I have had an LR without one for a long time you know!
In answer to Neils question, a cone could help traction if it happened to fall off and get trapped under the tyre I suppose!
I love this topic!
:wink:
-
What the HELL has a relocation cone got to do with traction?
I was thinking the same thing....
The only thing a RELOCATION cone does is what it says on the tin.
They save you from kicking the bloody spring back into place.
Thats the only reason i fitted mine
Photo to follow.
regards
wizard :twisted:
-
Just as an aside, does anybody do these for a Series 2 Disco?
Having popped a spring a couple of months back, it would save the hassle of trying to put the darn thing back in when it happens again.
Tim, would that one in the D44 pic fit?
-
What about some sort of super duper magnet....or....hang the expense..a jubilee clip!!!
<grin>
-
Jubilee clip... how common... :shock:
wizard
-
..a jubilee clip!!!
You're just so common, aren't you?
:tongue:
-
Tim made a point the other day about commenting on HIS own experience. I can only do the same.
I will try and explain my thoughts...
Dislocation cones are designed to relocate your springs when they have popped out.
My springs pop out because I do not have long travel springs but I do have +2" shocks.
I bought long travel shocks because I wanted more articulation.
I want more articulation to keep my wheels on the ground.
I want to Keep my wheels on the ground so I *might* get more traction.
I want more traction because I can't afford an LSD or a Locker.
My six points above are a whole package. They interlink. This package cost me £265.00.
Your whole point about it not actually being the cone which gives you traction is correct and always was correct. I've never argued with that. What I am and always will argue about is the fact that those of us who have cones fitted, have bought them to aid traction (as a package). I can't have more articulation without allowing my spring to dislocate. The two things are linked. Why would I allow my springs to disclocate and then not seat properly again? What I object to is being told I am wrong for making my decision. I enjoy having 9" of air between my spring top and spring seat, safe in the knowledge that 9" of air *might* just help me gain traction under certain circumstances.
I cannot agree more that under YOUR circumstances Thrasher, cones would have no benefit, but as far as I'm concerned with my set up they work. I bought cones to help with my overall battle with traction, at a price. If my budget had been different then perhaps cones would not have been necessary. All that said, spending £500+ per axle on traction control accessories is not within my scope at the moment. I'd rather spend £30 on cones and practise my technique.
For me cones are part of my traction package. Simple.
And yes Dave, I do enjoy this topic too !
-
...and so it goes around again. Disclocating a wheel does NOT aid traction to a great extent, especially if you have shorter springs?!
£500 per axle? That's expensive. I paid £350 for a pair of tru-tracs. You just have to know where to look :-)
-
£500 per axle? That's expensive. I paid £350 for a pair of tru-tracs. You just have to know where to look :-)
...arrogant man
-
Nope..not arrogant. I'm a tightwad. I would NEVER have bought traction aids for £500 an axle.
But this is like the oil/grease in swivels debate. The only way you can prove anything is physically. Get a standard vehicle, with standard suspension, and an obstacle. Drive both over. See what happens.
-
I had a discussion about extreme suspension setups with the nice man who had this very argument with a salesman on the Scorpion stand at Billing.
As he tried to explain to this salesman, although it looks very nice and it will keep your wheels on the ground for longer, the traction the dropped wheel has is very minimal. The reason for this is simple. As soon as the spring dislocates there is nothing but the weight of the axle keeping the wheel on the ground. With the spring in place at least you have the weight of the vehicle pushing the axle down. To prove his point he lifted up the dislocated wheel off of the floor with one hand and asked how much traction that was supposed to provide.
He was asked to leave the stand shortly afterwards.
PS - Neil, where did you get your LSD's from then? PM required please :wink:
-
My bottom mounted cone !!!
(http://www.discoveryownersclub.org/gallery/albums/userpics/10066/normal_Relocation%20cone.jpg)
Maddonnas top mounted cones !!!
(http://www.gasolinealleyantiques.com/celebrity/images/Rock/madonna-stylebook.jpg)
wizard
-
Disclocating a wheel does NOT aid traction to a great extent, especially if you have shorter springs?!
