Barack Obama linked 2nd gen. SAS | Page 4 | Ford Explorer Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free!

Barack Obama linked 2nd gen. SAS

So let me first start with a quick introduction .. my name is Barack Obama and apparently I'm the junior US Senator from Illinois :thumbsup: . I love slow walks on the beach and bed-side stories. Yeah I'm talking to you big boy:

Barack.jpg

Okay now onto the goods...

So recently I've been starting a few threads all relating to my Dana 44 front axle and other tid bits - so I figured it would be best if I just started an SAS thread to pull all of those threads together into one centralize place instead of having them floating about the sea of other threads.

Follow me now as I look back on the threads that I've started:

1) Reading Pinion Depth Number In this thread, I was confused on which number was the pinion depth offset number of my ring and pinion set for the Dana 44. After calling up the good people of Randy's Ring and Pinion, I was told that the numbers on the ring and pinion are no longer used for the pinion depth offset. So I'm like wtf m8!? They did give me a number to start from and so thats what I started with.

2) Ford 9" For Off-Road Use In this thread, I ask the general public what they think about the Ford-9" axle for off-road use. Conclusion, bowties - the GM 14-bolt axle with the stock Detroit locker is a God's send and so thats what I'm going with (it comes with a pinion bearing support - just like the Ford-9").

3) RE SuperFlex Assemby I've never put together a Rubicon Express SuperFlex Joint so in this thread, I ask the public how in the world these things are put togehter. And to be more specific, I was confused how to drive the plastic bushings into the housing. Conclusion - use a press <- faaantastic.

4) Hi-Steer Arms 10-degree Correction In this fabulous discussion, we discuss the ever-popular 10-degree correction that is often placed on High-Steer Arms. In the end, I decided to go with the Sky-Manufacturing arms (although I never updated the thread I dont think - darnit).

5) Dana 44 Ball Joint Sleeve > Replace? Ah finally, the pain in the asymptote. In this thread, which I have yet to resolve really, the problem is that the upper Ball Joint sleeve has frozen itself onto the "C" (aka inner knuckle). The issue has yet to be resolved so no conclusion yet.


Well then, lets dive into some concepts and design ideas.

3link_concept.jpg

As you can see, the front axle is located via a 3-link with a panhard bar. Each link will be mounted to the chassis using Rubicon Express Large SuperFlex Joint. Why go with the RE Joint? Well I was quite impressed at how much JEFE's front axle flexed - so I decided to go with the same joint. I recently asked him whether or not he has broken the 9/16" bolts used to attach the joint to the chassis and he said no - a big :thumbsup: . The link's body is made of a 2"x2" - 0.25" wall square tube - similar to Clayton Off-Road's long arms. Currently, my calculations are aiming for the bottom links to be 38.7" in length and the upper to be 34.2" (figures may change). This gives me an anti-dive of about 105% but I will make the upper link adjustable vertically at the chassis so the anti-dive characteristic can be fine tuned. The bottom links are angled "toe-out" becaue the Dana 44 is a "Wide-Track" axle and the Explorer's chassis is about 2" narrower than the Wide-Track axle's ideal mounting points. The "toe-out" angle however is not severe : about 2" out for the about total 38" length. The two bottom links are attached to the axle via a regular rubber-bushing. The upper "third" link is attached to the axle with the same type of rubber bushing except this one is adjustable - to allow for pinion angle changes.

Onto the front axle itself: As stated, the front "Wide Track" axle is from a Grand Wagoneer (I believe '86). Currently, its geared 5.13 with open differential. I'll throw in a locker in the future after I get this running. The axle was originally running the Wagoneer 6-lug bolt pattern but, because the rear GM 14-bolt is 8-lug, I switched the Dana 44 to 8-lug pattern using parts from a K20 (caliper bracket from a J20). As for the high-steer arms, as stated previously, I decided to go with SkyManufacturing's standard arms with the 10-degree correction angle (arms are on their way from CA).

