1991 Ranger Long Travel Woods / Prerunner Build

[nooch450]

Check out Google SketchUp its free and I designed my steering swingers in the program!

 

[jesse93]

im going to check that out...did you get your coilovers yet?

 

[nooch450]

im going to check that out...did you get your coilovers yet?

Not yet.... they should be here by the end of the week ... ill share with pics lol...

 

[Krwlnrx]

Cool build so far.

 

[-Nathan-]

build looks good. Dont do the double swingers....leave those for equal length. You will gain nothing by going to double swingers with an unequal length setup.

 

[nooch450]

build looks good. Dont do the double swingers....leave those for equal length. You will gain nothing by going to double swingers with an unequal length setup.

Why? My only other option is a droped pitman arm, and with the amount of travel I plan on using the stock steering geometry will creat bump steer...

My dual swingers should bring the amount of bump steer to almost nothing.

 

[LameDuck]

Nathan is correct.

But your using drop brackets so I'd be inclined to build a combo single swing and superunner style setup.

Should ditch the D35 and drop brackets and run a D44 similar to Nathan.

Here is a D44 with extended stock steering

Sent using two cups and a string

 

[nooch450]

My swingers will not be mounted like a traditional dual swinger setup for equal length beams... my swingers will be positioned to follow the unequal length beams just like they would on an equal length beam set up... The way it does this is by being mounted the swinger directly ontop of the beam pivot... my left side swinger that serves my passenger tire will be mounted between my pitman arm and the other swinger to make up for the unequal length beams...

With the stock steering you will still have bumpsteer.

And a single swinger gets ride of most of it but not all.

Dual gets rid of the most possible... but nothing is perfect...

 

[flexfab]

What size tube are you planing to use for your shock mount cross brace? You start running out of room under there real quick. Watch for motor mount flex, it doesn't take a whole lot to crack the 4.0 intake manifold.

 

[nooch450]

What size tube are you planing to use for your shock mount cross brace? You start running out of room under there real quick. Watch for motor mount flex, it doesn't take a whole lot to crack the 4.0 intake manifold.

1.5" OD .120" wall... I know, there is very limited room under there, im guna try to build a cage like in the pic I posted in the 4th page of my build thread.

Im guna try to tuck 2 tubes all the way in the back of the engine bay right up against the underneath of the hood... There is no way to get a tube over the middle of the engine if you ask me...

 

[prerunnerwannabe]

My swingers will not be mounted like a traditional dual swinger setup for equal length beams... my swingers will be positioned to follow the unequal length beams just like they would on an equal length beam set up... The way it does this is by being mounted the swinger directly ontop of the beam pivot... my left side swinger that serves my passenger tire will be mounted between my pitman arm and the other swinger to make up for the unequal length beams...

With the stock steering you will still have bumpsteer.

And a single swinger gets ride of most of it but not all.

Dual gets rid of the most possible... but nothing is perfect...

The only problem i see is what happens when you lose the drop brackets and get the beams cut and turned? If you build your swingers to the specs of the drop brackets, and after a while you get the beams turned, all of your swinger/steering geometry will be goofed up. I dunno maybe that would be easy to fix. I'm sure you've already thought of that, just trying to save you some headache

 

[nooch450]

The only problem i see is what happens when you lose the drop brackets and get the beams cut and turned? If you build your swingers to the specs of the drop brackets, and after a while you get the beams turned, all of your swinger/steering geometry will be goofed up. I dunno maybe that would be easy to fix. I'm sure you've already thought of that, just trying to save you some headache

Yeah, I figure that im not going to get rid of the drop brackets for a few years... When I rebuild it I will have to make new swingers because they wont work without the drop brackets.

I see alot of people hating on drop brackets and I dont think the drop brackets kill to much ground cleaence, the rear will be just as low... On top of that ive never really seen a prerunner truck with them and I want to see how it will run, besides I run alot of trails and I hear the drop brackets work better than C&T beams in cirtain off road situations that normal prerunners would not have to tackle...

I have Skyjacker Class II brackets and they loock solid, I have been considering bracing them to the frame for additional strength. I dont know if this will even be nessasary though.

 

[4x4junkie]

I think as long as everything is lined up where it's supposed to be, your steering will be fine, unequal beams or not.
IMO, equal length beams would be counterproductive on a radius arm setup anyway (particularly on a 4WD setup where there's a significant difference in the fore/aft positioning of the driverside and passengerside beam pivots). Many people I don't think realize that a requirement for the camber/caster curves to be the same on both sides is to have the passengerside beam remain slightly shorter than the driver side (yes I know this does sound counterintuitive). How much shorter is a function of radius arm length vs. the fore/aft difference of the positions of the drivers & passengerside beam pivots.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/sfr4x4/ttbsymetry.jpg

 

[nooch450]

I think as long as everything is lined up where it's supposed to be, your steering will be fine, unequal beams or not.
IMO, equal length beams would be counterproductive on a radius arm setup anyway (particularly on a 4WD setup where there's a significant difference in the fore/aft positioning of the driverside and passengerside beam pivots). Many people I don't think realize that a requirement for the camber/caster curves to be the same on both sides is to have the passengerside beam remain slightly shorter than the driver side (yes I know this does sound counterintuitive). How much shorter is a function of radius arm length vs. the fore/aft difference of the positions of the drivers & passengerside beam pivots.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/sfr4x4/ttbsymetry.jpg

This is a very good picture and without it I would have had no clue what you were talking about

I picture is worth 1000 words they say...

This picture makes me believe that the "fact" that Unequal length beams arc with different camber is a false statement.

Considering the beam pivot and the associated radius arm pivot is on the same red line, no matter how much you spread them apart or move them together the arc is going to be the same as long as you keep them on the red line. Therefor there should be an equal camber change on both sides during articulation.

The picture I edited and posted here is showing where i plan on mounting my swingers... the fat blue lines represent my swinger pivot points and the red circle is there my pitman arm is... I belive these pivots lines are where my swingers should be mounted... So directly above the beam pivots bolts but obiously in front of them also... If im wrong let me know!

 

[4x4junkie]

The picture I edited and posted here is showing where i plan on mounting my swingers... the fat blue lines represent my swinger pivot points and the red circle is there my pitman arm is... I belive these pivots lines are where my swingers should be mounted... So directly above the beam pivots bolts but obiously in front of them also... If im wrong let me know!

http://i1059.photobucket.com/albums/t433/nooch450/ttbsymetry.jpg

You want the lower end of your swingers (where your tierod will mount) on the red axis lines if you're looking for the least amount of bumpsteer.