Ahah Thrasher, caught you out, you're starting to believe me, now you say "to a great extent"....
implication being that it might actually work :wink:
-
To prove his point he lifted up the dislocated wheel off of the floor with one hand and asked how much traction that was supposed to provide
A. First of all impressive. My wheels and tyre weigh a ton and I'm a weedy 10 stone so I'd probably need two hands to lift a wheel/mud tyre/axle
B. If one wheel was dislocated it would imply that the other wheel / spring was compressed. Your standard diff would not turn this grounded wheel but would spin the dislocated wheel as it was the wheel with least resistance.
So spinning this wheel (even tho it's only got it's own weight pushing it down) will achieve nothing, correct ?
-
So spinning this wheel (even tho it's only got it's own weight pushing it down) will achieve nothing, correct ?
A 'light' wheel spinning will only dig or scuff the surface and provide little in the way of traction. In much the same way as locking the brakes does little for braking!
If I am heading sideways for an obstacle, the last thing I want to do is to stop the wheels from spinning. If they are spinning, I am less likely to get into a roll situation as the spinning wheels should hopefully slide over the top. That's the theory anyway! :wink:
It gets into the realms of soil dynamics and coefficients of grip.
If you do find yourself in a cross axle situation like you quote chances are you would be better trying left foot breaking to encourage the diff to transfer the power back to the wheel with the grip.
Regards
H
-
Wow, another interesting "hot" topic (or is it the same? :wink: ) - very interesting reading.
Can I please ask that as many of you as possible congregate around the BBQ at Whaddon and provide the nights entertainment :wink: :lol:
Just to add to the fire ... I mean conversation - my car still has it's anti-roll bars and a 1" lift. If/when I get into a situation where one wheel is off the ground (past the limit of articulation), then the car will potentially be unbalanced, I assume tending to go where the lifted wheel should be (on the ground).
If I had super articulation and the wheel actually managed to stay on the ground, would that make the car more stable? I.e. the shock absorber (at least) would help reduce the speed of change?
Basically, if all 4 wheels are on the ground (at least touching, not necessarily with much weight from the car), does that make it more stable/controlable?
-
If you do find yourself in a cross axle situation like you quote chances are you would be better trying left foot breaking to encourage the diff to transfer the power back to the wheel with the grip.
I dont get crossaxled, I use dislocation cones, my wheels stay on the ground :D
If that fails, I flick in the ARB's :D
Rolla
-
Traction benefits aside.... one thing to be wary of is the additional strain being put on the drivetrain and suspension with large amounts of axle movement.
The bushes are put under more compression, the driveline UJs run at high angles putting strain on them and the input / output bearings of the diff and transfer box.
You also get very exciting effects if the drooping wheel suddenly does find some grip. The rear radius arm of a Land Rover is designed fundamentally to work in compression.. the further away from it's 'natural' position it gets, the more oblique the forces applied to it become. Even "heavy duty" arms can be bent up like a banana with a bit too much power and some sudden grip.
These things are what keep us amused on dark nights when playing with suspension :-)
-
The rear radius arm of a Land Rover is designed fundamentally to work in compression..
Umm, don't you mean tension, unless your working on the front? :? Apply a big force, axially from the wrong end and they do 'pretzl' nicely, without adding off-axis loadings!.
cheers
8)
Eeyore
-
:oops:
must concentrate on one thing at once :roll:
-
Mace,
Go to the video section of mud-club and download the "Belgium2" video. Watch George with his non-anti-rollbar suspension get stuck, and the anti-roll barred vehicles walk the twister.....
-
CONES I went to whaddon last year. The spring came out of place, did not notice till started to drive home and smelt rubber tyres £100 odd each stopped at the side of the road Chris "big boy" helped me put it back in. Don't want it to happen again. I have 2" lift springs and shocks should this not happen :?: Hence the cones.
