Suspension suggestions

[boss]

I don’t know much about suspension at all, the scorpion racing kits look good but there’s a difference between looking good and performance
Something I don’t want to do is just put bearmarch springs and procomp shocks on as it doesn’t offer any greater axel articulation and it probably doesn’t do the car any good. If im going to do it, i want it done properly. Any suggestions?

[chaosego]

was wanting to know the same i have +2 inch bearmach springs and pro comp, which i think is hard for road driving especially the roads around ere(west yorks) i am wanting to revert back to standard hight and ats instead of mud tyres , not the best set up for me at the mo as it spends its life on the road as my 1st car when it becomes my second car then i can mod away.
i was wondering if i should go for standard springs or the scorpion ones are progressive so i am thinking should be a more responsive ride for the road??? sorry for nicking your post but i think you are right not to go for the cheep option like me but look into old man emu which are regarded as the best but come with cost. there is a lot of choice out there so what is best probably down to cost and usage your on road-off road equation. cheers glyn :?

[clbarclay]

Firstly not all bearmach springs are the same and the same goes for procomp dampers.

Bearmach produce softer off road springs and well as HD springs, whilst procmp shocks come in a range of lengths from standard length up to very long 15" travel versions. Therefor not all bearmch procomp setups are the same.

Scorpion racing produce some good kits, but its not the cheapest.

My personal recomendation if you want plenty of travel is the Challenge kit produced by Gwyn Lewis which is basically what I have. For sensible money it improves the suspension travel without drastic modifications and can be used with standard springs.

Some standard land rover springs are progressive anyway, I'm currently using progressive rear springs on the front of mine and Land rover HD on the rear  of my RRC which incidently are still longer and softer than a lot of aftermarket springs. Togive you an idead of howmany different landrover and other springs you can chose from here is a useful link (or 2)
http://www.landroverclub.net/Club/HTML/Spring_rates.html
http://members.shaw.ca/jbarge/springinfo.html#OME

[boss]

was wanting to know the same i have +2 inch bearmach springs and pro comp, which i think is hard for road driving especially the roads around ere(west yorks) i am wanting to revert back to standard hight and ats instead of mud tyres , not the best set up for me at the mo as it spends its life on the road as my 1st car when it becomes my second car then i can mod away.
i was wondering if i should go for standard springs or the scorpion ones are progressive so i am thinking should be a more responsive ride for the road??? sorry for nicking your post but i think you are right not to go for the cheep option like me but look into old man emu which are regarded as the best but come with cost. there is a lot of choice out there so what is best probably down to cost and usage your on road-off road equation. cheers glyn :?

yah my dad has the standard hight springs and koni shocks on his disco2 and the handeling improvement is astonishing. hes getting rid of them soon because hes getting a +2" lift. you want them? hes got air aswell so youll haveto get some new springs from scorpion

[Tony F]

I have been running 2"+ Scorpion Springs and Pro-Comp dampers on the V8 since last May and have no problems with the suspension at all. The Springs were uprated by 20% which seems to keep the higher centre of gravity in check (I also fitted Deflex bushes) as well as being slightly longer at the front to compensate for the extra weight of a winch bumper/steering guard.

The only issues I had were the steering getting a bit twitchier, so I fitted QT Castor corrected radius arms (now perfect) and a bit of vibration from the front prop, otherwise I am very pleased with the suspension set up.

[suggs]

what i have

3 inch lift with +5 shocks and dropped mounts, dislocation cones ajustable A-frame joint, front and rear corrected arms polybushed and extended hoses.

works very very well. all came from Bullfrog a forum member..

does stuff like this



cheers

[boss]

i hear the qt arms break!

[Lyndsey731]

Hi

I've got Scorpion Racing +2 progressive springs, +2 de-carbon shocks, dislocation cones all round -2 turrets, -2 rear shock mounts +4 brake lines, front and rear QT arms, polybushes (not on the shocks!!!), extended bump stops, not the cheapest but very good in my opinion, but to be honest I wish I had Sugg's shocker and A frame set up set up.

Good luck

Gav

[clbarclay]

i hear the qt arms break!

Your not the only one, though I've only ever heard of them breaking/bending during competative use, plus IIRC they have recently re designed them. Personally I preffer the standard arms and moderate the suspension lift, rotaing the axle with cranked radius arms messes up the working angles of the propshaft UJs causing more problems and expense.