The steering gear box is out of an IFS Toyota and the entire steering setup will utilize only Chevy TRE's except at the pitman arm.

The front axle will be suspended by Fox 2.5" Nitrogen Air Shocks with 16" of travel.

The rear axle, again as stated before, is a GM 14-bolt with a Detroit locker. Initially, it will be leaf sprung using the Explorer's stock leaf springs (with an AAL and WAR153s). However, I do plan on going 4-link in the near future after the Explorer starts rolling again.

Now onto some newbie pics..


The axle the day it arrived from New Jersey:
axle_pickup.jpg


Before last winter came, I emptied an entire can of Liquid Wrench (and other llubricants) into the differential to soak everything down in preparation for the following spring.
d44_greased.jpg


When spring finally came, the axle was torn down:
d44_housing.jpg


New carrier and new gears. The carrier bearings below are the set-up bearings which have had their inner races grinded down for repetative installation and removal on the carrier while the pinion and ring gear geometry was fine tuned:
d44_carrier.jpg

Spring also brought wheeling weather and I got high-centered on a rock so I decided to SOA the back for fun (the thing on the back is my snowboard and bike rack) and had to get my driveshaft retubed because it popped in half:
soa_backshot.jpg


The caliper brakets from a J20 after sand blasting and a coat of epoxy paint:
d44_caliperbracket_painted.jpg


Flat-top knuckles from a J10 masked off and ready for some epoxy paint:
d44_knuckle_ready_for_paint.jpg


Inner "C"s on the front axle sliced from the axle tubes (and temporarily knocked out about .125" for easier rotation) to set proper caster angle:
inner_c_sliced.jpg


Chevy K20 8-lug rotors .. "Oh my Mr. Obama, what big rotors you have. Why yes Sally, I do have big rotors." :
d44_rotor.jpg


Chevy K20 calipers:
d44_caliper.jpg


And finally for now, the RE SuperFlex joints:
re_joint.jpg


As for tires, right now I have a set of 36" TSL-SX's I bought for cheap from a local individual.


So what's in the future? Well the rest of the link parts are on their way - as well as the high steer arms. The Fox shocks will be purchased in about 2 weeks and the 14-bolt axle will be picked up about 3 weeks to a month after that. The rear axle is the least of my worries so that's the last thing on this Senator's mind.
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





A quick diagram outlining the pinion angle difference at full droop between a Long bottom arm setup and a Short bottom arm setup. Any thoughts on this? Because it seems to contradict the typical configuration with the longer bottom arm setup.:

link_length_analysis.gif
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





i know nothing about pinion angles and stuff, but dont feel bad that no ones replying, because they didnt to mine either, so everyone is too cool for explorerforum tonight ;)
 






21robbie21 said:
everyone is too cool for explorerforum tonight ;)
LOL


Well I've been going over a few of the threads I've bookmarked on Pirate and I actually found one 3-link setup with a longer upper arm :
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4651588&postcount=69

Very interesting - this gives me a little bit of confidence about the longer upper arm configuration - maybe I'm not too crazy after all :confused:
 












Have you thought of doing a radius arm setup. A radius arm would basically do what you are trying to do and would be easier to design in terms of mounting points. It'd be a little cheaper as well and you'd have a chance to make it more robust. It's basically the same design except your links share a rear mounting point, which you're getting close to anyway. You'd then leave the one link side the same as your have it to improve flex. In the end you'd have a radius arm on one side for axle location and rotation control and just 1 link on the other side for location, then the trac bar of course. This is the setup I'd go with if I were doing an SAS. I'm not sure what this would do for dive/squat characteristics, I'm not fresh on my theory in that sense, but I think it would be fairly neutral. Certainly are plenty of radius arm rigs out there. I think you are heading in the right direction if you're keeping the double cardain. The other option would be to go to single cardain and conventional longer lower link.
 