-
from my personal experience
using <expletive deleted>(laughs at tim) cones.
dislocating suspension travel really made no difference to traction
ie wheels moving the vehicle forward
but it does allow me to travel through crossaxled situations a little better(dependant on speed)
it does allow me to pop over larger mounds at a diagonal angle and not get grounded.
i dont have bump stops anywhere near long enough to stop the wheel hitting the rear inner arch.
although twin shocks allow a little more resistance
so if i drive quick enough then the wheel and arch do not contact
the a frame ball joint bears the brunt of this stress
if i came to a halt in a cross axled situation and my wheel made contact with the inner arch then halfshafts could easily snap.
my god ive rambled on
traction======no
get further =======yes
cause more damage=======yes
wheels on ground doesnt equal traction
bodys hanging on the vehicle over the spinning wheel helps :wink:
the physics are in the above comment
but as for my <expletive deleted>(second laugh at tim ) cones
i am keeping them
mike
-
Poppycock, the lot of ya...old debate no-one will ever conclude. Each seem to be entrenched on one side or the other and no-one is giving ground.
I dont know the answer either....Simon i'm worried about your comment. I wouldn't want to meet the bloke who could lift my dislocated axle one handed....how big was he or is this an urban myth, the giant scorpion axle monster??? Im 16 and a half stone of lard and pretty strong. I will try this in the light tomorrow and i suspect that it isnt possible.
The only benefit i can see is that with increased travel the suspension reacts more steadily and allows the vehicle to remain more stable...but the taller the vehicle the less stable it will become.
-
:twisted: im loving this forum :twisted:
debate after dabate
it like the house of commons
mike
-
no mate thats full of people who mass-debate!
-
cant lift an axle one handed?
eat more greens!
:wink:
-
Of the vehicles which are mine, one could be modified to "dislocate" a spring,the other *could not*. Is the one which can't inferior to the one that can?
-
Of the vehicles which are mine, one could be modified to "dislocate" a spring,the other *could not*. Is the one which can't inferior to the one that can?
IMHO yes because the one that can't isn't a Discovery :lol: :lol: but then I am biased
-
Of the vehicles which are mine, one could be modified to "dislocate" a spring,the other *could not*. Is the one which can't inferior to the one that can?
perfect opportunity to come to whaddon and test the theory.
you know you should be there
mike
-
Pete,
Remember at least one of your Discovery's was born from the RR :-)
Can't do Whaddon. Work.
Oh and...trust me...Mace would not like it, as the factory spec one comes with added traction enhancements I can't switch off.....
-
Pete,
Remember at least one of your Discovery's was born from the RR :-)
Does that mean as it is the son or daughter of RR it will be better in the long run as it will grow up not to have daddys and mommys faults :shock: :lol: :lol:
-
Well currently the RRS is suffering from the LR3 faults.....so......er....
-
Well currently the RRS is suffering from the LR3 faults.....so......er....
argghhhhh in breeding now look what they have done ](*,) ](*,)
-
I think this guy may hold the answer,
http://www.sproklegrommet.co.uk/LRSuspension/Index.asp
Oh and the only type of cone you need is a 99!
-
Pants!! blow up rubber ...if you like that kind of thing?!? Lottery win anyone??
Anyone read LRO? the section on how far you can push a modded Lanny kind of leans toward the thinking the cones are GOOD! shock horror ...what amazing timing...Read it and weep boys!!
Is that the time , im far too sad....off to bed look- forward to the replies.
-
Bulli,
I don't think anyone is disputing that RE-locating (blows a raspberry at Chuggaman) cones are a good idea.
The issue, as it usually does, has turned to whether lifting your springs out of their seats provides any real benefit. And on that, I think you are right in saying that there will never be a "right" answer.
-
The issue, as it usually does, has turned to whether lifting your springs out of their seats provides any real benefit. And on that, I think you are right in saying that there will never be a "right" answer.
its just allowing those people who fit cones in the thinking they may get extra traction from it see that fitting them primarily helps the spring back into place. :wink: ..let the debate continue I say!
Bulli,
looking at your signature, thats an impressive list of spares you have there - do you plan getting a vehicle to put them on ?
