Search results

@illverado EDIT. Correction to be more concise. Under static loads. As far as the ball joints are concerned, their reaction forces are dictated by the scrub radius moment arm and they don’t care where the wheel bearing is located. Wheel/knuckle acts as a rigid body. As far as the wheel...

Of course. My comments were not about your post but more general. Your analysis of the bearing moments is accurate just not complete. The applied moments are the force (normal force acting on tire contact patch centroid) times a moment arm. The full moment arm distance needs to include the...

I doubt this. Wheel offset and scrub radius dictate the bending moments applied to the wheel bearings so that is really the main point. Curious if @Ducati1098 has seen many wheel bearing failures on stock wheels.

Lots of strange and conflicting information in this thread. 9” wide wheels have a center line at 4.5” from edge. So 5” backspacing has a positive 12.7 mm offset (1/2”). That is not super aggressive. Not even negative. The pic does seem to show a negative offset but hard to tell. No idea where...

Even more so with the significant motion ratio you have put on your trailing arms.

25.4 mm/inch

Just to be crystal clear. I am NOT anti portal. We all know suspension lifts have advantages allowing bigger tires and more clearance. We all also know they can’t be extrapolated or unbounded without issues. As lift increases there are diminishing returns. Nothing is free. A portal lift is no...

You will not need new UCAs if only doing a 1” suspension lift. You should not have any issues with alignment.

Exactly this. The distinction between loading and response is necessary. For the scenario of interest, body rotations in the for-aft and up-down plane must be considered. So pitch motions. The loading occurs from traction forces at the tire/ground interface generated by torque at the wheel...

Hey now… tone it down a bit.. purposeful machining tolerances of +1/4” and -0” gives you that extra needed thread engagement.

Question for @5GENIDN. Three significant figures on gear ratios seems silly. Surely there are machining tolerances and gear engagement tolerances that stack up. Can there realistically be any significant binding with a <1% difference front to back?

And I thought I had long posts….. Just kidding. Awesome write up. Very informative.

Indeed. Except maybe 3.1” wheel spacers. 🤣

This is not accurate Having a rear sway bar, increases roll stiffness in the rear. That will also help with front articulation. The stiffer the rear is wrt to roll the greater the articulation in the front. Three torsional springs in series; rear roll stiffness, frame torsional stiffness, and...

I love my ICE vehicles and don’t intend to switch with the currently available technology on EVs…. But this is hard to argue against. very curious where this technology will go. I struggle to keep politics out of science, they just don’t mix well. Science has no agenda and is pure, but very...

Ssssoooooo… no easy way to say this… but I was talking about all the stuff your wife is doing…. 😳

A coilover swap is not that hard if you know what to watch out for. But yeah, the stuff @SierraBronco is tackling is bad ass.

The @SierraBronco 1/2 portal rig is an easy DIY job. Check it out. All you need to do is be able to count to at least 2… oh. And remember front or rear… never mind. I guess that is getting complicated.. Very cool effort he, and mostly wife, are tackling...

Sorry. No disrespect intended. My thoughts were generically intended towards reducing wear and tear and loads on a heavy overlanding rig with RTT. And increasing longevity with reduced maintenance. I fully understand you do not intend to go that route but others may benefit.

First off. Nice rig and build. This may not be a popular opinion but it is sincere and not meant to be negative. Your challenge is all the weight you are carrying and the vehicle CG. Not an easy challenge to overcome. I would seriously ask yourself if you need 37s as an overlander with RTT...