CK5 - The Full-Size GM Off Road Community

Ok, I'm pulling this out of the "Lifts that don't ride like crap" thread. I got interested in it and sorta hijacked the thread discussing it with Donovan. Anyway, I thought I would throw it out here for general viewing. Sorry, I know it’s generally frowned on to hijack a thread and go off-topic, but it didn’t start that way. http://www.coloradok5.com/forums/images/icons/frown.gif

I'll post the relevant history from the other thread below in chronological order separated by “--------------------“

-----------------------------------------------------------
The best riding springs are going to be a spring that is longer than a stock one. What I mean is the shackle angle is very important. The more straight up and down the worst it will ride. The more it is kicked to the back the better it will ride. That is assuming that you have a positive arch spring. Look at my web page and you can see the longer shackles and they mount at about 45 degrees to the back. http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com/photo.htmlThis makes for a super smooth ride. Also my buddy with the red blazer in the pictures is getting longer top leaf to install on his tuff country setup. This should smooth out the ride and give him more flex.

Donovan
http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com
Bigger is Better

-----------------------------------------------------------
Cool, I never thought about that but I guess I can see why it would work. If the shackle is vertical, the forces caused by the axle moving closer to the frame will be directed straight into the frame. Only the dearching of the spring will cause the shackle to move past it’s vertical position. When the shackle is already angled to the back, in the direction of spring extension, then forces caused by the axle moving toward the frame will be converted through leverage to sort of "stretch" the spring out effectively reducing it's spring rate. In the other direction, the forces of the axle moving away from the frame will be directed into the increased arching of spring rather than simply pulling straight across the shackle (which of course is not going to stretch).

I like it, make the existing forces work for you through leverage.

So, let me see, you took 84 Cherokee main leafs, an add-a-leaf, and a 77 Wagoneer main stack to build your front springs. I guess the width and pin location is already about right for the Chevy? Did you make those shackles? Does that extra hole have a purpose?

Those spring rockers look interesting too. Simple concept, should be easy enough to make.

Any down sides to the longer springs OR the spring rockers? I guess it reduces the load carrying ability but off hand I don’t see anything else. I’m tired and I may have missed something but, it looks like I have just found another trick for my project. Thanks…

Nice ride.

Bad Dog
-----------------------------------------------------------

No I don't see any side effects to the longer front springs at all. They are 23" from the front spring bolt to the center pin. Stock chevy is 23.5". So that is okay. The shackles are made by me out of 3/8" plate. The extra hole will be for a brace like the Hill Shackles have. The bushing in the cherokee springs are a metric size. The bolts was 14 mm so what I did is drill the bushing out .011" to 9/16" size. This is now 9/16" front and back. These shackles are 6.75" long but they need to be a little longer because the hit the frame but it is not that bad. I will probably leave them the way they are. The measurement from the bumpstop to the top of the axle is 12.5" which is about 4" lift. If you need the measurements on the shackle let me know and I will make you a drawing of them. If you have any question let me know.

Donovan
http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com
-----------------------------------------------------------

On the shackles, thanks! I don't need a drawing, just the hole to hole. Is the 6.75 you mentioned hole to hole? You think 0.5" longer would fix the frame clearance problem?

Also, moving the axle forward a bit is one of the things I wanted to do anyway so 0.5 shorter is 0.5 in the right direction. I was planning on using BDS or TC 4" lift. I wonder if I could get them to provide a longer main leaf? If so, wonder what it would cost? I think I'll call their tech line...

Bad Dog
-----------------------------------------------------------

Yes it is 6.75 from center to center. I was think about making 7.25" long ones. So you are right on the money.

Donovan
-----------------------------------------------------------
What about those spring rockers? How much difference (good/bad) have they made? Looks like a simple concept. Basically make a hinge out of really strong stuff with the pin running parallel to the spring, bolt the bottom to the axle using short u-bolts, and the top to the normal spring plate using bolts/studs. Do you have a better picture(s) of them? It would be nice to machine some straps (like on some u-joints) to replace the u-bolts and then use studs in the hinge with nuts on the straps so that the lower plate would not need to be so wide to clear the u-bolt nuts. However, the design would have to be right so it did not create a hang point problem like spring under setups tend to have.