:wink:
-
think a poll might be in order
mike
-
Perhaps some sort of trial/vehicle test could be arranged?
for and against, see who gets stuck/rolls over/goes home crying first....................
Men from the boys and all that.....
-
see who gets stuck/rolls over/goes home crying first....................
That'll be Turtle, Andy (from MK4x4) and either Jason or Guy110 ('cos they're always breaking stuff)
:lol:
-
Anyone want any spares??? I have loads of standard crap lying around....
here's my little disco...just so you know its real.BUt it is a very OLD photo , pre 3 link and lots of toys...
-
The issue, as it usually does, has turned to whether lifting your springs out of their seats provides any real benefit. And on that, I think you are right in saying that there will never be a "right" answer.
its just allowing those people who fit cones in the thinking they may get extra traction from it see that fitting them primarily helps the spring back into place. :wink: ..let the debate continue I say!
Bulli,
looking at your signature, thats an impressive list of spares you have there - do you plan getting a vehicle to put them on ?
:wink:
Muddyweb, spot on. There is no right answer. I made this comment last week - no one needs to prove anything as it's almost impossible to prove. And just to be pedantic, the need to lift your springs out of their seats can be avoided by fitting long travel springs in some cases, thus negating the need for cones. It doesn't avoid the fact that long travel suspension of any kind is there to keep your wheels closer to the ground. Correct?
Davidlandy, as usual you've missed the point :wink: We all fit dislocation cones to put our springs back in when they have popped out, FACT. The question your side seem to avoid answering is WHY the spring popped out in the 1st place ? If your set up doesn't allow your suspension to travel further than the spring length then there's no need. In your case Dave there is no need as your springs are held in place with a pair of your wifes tights. I would hazard a guess that anyone who's springs do pop out have intentionally made alterations to allow their suspension to travel further. And why would they want to do that? Can someone give me the answer?
Bulli, what are gayspokes ?
I still cannot undertand why this causes such debate. In my mind keeping a wheel on the ground under 95% of circumstances must have a benefit (no matter how small) on traction or stability. We all do it different ways.
Has anyone given a thought to the guy who asked the question at the start of this thread. Bet he wished he'd never asked now :lol:
-
Has anyone given a thought to the guy who asked the question at the start of this thread. Bet he wished he'd never asked now
:?
Has any one got pics of how dislocating cones fit. How they sit inside the spring and on the top. Basically how they are held in place. Cheers.
Had to look what the original question was :oops:
I've just ordered a 2" lift kit from Paddocks, being a mechanical fool, it's booked into the garage next week to fit the lot, INCLUDING DIS/RE-LOCATION CONES, whether I need them or not.
Dave, if you are still having problems, let me know and I can:
a) ask the garage how they did it
b) take pictures for you
c) find out roughly how much it cost to fit them (or how much it would have cost if I hadn't been having all the rest done at the same time.
-
I would hazard a guess that anyone who's springs do pop out have intentionally made alterations to allow their suspension to travel further.
The only alteration to my suspension was to fit OME springs and shocks giving me a 2" lift (allowing the larger tyres etc). I still have my anti roll bars fitted otherwise I think my suspension would move alot move than it does now, so no intention to allow further travel.
My springs popped out just 'cos I am getting braver and doing things in the car that previously I didn't, resulting in taking articulation to the limits on the TD5 with anti roll bars fitted.
-
Tim thanks mate but while all this arguing as been going on i have got my hands on some metal and have a good idea of what to try :wink:
Also i promise not to mention the subject at WW2 :roll:
-
Dave,
I've just signed for my package which contains (or it better anyway :evil: ) the cones, if you are looking to make some, would you like any measurements or pictures before they go to the garage?
-
The issue, as it usually does, has turned to whether lifting your springs out of their seats provides any real benefit. And on that, I think you are right in saying that there will never be a "right" answer.
its just allowing those people who fit cones in the thinking they may get extra traction from it see that fitting them primarily helps the spring back into place. :wink: ..let the debate continue I say!
Bulli,
looking at your signature, thats an impressive list of spares you have there - do you plan getting a vehicle to put them on ?
