JUNE : 24TH - 26TH - CHOCCO : FATHERS DAY RIDE
JUNE : 24TH - 26TH - CHOCCO : FATHERS DAY RIDE

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10
1
A few more pictures that I took












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2
I think people over rate flex, for the sole purpose of touching the ground beneath them without consideration of the lack of traction experienced when no pressure is applied to the tire touching the ground.  If there is pressure to that tire, then that is beneficial flex, but I'll suggest that being more off camber with pressure being applied to both tires is more beneficial than tons of flex without any (or very light) pressure applied the droopped tire.

I am not very knowledgeable, but my brain thinks the benefit of the anti rock (or any sway bar) is that as a wheel/tire droops, it pulls down on the sway bar link on that side, which pulls down on the sway bar, which pushed down on the other sway bar link, which puts pressure on the other wheel/tire, thus gaining the max traction possible on that axle's tires. However, I can envision a scenario where the sway bar limits the travel of the suspension ahead of the suspension flexing to the point there would be no useful traction.  So, I could see where the sway bar could hinder overall traction, and where the sway bar needs to be matched to the suspension setup and axle/wheel/tire weight to allow sufficient droop for the suspension to continue to allow pressure on the tire on the droopped side, but not limit travel ahead of that point.

Where is my thinking wrong?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
The only concern I know of for the full unhindered droop is the rate of droop, that should be restricted some, so that in a delicate situation, a wheel does not fall out, hit full droop on the rig rather than the ground with momentum, and use all of that energy to pull the rig over.


Isn't that what good shocks are for?
If shocks control it, why do you need a sway bar?
3
https://vimeo.com/172364136


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
4
Jimbo, Thanks for leading us around Saturday morning. We enjoyed the ride. My neighbor Jay, flatbed F150, really had a good time.

Went back out after lunch and finally fell in behind Bobby, Kent , and a few others and I followed them down and back up Tombstone. Really good challenge for the WJ. Going down was pretty interesting but made it down (gravity always works). Coming back up I got hung up a bit and had to have a bit of spotting to make it past the merge at the bottom. My son got a video of me on the top half going up the rock slab. 
5
I think people over rate flex, for the sole purpose of touching the ground beneath them without consideration of the lack of traction experienced when no pressure is applied to the tire touching the ground.  If there is pressure to that tire, then that is beneficial flex, but I'll suggest that being more off camber with pressure being applied to both tires is more beneficial than tons of flex without any (or very light) pressure applied the droopped tire.

I am not very knowledgeable, but my brain thinks the benefit of the anti rock (or any sway bar) is that as a wheel/tire droops, it pulls down on the sway bar link on that side, which pulls down on the sway bar, which pushed down on the other sway bar link, which puts pressure on the other wheel/tire, thus gaining the max traction possible on that axle's tires. However, I can envision a scenario where the sway bar limits the travel of the suspension ahead of the suspension flexing to the point there would be no useful traction.  So, I could see where the sway bar could hinder overall traction, and where the sway bar needs to be matched to the suspension setup and axle/wheel/tire weight to allow sufficient droop for the suspension to continue to allow pressure on the tire on the droopped side, but not limit travel ahead of that point.

Where is my thinking wrong?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
The only concern I know of for the full unhindered droop is the rate of droop, that should be restricted some, so that in a delicate situation, a wheel does not fall out, hit full droop on the rig rather than the ground with momentum, and use all of that energy to pull the rig over.


Isn't that what good shocks are for?
6
I think people over rate flex, for the sole purpose of touching the ground beneath them without consideration of the lack of traction experienced when no pressure is applied to the tire touching the ground.  If there is pressure to that tire, then that is beneficial flex, but I'll suggest that being more off camber with pressure being applied to both tires is more beneficial than tons of flex without any (or very light) pressure applied the droopped tire.

I am not very knowledgeable, but my brain thinks the benefit of the anti rock (or any sway bar) is that as a wheel/tire droops, it pulls down on the sway bar link on that side, which pulls down on the sway bar, which pushed down on the other sway bar link, which puts pressure on the other wheel/tire, thus gaining the max traction possible on that axle's tires. However, I can envision a scenario where the sway bar limits the travel of the suspension ahead of the suspension flexing to the point there would be no useful traction.  So, I could see where the sway bar could hinder overall traction, and where the sway bar needs to be matched to the suspension setup and axle/wheel/tire weight to allow sufficient droop for the suspension to continue to allow pressure on the tire on the droopped side, but not limit travel ahead of that point.

Where is my thinking wrong?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
The only concern I know of for the full unhindered droop is the rate of droop, that should be restricted some, so that in a delicate situation, a wheel does not fall out, hit full droop on the rig rather than the ground with momentum, and use all of that energy to pull the rig over.
7
I'm a strong believer that flex, up travel, and down travel are all very important for a number of reasons, of which the highest concern to me is ample up travel for the axle to flex or articulate enough to keep the vehicle level or at least more level or as level as possible, and build on that.

If a tire is touching, isn't that weight now resting, at least partially, on good earth, and not being pulled down on that corner by gravity, hence changing the center of gravity towards the high side, decreasing the chance of a roll?

I do like 40/60 up down
8
I noticed a big difference in stability feeling once I added the AR. I felt it fairly quickly. I also noticed that my flex is not always the same. I know mine is not set properly, but I thought it was only being affected by contacting the body mounts. Will adjust before next ride and see what changes.

So far, I feel like I've been noticeably more capable on the trails. Even its not set up perfectly, it seems to be helping.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
9
 //btt//

I thought this was the Choccolocco Thread. I must be tired from this past weekend.
10
I think people over rate flex, for the sole purpose of touching the ground beneath them without consideration of the lack of traction experienced when no pressure is applied to the tire touching the ground.  If there is pressure to that tire, then that is beneficial flex, but I'll suggest that being more off camber with pressure being applied to both tires is more beneficial than tons of flex without any (or very light) pressure applied the droopped tire.

I am not very knowledgeable, but my brain thinks the benefit of the anti rock (or any sway bar) is that as a wheel/tire droops, it pulls down on the sway bar link on that side, which pulls down on the sway bar, which pushed down on the other sway bar link, which puts pressure on the other wheel/tire, thus gaining the max traction possible on that axle's tires. However, I can envision a scenario where the sway bar limits the travel of the suspension ahead of the suspension flexing to the point there would be no useful traction.  So, I could see where the sway bar could hinder overall traction, and where the sway bar needs to be matched to the suspension setup and axle/wheel/tire weight to allow sufficient droop for the suspension to continue to allow pressure on the tire on the droopped side, but not limit travel ahead of that point.

Where is my thinking wrong?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk



#1 miss-assumption that swaybar and suspension are adjusted to match.
Are you stating the sway bar and suspension don't need to be matched?

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk



No - I am saying you are assuming that they are matched which is a false assumption.  Since the JK AR has no adjustment holes, and there is a wide variation in JK suspensions it may not work for everyone.  I'm running an evo valved and engineered suspension and they recommend full disconnect, not an AR.

Whether an AR or full disconnect works in theory better than the other doesn't matter if it's adjustments aren't even anywhere close so it doesn't work for his suspension. Since there isn't any adjustment in the JK version of an AR, it's an all or nothing thing.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10