FROADER said:
Why are you worried about having a longer upper link?
I'm worried because I don't see it very often -- it just seems like if it was the correct thing to do, then there should be plenty of people running longer upper links.

Byrd91 said:
Have you thought of doing a radius arm setup.
I've thought about a radius arm setup but I don't think anything will beat a link setup as far as flex goes -- thats the reason why I bought shocks with 16" of travel -- for optimum flex
 






IZwack said:
A quick diagram outlining the pinion angle difference at full droop between a Long bottom arm setup and a Short bottom arm setup. Any thoughts on this? Because it seems to contradict the typical configuration with the longer bottom arm setup.:

link_length_analysis.gif


Are you sure you dont work for NASA or something like that?
 






[QUOTE='97 V8]Are you sure you dont work for NASA or something like that?[/QUOTE]I'm a male model ! :D Oh and a Senator (according to the title of this thread)
 






I'm gonna have to require that you post all measurements of this install. so as to make it easier to copy, for my swap.
 






zhanx said:
I'm gonna have to require that you post all measurements of this install. so as to make it easier to copy, for my swap.
Surely -- once its finished I'll post final measurements -- cauz right now the numbers are in flux!

Right now, I plan to run lower links that are at about 39" long (pushing the front axle forward about 3") -- and whatever length upper link I need in order to account for a proper pinion angle. So this probably means my upper link is going to be around ~46" long -- eeep :D
 






IZwack said:
I've thought about a radius arm setup but I don't think anything will beat a link setup as far as flex goes -- thats the reason why I bought shocks with 16" of travel -- for optimum flex

A radius arm setup is a link setup. It behaves more like a four link though. Have you seen the way radius arm setup flexes with a wristed passenger arm? It behaves like a Three link. I think Jefe is running what Byrd91 is talking about. I would consider this option as well. I have seen a ton of TJs and XJs running an RE long Arm kit with only the drivers side upper attached and they travel with the best of them. You will need to make the lowers seriously beefy though, especially at the frame mounts. They would encounter extra abuse.
 






Kirby N. said:
A radius arm setup is a link setup. It behaves more like a four link though...You will need to make the lowers seriously beefy though, especially at the frame mounts. They would encounter extra abuse.
I think the 2"x2" x 0.25" wall square tubing might be enough to run the three-link radius arm setup but I think I'm going to stay with the 3 independant link setup -- thanks for the insight tho Kirby N :D
 






IZ,

I'm curious why you think the independent links will flex more than the radius arm/link setup. I'm not really sure, but it seems like there is one less axle/frame connection that will bind. Also the range of motion of any 1 bushing/heim isn't any greater with the radius arm setup, so I really don't think it will flex less than independent links...keep in mind, I have to proof, but just seems to make sense and as Kirby said, there are a lot of Jeepers out there with this setup flexing like mad. I'm alll about simplicity too.
 






I was under the impression that a true 3 link will flex better than a radius arm setup after reading a few Pirate and NAXJA discussions.

In addition, the 3 link allows for finer tuning -- mainly the anti-dive numbers -- which I'm aiming for somewhere between 80% and 120%. A radius arm setup has a fixed instance-center (near the frame mount) where as a true linked setup can be adjusted (for proper lift and dive characteristics - and the IC does move when the suspension is flexed).

The only real issue with the true 3 link setup is the pinion angle at full droop/stuff -- but I think I have that covered by using a longer upper link.



EDIT: I thought I'd throw this out there just in case anyone see's a problem (like when KirbyN pointed out the upper to the driver's side :D ) -- Yes that is a 54.7" long upper link <- Haha! I know thats probably twice the length of what most people run with but the numbers speak for themselves so I'm going to give it a try.
The "full droop" image is with the axle ~10" down and "full stuff" is with the axle 7" up:
linkTravels.gif


The pinion angle is I think at acceptable levels throughout the suspension travel. It is slightly below the transfer case output at full droop and slightly above at full stuff.