[Lyndsey731]

Chris

The point of the cranked arms is to pull the axle back in line after a suspension lift to try and fix the issue of working angles not mess them up.

The axle rotates in differing amounts dependant on the size of the lift, this added with the fact the vehicle is now higher (causing a tighter prop connection angle) is what kills the UJ's.

I didn't bother changing them on my 200 but did on the 300 The UJ's have lasted longer and the steering is more positive. To be honest as it's been said on here time and again, lift it, see how it feels, if you don't like it then change them.

Gav

[chaosego]

my bearmach  springs where intended for a d90 but sold it got the disco so decided to put them on. all four springs were the same length which i do not think is right it does look a bit odd looking at the chart and other suppliers the rears are meant to be longer dont know if this evens out once fitted ??

[clbarclay]

Chris

The point of the cranked arms is to pull the axle back in line after a suspension lift to try and fix the issue of working angles not mess them up.

The axle rotates in differing amounts dependant on the size of the lift, this added with the fact the vehicle is now higher (causing a tighter prop connection angle) is what kills the UJ's.

I didn't bother changing them on my 200 but did on the 300 The UJ's have lasted longer and the steering is more positive. To be honest as it's been said on here time and again, lift it, see how it feels, if you don't like it then change them.

Gav

The amount of lift affects the angle of the transphere box end UJ, but rotating the diff/axle for castor correction changes the angle of the diff end UJ relative the transpher box UJ making them out of balance. In this situation a cardon prop like the disco TD5 will cure this inbalance, though its not a cheap option.

If yo want to rotate the axle to prevent the propshaft from being un balance with standard UJs then you would have to crank the arms to rotate it further forwards. The only thing that needs rotating to correct the steering geometry is the chrome balls rather than the whiole axle.

[Lyndsey731]

Chris

The amount of lift effects both joints equally, the prop is basicaly a solid bar fixed at each end with a flexible joint, therefore based upon the theory of every action must have an equal and opposite reaction when you lift the vehicle the top of the front joint gets tighter as does the bottom of the back joint equally.

Additionaly when you lift you rotate the axle changing the castor angle, this as you state unbalances the joints. Castor correction arms bring them back into balance by allowing the front joint to connect at its original angle

Double cardon joints are usually used on lifted vehicles to stop the UJ's locking up on themselves in situations such as steep ramp over angles, though as you say this would do the job.

Lifting the vehicle also pulls the axle sideways which can have effects on the steering, though sometimes not really enough to notice, as always with Land Rovers it seems to depend upon the indivdual truck, an adjustable panhard rod could be needed.

Gav

[clbarclay]

The amount of lift effects both joints equally, the prop is basicaly a solid bar fixed at each end with a flexible joint, therefore based upon the theory of every action must have an equal and opposite reaction when you lift the vehicle the top of the front joint gets tighter as does the bottom of the back joint equally.

Due to the desgin/nature of the radius arm suspension on the front of land rovers this does not happen. The relative angle of the lower (diff) UJ increases less for a given lift compared to the top (transpthere box) UJ. To make matters worse rotating the whole axle with either castor correction arms or bushes makes the angle of the lower UJ straigther, hence evan more imbalance. If your still not convinced them give me a little time and I will make a basic CAD model to explain it better than my I can with words.

[Lyndsey731]

Chris

If you have the time then do me a quick sketch (or just ignore me and I'll go away soon enough)

I don't understand how you can raise one end of something that is attached at either end with flexible connections and effect one end more than the other.

For example take a pen and hold it with your thumb and finger at either end, raise one end we'll call it the transfer end, the movement at the other end (the diff) is the same.

Now try holding the diff end tighter to simulate less movement of the joint, you can't move the transfer end.

As for the arms when I said they put them back to their original angle I meant the face of the diff, obviously the UJ angle is now greater, sorry the original comment didn't read at all well, my mistake  :oops: and I completely accept what your saying there, its the difference in angles I need convincing on.

cheers

Gav

 :lol:  :lol:

[clbarclay]

Had a go earlier, but its either very scruffy and difficult to understand or very time consuming. Solidwoks wasn't realy designed for this kind of thing. Still its better than my verbal explanation skills, I'll try to get some screen shots of the basic model later.

[Gav_T]

I was told in the defender forum that +2" springs and dampers with -2" lowered mounts will cause the dampers to bottom out?

Will +5" dampers work with +2" lift springs?

Me and my mate (90 and disco) are wanting to try and get plenty travel in the suspension.Will the x eng dislocation springs help?