:wink:
Davidlandy, as usual you've missed the point :wink: We all fit dislocation cones to put our springs back in when they have popped out, FACT. The question your side seem to avoid answering is WHY the spring popped out in the 1st place ? If your set up doesn't allow your suspension to travel further than the spring length then there's no need. In your case Dave there is no need as your springs are held in place with a pair of your wifes tights. I would hazard a guess that anyone who's springs do pop out have intentionally made alterations to allow their suspension to travel further. And why would they want to do that? Can someone give me the answer?
Andy, (love the debate, u know me) , anyway, me missed the point, I dont think so young sir :wink: the point I am making is as I have mentioned, the point of the cones is primarily to ensure that when your spring dislocates it goes back home, NOT to gain traction.
When you purchased your suspension system did you design and buy it with in mind that it would dislocate to give you traction or did you just happen to find out that your springs kept popping out and therefore bought cones to sort the problem? like many others.
My set up is OME and if I let the axle drop the length of the shocker the spring still stays in situ. I didnt design it that way but I do have a completementry spring and shocker package. I didnt know whether my springs would pop out of not!, but if they did I was just gonna fit jubilee clips or my wifes best hosiery if some was availble - in fact whilst searching through her drawers I did find some suspenders which I thought may be useful, but they melted when I tried to weld them on as axle retining straps!
I would also ask the question on stability as to if a vehicle is less or more stable whether the wheel is dangling in the air, or when its on the floor under full articulation in a dislocated situation ? surely the vehicle can still rock with a similar effort until the spring locates again? hhmmm....
:wink: :wink: :wink: :D
-
Andy, (love the debate, u know me) ,the point of the cones is primarily to ensure that when your spring dislocates it goes back home, NOT to gain traction.
I have never dissagreed with this arguement Dave. As you've stated before, stick one under the tyre and it might help :lol: . What I've always said is MY disclocation cones are there as part of a package to help me scrape the last ounce (if thats the right term) of traction out of my setup. It's this package thing (can't have one without the other) bit which is the point I inferred you missed.
When you purchased your suspension system did you design and buy it with in mind that it would dislocate to give you traction
YES I did. In fact I was given a pair of scorpion dislocation cones before I bought my spring shocks package. :shock: Therefore my whole decision was based around the cones. Rightly or wrongly (we can't prove it either way) I want my wheels on the ground in the hope that some traction can be found. If I didn't have the cones I may have bought longer travel springs instead, but I didn't because I'd got the cones. AND as Hightower has said, the reason I bought my springs was ONLY to gain extra room under the arches for bigger tyres. I wasn't after more ground clearance. The spring issue aside, I bought +2" shocks (actually were +2.5" extra over the ones I removed) so I could get my axle to droop further and keep the wheels on the ground. The results were a laugh :lol: 1st problem was my anti-roll bars restricted the articulation and made the need for cones or +2" shocks irrellevant. When I removed the ARB I found that I finally got the articulation I wanted, yippie I thought. Nope the b****y cones I'd been given didn't fit my springs very well and got jammed. Muddyweb and Datalas can probably remember laughing at me whilst helping to relocate my springs at www1 :?
My set up is OME and if I let the axle drop the length of the shocker the spring still stays in situ.
Again, I'll repeat myself. I have +1.5" springs on the back which are shorter than some long travel springs such as Scorpion ones which have extra coils in reserve under articulation. I'm sure we could get your 90 and my disco to articulate to the same height and your springs will still be in their seats and mine will have popped. I need cones, you don't.
I would also ask the question on stability as to if a vehicle is less or more stable whether the wheel is dangling in the air, or when its on the floor under full articulation in a dislocated situation ? surely the vehicle can still rock with a similar effort until the spring locates again? hhmmm....
A very good question Dave, but the difference with the two set ups is one will have several inches of air to pass through before it hits the deck (possibly breaking a half shaft / bending a trailing arm, if you get it all wrong) the other will have a *period* of time when the shock absorber is actually working to slow down the rate of decent of the weight on that corner. It maybe slight but it's working. The only thing I'll say is, take the dislocating bit out of the equation. Longer springs will keep you on the floor too.
