Double check my 3 link numbers

[Shran]

This is for my 2 door Explorer SAS project. Rock crawling/slow speed stuff, no go-fast stuff, very little street use

Anyone see anything major out of line? I have some flexibility with almost all of these numbers. The upper link is probably the least flexible as I am planning on mounting the frame mount outside of the frame by the front cab mount.

My buddy whom I trust a lot, who has many years of racing and high dollar crawler buggy fab building experience said not to think into this a whole lot. Just trying to cover all my bases before I go mounting stuff.

 

[ryan]

Are you keeping the leafs in the rear?

edit - those numbers all look good. I like that antisquat number a lot, but without the rear suspension it's sorta just throwing it out there.

 

[Shran]

Are you keeping the leafs in the rear?

edit - those numbers all look good. I like that antisquat number a lot, but without the rear suspension it's sorta just throwing it out there.

Yeah, leafs in the rear.

The main thing that is throwing me off a little is that my normal ride height will be a few inches higher. So the frame mounts will be raised as well. I'm not sure if that really matters as the geometry stays the same, more or less, but I was advised to build the links with the front suspension fully compressed. That is where my measurements come from. As a result of that I am also going to need taller leaf springs to make the rear ride height match the front and all of that raises the sprung mass CG.

 

[ryan]

Yeah, leafs in the rear.

The main thing that is throwing me off a little is that my normal ride height will be a few inches higher. So the frame mounts will be raised as well. I'm not sure if that really matters as the geometry stays the same, more or less, but I was advised to build the links with the front suspension fully compressed. That is where my measurements come from. As a result of that I am also going to need taller leaf springs to make the rear ride height match the front and all of that raises the sprung mass CG.

Yes, but you're also correct that it won't change the geometry all that much