Sorry to hijack

Gav.

[clbarclay]

I was told in the defender forum that +2" springs and dampers with -2" lowered mounts will cause the dampers to bottom out?

Will +5" dampers work with +2" lift springs?

Me and my mate (90 and disco) are wanting to try and get plenty travel in the suspension.Will the x eng dislocation springs help?

Sorry to hijack

Gav.

slight confusion of issues here, the springs should not be used to prevent upwards suspension travel, instead the bumpstops should be the limit.

By just fitting longer dampers to standard supension they can end up fully compressing before the axle reaches the bumpstops which is bad for the dampers.

If you want to fit longer dampers or lowered damper mounts then you should either extend the bumpstops downwards or reposition the damper mounts for longer dampers.

If you want to fit +5 dampers then have a look at the Gwyn Lewis challenge kit, it repositions the upper damper mounts so that +5 dampers can be used with standard bumpstops.



I've no direct expeiance of the X-eng suspension, form a concept point of view I can see some advantages over dislocation cones or using very long springs, but they still have the basic problems that any coil sprung suspension will have with weight transphere and traction. The biggest down side I can see with then is the look like a mud trap.

[boss]

in the july edition of lrw there is a picture of the lrm "project 90" winning the twist of with those springs.....or i think its those :? either way that thing has massive articulation!

[clbarclay]

Finally got an example sorted, based on measurements from the VM range rover. One slight problem with the measurements is that although its parked on level concret, it has no engine so you can add an inch or 2 lift to the diagrams which is why none of the angles match.

As I say these are not mm perfect but illistrate the point well enough. The diff is held with 2 bushes so can be considered not to rotate independant of the radius arms, therefore the diff roates in an arc around the radius arm/chassis mounting bush. The green is the diff and radius arm, the black is the propshaft and the rusty brown colour #-o (i did say this was an acurate representation) is the chassis/transphere box. Each picture has slightly more lift than the one above it.

The 2 measured angles are the working angles for both UJs and were calculated by the CAD model.






Just to explain the green shape, it is made up of a large triangle with the points being the location of the bushs and the slanted back point sticking out the top representing the position of the diff UJ.

[Ja1983]

I bow and salute your CAD skills!!

i think the confusion here is in the fact that yes, if you grab a pencil at each end with a hand, and move one, they move relatively the same, however, the arms are also attached, creating a funny kind of polygon...

think in the line of two pencils perhaps, or similarly the action on an excavator arm...

...hope that helps..

think maybe a suspension guide (like the tyre one) would help

2" lift, road handling = "***" springs, "***" shocks, "yes/no arms"
2" lift, max articulation = "
std height, max articulation =
etc...

 :arrow:

[Lyndsey731]

I too bow to your skills (and superior knowledge) and appreciate the effort taken in explaining yourself

Thanks

Gav

[clbarclay]

I'm sure the CAD skills make up for the lack of word skills.


A guide may be a useful, but there are just so many vraiabels with suspension mods (the tyre one kept it nice and simple by only changing the tyre each time) that I dought it work work quite so well.

Maby a better approach would be take each item/modfication as an individal and explain what it does, how it does it, advatages/disadvantages and how to use/what to use it with it for best effect. Or something along those lines anyway.

[SnakeLogic]

That sounds like a fine idea!  Any volunteers?  

Here in Japan, the only suspension modifications I've seen on Land Rovers is a somewhat popular 2" lift (springs only).  As not too many (read:almost no) Land Rover owners actually venture off the pavement here, it is nearly impossible to get reliable information.  

For me, the Mud Club was a Godsend.  3 cheers for you guys!

[rollazuki]

The upper A frame on the rear of the landrover is shorter than the lower radius arms. As the distance between chassis and axle increases(as in fitting a lift kit) then the diff tends to end up pointing more nose down. The ONLY ways to correct this are:
1) fit a longer A frame(equipe suspension anyone)
2) fit a shorter lower radius arm(the crakned one is slightly shorter)

These will restore UJ angles(remember UJ flange faces must ideally be parallel to each other). The downside is that the axle will be pulled slightly foreward of its usual position, causing the UJ's to operate at a sharper angle than intended, therefore shortening their life.

The front obviously is a different kettle of fish. The front UJ's run out of true from the factory(dont arge, they DO!) If you lift it it changes diff angle, camber, KPI, and trail. Hard to tune out, changes lots thru its suspension range, and is generally suited to give decent ish road manners. IMHO