I've never said my set up is better than anyone elses. I've never said anyones elses set up doesn't work for them. All you anti extreme suspension chaps seem hell bent on telling those who choose to have cones, dislocating springs, long travel shocks, no anti-roll bars etc etc that they are mugs, wrong and need to be put in an assylum. Thats arrogance. No one has proven anything.
Dave. Finally, can I have any spare hosiery you're throwing out, I need some stockings to rob a bank so I can buy some ARB lockers. Like you I'd then be coneless :lol: :lol:
-
I've never said my set up is better than anyone elses. I've never said anyones elses set up doesn't work for them. All you anti extreme suspension chaps seem hell bent on telling those who choose to have cones, dislocating springs, long travel shocks, no anti-roll bars etc etc that they are mugs, wrong and need to be put in an assylum. Thats arrogance. No one has proven anything.
Remind next time I want to help someone save money, to shup up, or it might be seen as being arrogant. :roll:
-
Anyone want any spares??? I have loads of standard crap lying around....
here's my little disco...just so you know its real.BUt it is a very OLD photo , pre 3 link and lots of toys...
Me too. I'm after a pair of anti-roll bars though......
-
Tim yes please to the measurements, pics. I have some pipe 115mm diameter which should be the right size to fit if i cut some slits in the tube then fold in to a point for the bottom and two bars to bolt the top. Just want some dry weather to get some jobs done.
-
As Ali G once said "Easy NOW"
im gonna go with the more common cheap method & say jubilee clips rock & disclocated springs to nothing more than get in the way,if you can afford to fit lockers etc why u arguing about dislocating springs [Edited],all you do is flick switch & drive,for those without lockers we have to concentrate on what we are doing,pick a line that our vehicle will cross with the minimum of damage to our vehicle & the terrain...
on all my 90's & the 110 i have +2 springs & shockies,if you flex it hgard enough they can come out,BUT if you use a jubilee clipx2 per rear spring,problem soved & £28 saved,
also in regards to neil being classed as arrogant,think thats a bit harsh eh.. :wink:
<runs for cover & picks maces toy's up>
-
Trust me is you fit ARB's (lockers) you want as much articulation as possible it keeps the car more stable allowing you to make progress( imho)
I believe that you are better to keep the wheels on the ground, and mine is safe but not great on the road.
RRB sorry but never had anti roll bars, really dont want them either... rock and ROLL!
-
Trust me is you fit ARB's (lockers) you want as much articulation as possible it keeps the car more stable allowing you to make progress( imho)
I believe that you are better to keep the wheels on the ground, and mine is safe but not great on the road.
RRB sorry but never had anti roll bars, really dont want them either... rock and ROLL!
if thats the case if you watch hammer down 2 (american rock crawling) the ones with the silly articulation going for keeping the wheels on the ground are the ones that end upside down as the wheels stay still & the body moves waaaaay out due to the travel & then comes crashing down,all because it has so much articulation
-
and i suppose they would be in an extreme rock crawling competition with NO articulation and anti roll bars...OH no they would be the nice sensible 4x4 they towed it to the event with...dont be silly!
-
right sod it,i challenge you to bring ur tricked up gee wizzz wagon uphere for a play at drumclog(landyman ash;you aswell) cos that WILL sort the men from the boys,I challenge yo to go up death valley & come out at the top unaided,
this is a site where dont matter what you got,its how you use it that counts
-
hmmmm, i may take you up on that. Not that i think there is owt to prove i just like seeing different sites and its nice to make new friends.
You do see my point though..those yanks dont often dislocate their springs but do have huge travel...infact most use coil overs which by their nature cannot dislocate.40+inch tyres are needed to negotiate the rocks they cross and they are following a preset course...hey if they roll they dont often care they just get on with it.
Death valley sounds nice i could do with getting a tan ..im guessing because of its name its dry and hot???Any piccies?