I guess the thickness would work more pretty much like a block which could cause additional axle wrap but the whole thing should not be over 1-1.5" tall so it should be ok. I don't know if I would trust those things on the street but it might be really cool on a dedicated rock ride...

Bad Dog
--------------------------------------------------------


Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

This is the kind of stuff I'm here for, fantastic! I read that post earlyer and have past it over since, thanks for tagging it Baddog. I don't think you can go wrong with longer leafs (too a point).

I've also been following the thread. The only drawback I can see with the pivots might extra body roll. No big deal on a trail only truck, also they could probably be pinned for street use.

Donovan has posted his 'recipe' for his front springs, as well as pictures of how his beast flexes, a couple of times before. Pretty impressive stuff! Its got me looking for Wagoneer springs etc. I'd get right on it but I have to focus on body work for the mean time.

Rene

http://www.standonguard.com/images/m_gordie.gif<A target="_blank" HREF=http://jules.coloradok5.com>http://jules.coloradok5.com</A>

Well guys I am still testing the rear pivots out. Yes they do have more body roll but I really don't have a problem with it. That is the best pictures I have of them. I got them as a test mule from http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com (http://www.bcbroncos>http://www.bcbroncos</A>.)
Bigger is Better

Sweet! Keep us all posted....

Rene

http://www.standonguard.com/images/m_gordie.gif<A target="_blank" HREF=http://jules.coloradok5.com>http://jules.coloradok5.com</A>

Here is a quick little picture I draw to show you what I have in mind to lock the rear pivots from moving while on the street. Look here, I hope that you can see it. http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com (http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com/whats_new.html>http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com/whats_new.html</A>

Donovan
<A)
Bigger is Better

Your kid draw that? (just kiddding), looks like it would be ok, would have to be yery ridged.How about two pinsoff the axle, a left and right, too take the stress off just ine? Your mission, if you chose, is to get it handled and let us know. We take no responsibility and will decline any knolahge of this post. Good luck.

TwiZtid

Yes you could mount two brackets one on each side and that would be fine. Yes I chose to take that mission.http://www.coloradok5.com/forums/images/icons/smile.gif
So liked the drawing? HEHEhttp://www.coloradok5.com/forums/images/icons/wink.gif

Donovan
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com>http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com</A>
Bigger is Better

Better yet; why not a panard bar? Anything wrong with that? discannect it for the hills, tie it in for the streets.

A panhard rod will not help any in this setup. The panhard rod is used to keep the axle from moving side to side. The next best thing to my drawing would be a rear sway bar. Then you could use sway bar disconnects.

Donovan
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com>http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com</A>
Bigger is Better

I'm making this post just to add a few more thoughts I had on how/why this works so well and to bring it current since there has been more discussion on this in other recent thread. I'm just pasting my post from the other thread into this one.

&lt;paste&gt;

On the shackles, there were two things discussed on the old thread where I first saw Donovan's setup. One, of course, is to clear the frame. The other was to help with the ride and spring deformation. With a longer shackle angled back to the spring eye, the action of spring compression is converted to leverage that actually aids in de-arching the spring. The reverse is true when the axle starts down in droop. The downward pull causes the angled shackle to move toward the front increasing the pressures on the spring which ultimately result in increased arch. This affectively reduces the spring rate a bit without running softer, weaker springs. Now, that may not be a perfect explanation but that is what I think I understand about it. We discussed this at length on an earlier thread.

Oh, and one other thing. If you visualize what happens in droop you will see that without the shackle beginning it's movement angled back, you will reach a point where the axle pulling down on the spring can not arch it any more because the spring is pulling straight along the shackle. Since the front is mounted solid, the axle can not move down any further without bending the spring into a V rather than a smooth arch. The net result of angling the shackle back would be a deeper droop with the spring remaining in a normal arch. This in turn results in better articulation with less stress on the springs (I think, unless I'm missing something). I'm no expert on this and I've never done it, I'm just trying to think/visualize my way through to an understanding. This is something I have every intention of trying on my current project as soon as I get around to it.

