Custom Upper A-Arms | Page 3 | Ford Explorer Forums - Serious Explorations

  • Register Today It's free!

Custom Upper A-Arms

Not trying to sound like a dick or criticize the idea but why bother with a dual rate coil over on a set up that only pulls about 10" of wheel travel and will probably only use about 6" or so of shock shaft travel? I could understand using a regular single rate coilover or maybe a set up with a tender coil but I also don't see how it would be worth stuffing a dual rate into such limited space on a system with not that much wheel travel. Again I'm not trying to call you out or anything but rather figure out if what you want to achieve by using that type of C/O is necessary
 



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!
.





Not trying to sound like a dick or criticize the idea but why bother with a dual rate coil over on a set up that only pulls about 10" of wheel travel and will probably only use about 6" or so of shock shaft travel? I could understand using a regular single rate coilover or maybe a set up with a tender coil but I also don't see how it would be worth stuffing a dual rate into such limited space on a system with not that much wheel travel. Again I'm not trying to call you out or anything but rather figure out if what you want to achieve by using that type of C/O is necessary

Lol my mistake, its more of the tender spring and main spring setup. For an 8inch coilover you need a 14 inch coil, and they dont come in a heavy enough rating for an explorer. Thats what ryan (white96x) ran into when he did his coilovers. It will be a 4 inch tender and 10 inch main spring. Sorry for the confusion, and no worries constructive criticism is always welcome
 






I'm interested in any way to improve the rough stock ride. The rear leafs may be most of what bothers people, but the torsion bars have a non linear spring rate. Hopefully that's part of the problem.
 






For the rear ill be going with deavers, and a good valved set of shocks. In my opinion torsion bars suck, the coilovers should be 100 times better. Once all is said and done it should be a whole different truck.
 






I'm interested in any way to improve the rough stock ride. The rear leafs may be most of what bothers people, but the torsion bars have a non linear spring rate. Hopefully that's part of the problem.
Really? I thought the torsion bars were pretty much linear (as with most other single spring system).
 






No, the springs have a very short total range of the twist in them. I think the rate change is a curve, where it changes more per inch as the bar is twisted more. Thus the initial rate when you hit a bump is high, and falls off on droop.

For a street truck the softer springs that would ride well, they allow too much height change, hitting the bump stops easily. I changed to the "B" bars when I lowered to where I wanted the truck finally, and I have almost no bottoming out. The ride is much harsher now though also, every bump is felt.
 












Thanks for the information. Check out this key section of it,

"... The fact that torsion bars are a linear spring effect the ride quality in a negative manner. Luckily, with modern technology and the advanced design of independent front suspension (IFS) ride is still going to be far superior to that of a progressive leaf spring and a solid front axle. Also, you may notice that the LCA on the GM IFS seems to be resting on its upper bump stop. This is not only a bump stop, but what is called a progressive dampner. It compresses at a progressive rate, simulating a progressive rate spring, and letting the torsion bars achieve close to a progressive feel. Another con is as you increase the ride height by adjusting your keys, the ride gets worse. Now it’s a common misconception that there is more of a load on the bar and this is the cause. That is impossible since the LCA moves as well, so there is no more torsion on the bar than before, the spring rate does not actually change like many belive. The twisting action does not change the pre-load on the bar directly, so cranking your bars is just like adding a block in the rear or a coil spacer. It is simply changing the position of the spring. Just to clear things up, pre-load is the amount by which the torsion bar can't return to its original (unloaded) position due to be installed in the truck. The reason for the bad ride quality is instead a combination of things. First of all, when you adjust the height up, the angle between your LCA and the ground is increased which effectively does reduce your pre-load by reducing the leverage your LCAs have on your torsion bars. This negativly effects the ride by taking the torsion bars out of the preload range they were designed to work in. In combination with that, if you crank too far your UCAs have very little room left between them and the lower bump stops, reducing downward travel. You also pull the LCA away from the progressive dampner, making it ineffective and putting yourself back into the position of having a linear spring. These are the reasons the ride gets worse! One last disadvantage is that like all other springs, torsion bars will wear out over time causing your front end to sag. The more weight on the front of your vehicle, the faster they will wear. Also, the more your suspension travels the faster they wear...."

What I see is that we are all altering our ride height, which is hurting the ride. Like in that article, the bump stop may be what makes the ride quality change as the truck moves through a bump etc.

The answer seems to be that a progressive rate is most desirable, and that is easier to accomplish with coil springs. The initial compression of progressive rate springs is softer than the rest of the motion. That makes the normal ride better, small bumps become less noticed. That's what I'm after,
 












Ok, ordered the ball joints today. They are larger/stronger moog units. The arms should be built within the next week or so, ill get pics up and everyone can see the finished product. These will be a good upgrade....
 






























Got the ball joints that will be used in these arms in yesterday. Holy crap these things are beefy and can extend to a crazy angle. And they are moog and stocked at rock auto for 35$. Cant beat that, the measurements and mock up will be done tonite. When i get home ill take some pics of the new ball jont side by side with the factory moog replacement.
 






Ask your buddy what he would charge to build a set of boxed arms for a 92 full-size blazer. long ones....
 












i'd rather go like 6 per side. i'm not afraid of travel! and i like my trucks WIDE! sure i could drive it up there.
 









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!
.





Good. the expensive part will be shafts.....
 






Back
Top