Are you coming south at all? Fife is a fair way for me ...hows about a lakes weekend? Ash is way further south ...poor lad
-
i do see your point,but u can also see mine that if you have lockers the fact the wheels of the ground due to a lack of articulation aint gonna be a problem,
dunno why its called death valley,theres one way in & one way out,(unless you fancy a 3 point turn)
its also wet as hell & a HUGE hole to get out off
(http://forum.difflock.com/discus/messages/6/111677.jpg)
BTW drumclog is just south of kilmarnock & is about 1 1/2 hour drive for me to get there,dont normally go much further than DC for offroading aloth i am planning on heading north for a wee trip over crimbo
-
i know what you mean but looking at the phote that isnt going to prove either case. My lockers and tyres would be the deciding factor on a mud pitt like that . I find the extra travel makes it more stable and easier for me to predict....mine was standard once and there are times when waving a wheel is disconcerting.
Have a look at the travle in this shot. if i hadnt got the flex i would have 2 wheels airborn....a few of the other guys couldnt get through it...plus it means you can take it slowly and use the arbs to full effect without the body moving all over the place.
-
BTW the pic is one of the "easier" bits,
-
the bottom photo is part of the extreme challenge at Kirton lindsay that i marchalled this summer...walked through that bit...but it wasnt one of the hard sections.
-
also in regards to neil being classed as arrogant,think thats a bit harsh eh.. :wink: <runs for cover & picks maces toy's up>
My toys are still in my pram, honest :D
Apologies to Neil if you found my comment harsh, but it was in response to you telling the world that you could get a pair of trutrac LSD's for £350. The implication being that you knew something we didn't and you were mocking the rest of us if we paid out £500 per axle for any form of traction aid. I found that arrogant and said so.
Sorry Neil.
-
The implication being that you knew something we didn't and you were mocking the rest of us if we paid out £500 per axle for any form of traction aid. I found that arrogant and said so.
He possibly does, specifically where to get them from a lot cheaper.. Arrogance would be where he refused to pass on that bit of information when asked :)
-
if thats the case if you watch hammer down 2 (american rock crawling) the ones with the silly articulation going for keeping the wheels on the ground are the ones that end upside down as the wheels stay still & the body moves waaaaay out due to the travel & then comes crashing down,all because it has so much articulation
Dude, if youre gonna get all tech, then at least get it right.
Most Crawlers use coil over shocks, anything from 15 inch to 20 inch travel. These have the mains spring(possibly two to get dual rate) then a saggy ass assistor spring to keep the spring seats captive. his is probably no more than 10ft/lb, and there only to hold the main spring steady, they are mostly fullt compressed(ie flat) when the car has its weight on it.
The main spring may as well be classed as dislocating. Now if you think Landrover shocks with maybe 6-8 inch travel are a good thing then carry on, if you think that long travel shocks(lets face it, 10 inch minimum is a start) then you either need springs with a real slack rising rate for about 8 inches, or dislocators. Ill tell ya, fit 12 inch travel shocks and those landy springs look real short real soon.
The ones getting it right in the video, are the trucks with either good drivers, or a suspension set up that has its anti squat/dive well sorted, and doesnt turn into a bucking bronco at 75 degrees with plenty of skinny pedal.
Dont mean to come over all anal, but with some reasonable suspension travel, how do you propose to control your spring? I assume you agree we DO need suspension..........
As for a trip to Fife, jees mate, Id need a fortnight off work in the zook. :D
Hope to meet up some point and have a play, Anacondas and ARB's work in mud as well, just my dislocating suspension also works on ickle bumps :D :D
-
Take into account that the good 'ole boys across the pond also use winches fore and aft, that arent for recovery, oh no, thay simply winch the axle up against the springs, reducing suspension droop.
When ya hit a steep climb, tuck the front axle up with the winch, helps stabilise the car, stops the front lifting on acceleration.
Get in a messy rock garden, slacken off the axle winches, and suddenly long travel suspension is back with all 4 wheels on the floor supplying drive and stability.
Damn it, Im moving to America! :D :D