&lt;/paste&gt;

Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

BadDog,
When I built my front "buggy spring" I angled the shackles straight up and down. I figured by doing this there wouldn't be much resistence while tucking the suspension. I also used greasable bolts and bushings and just made them snug tight. I then put extre nuts on each bolt so they couldn't backoff. It rides much better than it did before, plus it tucks very well. Take a look at this guys website, he has some type of tractor parts on the back of his willys.http://wildwillys47.homestead.com/Index.html
David.

GOT ROCKS?

BadDog- you techno guru. What a guy!

So if I'm think'n right. The shackle should follow the spring threw its front to back swing, not against it. If thats what your talking about then I'm down with that. Thats one of the reasons I swpped over to the longer springs. The A.M. lift springs are to short and put the front shackle angle pointing towards the front end and makes the spring work against the shackle not with it. What I was trying to ask on the other post was; -Is there a spacific length shackle that matches a spacific spring length?- Now that I'm sitting here thinkng about it, I don't think so. Just as long as it clears the frame and works with the spring. Agreed? Any other thoughts? Since mine is still sitting in the grage, I'm kinda wondering how the side loading and stability will be with the longer shackles and angled back.

Twiztid

Yeah, I guess it would be a completely different thing with the buggy spring setup (still having a hard time adapting to that term, I keep seeing 3/4s! http://www.coloradok5.com/forums/images/icons/smile.gif). That top spring pulling down arches too so the shackle would tend to stay more vertical. Even if the shackle did eventually line up with the lower spring arch (which would tend to stop a normal suspension), the upper would just bend more to allow it to continue drooping. I’ll bet a combination of the two approaches would give even more flex. You could test that easily enough by making a second short leaf a bit shorter if you were inclined.

It would also be interesting to see an actual contact pressure graph based on the amount of droop in the short leaf. I wonder how fast it falls off. You could make a base line by locking the short leaf to the frame (strap?) and lifting the other tire (forklift?) until contact pressure drops to zero. Then do the same with the short leaf free to work. Comparing the graphs would show a better picture than just an RTI score type of thing. No doubt it gives better droop, I just wonder how much it really helps with capability.

Man, that jeep has some wicked trick stuff under there. Sort of like those spring rockers from BC Bronco but on the shackles. That looks like the ball sockets on a 3 point hitch used for attaching impliments. Cool idea.

Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

I got two questions did Donovan use the original holes for the shackle and how did he figure out where the spring eye needed to be located for the longer front spring. I know he probable has already answered these questions but if he is going to make cool stuff then he is going to get dumb questions. Thanx Jeff 80Blazer

Its time to lock them in!

Good job with bring this one back up baddog, can you pull that last pic from donovan's last reply on "buggy spring" to this post. Like to keep all this stuff in one place.

Also; A contact pressure graph would be good if you had acsss to one, but how much is it worth in te real world? How much flex does a guy realy need? It's cool to say its got XX amount of travel but do you realy need it? What I'm saying is if I happen to take up 2ft of travel and need more- than I'm going to be worried more about whats going to happen when that suspension settles back down and the rockers/skidplates start dragging. Threre has to be a usefull limit right?

Twiztid

80blazer I used all the original mounting holes. The cherokee springs are 23" from the front bolt to the center pin. Stock chevy is 23.5". This moves the front axle forward .5". The back of the spring is 28.5 long. I used AutoCad to get the shackel the right length.

Donovan
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com>http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com</A>
Bigger is Better

Thanx Donovan it sounds like a good way to get flexy and good ride and right know I don't have either. Jeff 80Blazer

Its time to lock them in!

I agree that just adding flex doesn't do any good if there is no added stability and/or traction. That is why I would like to see a contact pressure graph. Then, if you see that with X" of droop you had Y lbs of contact pressure before the change but after the change you still have Y lbs with X+6" of droop then you know you have accomplished something positive.

Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

Here is a diagram that Donovan provided which explains sort of what I was talking about a few posts ago.
http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com/photo.html (http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com/whats_new.html>http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com/whats_new.html</A>
Here)

Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

Just curious Donovan. What ever happened with your Blazer after? Did you get it back or is still MIA??

Brian
89KBlazer

It is still MIA. I have not heard a thing.

Donovan
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com>http://www.rustbucket.coloradok5.com</A>
Bigger is Better

Sorry Twiztid, somehow I missed your question earlier. I just found it in my email notifications.

Yes, the critical point would be that the shackle must not allow interference with the frame. I don't think there would be any significant side load problems with the longer shackle but with additional leverage the stress would have to be a bit higher. However, I don't think it would be nearly as significant as the stress caused by setups like the "goofy leaf" or rear shackle flip and others which don't seem to be much of a problem. Also notice that Donovan’s shackles are considerably heavier than the factory units.


Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

i haven't read all of this post but why didn't you just use aftermaket lifted cherokee springs instead of the custome pack you made?

78, 350/350/203, 3/4 ton, 4" lift, 35" BFGs
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://bluebeast.coloradok5.com/>http://bluebeast.coloradok5.com/</A>

True B.D. But I'm thinking that the angle and the lengh of the longer shackle will add to the leverage of the side loading in corners (street) on the frame. The front end takes ALOT of abuse in normal street driveing, check out how heavy duty the I.FS. control arms are even on 1/2 tons. In off-road it's not that big of a deal, less speed = less load. But in my case, it has to do both. (rear shckle angle- 20 degs. 5" long. -vs- Stock near 0 degs. (?) 4" long) Maybe I'm just splitting hairs here, but it's something to keep an eye out, if this thing ever gets rolling.
Any input?

By the way, modified 52" front (was stock rear) springs seem like theyd flex like mad, except for the shock length and spring clamps, I haven't got that zeroed out yet. Keep ya posted if your interested.

Twiztid

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by Twiztid on 04/11/01 09:49 PM (server time).</FONT></P>

I don't know about the leverage, it will definitely increase the load but I don't know if it might eventually cause a problem. Also remember that if the shackles are angled back for longer springs, then part of the increased load (due to increased leverage) is going to be transferred more along the frame rail lengthwise which should be able to easily handle the additional load without damage. If the shackle is perpendicular to the frame then all of the load is applied perpendicular to the frame rail which can/will twist. The amount of additional leverage magnifying the twisting force on the rail would be calculated by the vertical distance from the top bolt to the bottom, not the length of the shackle. This distance is still greater than stock but not equal to the entire additional length of the shackle.

About using the rear springs used on the front, I am definitely interested in what you find out. Good luck.

Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56
Coming soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.

True again.
I understand just about everything you have to say, but lack the ability to articulate the words like you do. Try saying it in a more lay-man term. It would save me some time in rereading your posts to make sure I get it. DON'T take that the wrong way, but I'm not taking a collage class here, just shareing some ideas. (in other words, When in Rome.....)

Twiztid
-like I said- don't take that the wrong way, just take it back a step-

edited- I reread your post, it's not that hard to understand, but my brain clocks out at 6:00, so if you could stay away from words like "multiply" and "calculat" my frontal lobes would be thankfull.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by Twiztid on 04/12/01 08:59 PM (server time).</FONT></P>

LOL! No problem, sorry about that. I'll try to keep it simple and clear in the future. I guess that is a result of my work. I don't mean to be confusing, just as accurate and as complete as possible. I also try to express my thought processes (there I go again! http://www.coloradok5.com/forums/images/icons/wink.gif) so that others here can point out when/where I go wrong. Oh well, glad it eventually made sense. Thanks for all your input, I really like the ideas covered in this thread and I will likely be applying them soon so I want to make sure I do understand it correctly.

Bad Dog

85 K30 CUCV, 350 TBI, TH400, NP205, D60/C14, 4.56 Locked
Soon: 4" lift, 40" tires, massive cutting, shorter wb and rear overhang.