I haven't ran the anti-dive numbers yet but right now it should be a little on the high side -- but there X (3 or 4 maybe) more mounting holes on the chassis-end of the upper link which will allow tuning. There will be a significant margin of error in the anti-dive calculations because I dont know exactly where the center of gravity is on an Explorer. But again, the extra mounting holes will help fine tune the suspension.

BTW I'm going to mock the links up with conduit tubing (under the Explorer with the axle and everything) -- so I'll get a preview of what the suspension is going to act like during its travel before final cuts are made.
 






Ummm, yeah I am going to shut my pie hole now, cuz you are pretty much way over my head now and it sounds like you got it covered!!! Sounds like you have thought it out plenty!!!
 






Kirby N. said:
Ummm, yeah I am going to shut my pie hole now, cuz you are pretty much way over my head now and it sounds like you got it covered!!! Sounds like you have thought it out plenty!!!
No please keep chiming in -- your insight on the location of the upper link was very helpful and this suspension will be a LOT better now thanks to your suggestions. And initially I wasn't going to do a writeup or anything on this axle swap, but its a GOOD thing I did -- or else I would have had severe pinion dive during flex :D


For an update on parts:
- the Fox 2.5's are coming in tomorrow :D Right on time according to UPS.
- the 14-bolt will be picked up on Thursday - I'm leaving around 5am to avoid the metro DC area traffic and should be in Chesapeake, VA by around 9am or so (its where ShakerBuilt is located).
 






I have to say that you're doing your homework before starting the swap. Alot of guys just start swaping and then ask questions and get mad when it doesn't match up!

Have you crawled under the truck to get some guesstimate as to where the top link will be? You're obviously going to have to make a new tranny cross memeber, but i'm just concerened that one that long maybe be to far back on the frame.
 






JoshC said:
I have to say that you're doing your homework before starting the swap. Alot of guys just start swaping and then ask questions and get mad when it doesn't match up!
Thanks:D, I've been preparing and doing research for almost a year now (I bought the Dana44 about 10 months ago) - so I've lost a few hours of sleep over this whole thing :eek:

JoshC said:
Have you crawled under the truck to get some guesstimate as to where the top link will be? You're obviously going to have to make a new tranny cross memeber, but i'm just concerened that one that long maybe be to far back on the frame.
I have done the measurements for the lower links but not the top link yet -- I will get under the vehicle again once the east coast dries up a bit :D Yeah the transmission cross member will have to be redone -- which will probably end up bolting closer to the upper link to ensure the arms dont run into the cross member.

As a side note, a pair of Fox 2.5's came in today :D

fox_shocks_standing.jpg



At full extension, its 42 and 5/8ths inches in eye-to-eye length (subtract 1 inch from the photo below - I have a habit of measuring from the 1 inch mark instead of the edge of the tape). Shock travel is of course 16 inches. Its surprising how light-weight these things are

fox_shocks_length.jpg




EDIT: since this is related to this project I guess should link to it: My Wanted Add for 14-bolt hubs which will give the axle a smaller WMS-WMS figure -- http://www.explorerforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1469197#post1469197
 






wow, those air shocks rule! I'm planning on a setup similar when I move my 44 to my new truck. It should work good from what I'm told. As to why a 3 or 4 link versus a radius arm (c-wedge style like I have) you need to consider what angle your ball joints and pinion will be when at full droop. With a 3,4 link the knuckle stay on top of eachother regardless of where the axle is cycling, if you had a radius arm style and had an axle at full droop, your top ball joint would be much further forward and your steering geometry will be off, that's at least what I think is the best reason of my to go 3,4 link.
 



Join the Elite Explorers for $20 each year.
Elite Explorer members see no advertisements, no banner ads, no double underlined links,.
Add an avatar, upload photo attachments, and more!
.





Dannyboy said:
wow, those air shocks rule!
LOL lets not be so quick to judge them yet. They may explode under high pressure and poke my eyes out - at that point, they won't rule anymore :D
 






Back
Top