Poor man's susp. drop and sway bars?
#16
So I guess that's a no on the shower curtain rod? How about welding some heavy pipes into the bed?
And what's wrong with cutting springs and removing leafs? Any particular explanation as to why that would prove detrimental? How about keeping the stock suspension and just loading the bed to level the rake?
I wonder if you could weld some lead weights to the front to accomplish the same?
And what's wrong with cutting springs and removing leafs? Any particular explanation as to why that would prove detrimental? How about keeping the stock suspension and just loading the bed to level the rake?
I wonder if you could weld some lead weights to the front to accomplish the same?
#17
#18
Originally posted by TTA89
You Cheap bastards...
It costs $125 bucks for a set of Springs from Ruslow which can be had anywhere from stock to 1500lbs. Order a set and do it the right way....
Cutting Coils is the hack backwards way to do it. You own a 30 Thousand Dollar truck, Im sure you can afford $125 bucks to do it the right way.
:
You Cheap bastards...
It costs $125 bucks for a set of Springs from Ruslow which can be had anywhere from stock to 1500lbs. Order a set and do it the right way....
Cutting Coils is the hack backwards way to do it. You own a 30 Thousand Dollar truck, Im sure you can afford $125 bucks to do it the right way.
:
#19
Originally posted by whiplash
If one can cut part of a spring and lower their truck for nothing versus spend $125 with the same result.....why spend the extra money?? I'm into saving money if i get the same result.....
If one can cut part of a spring and lower their truck for nothing versus spend $125 with the same result.....why spend the extra money?? I'm into saving money if i get the same result.....
You will lower the truck, but the ride will not be worth it in my opinion. Why not just wait until you have enough money to do it right the 1st time.
I have cut springs in the past on many cars, this was when I was in H.S. and didn't know any better. Years latter I replaced the springs with lowering springs from hotchkis, and it made a world of difference. Thinking back with all the tires and shocks I went through I should of just left the stock springs alone until I could do it right.
#20
Originally posted by LightningGuy
So I guess that's a no on the shower curtain rod? How about welding some heavy pipes into the bed?
And what's wrong with cutting springs and removing leafs? Any particular explanation as to why that would prove detrimental? How about keeping the stock suspension and just loading the bed to level the rake?
I wonder if you could weld some lead weights to the front to accomplish the same?
So I guess that's a no on the shower curtain rod? How about welding some heavy pipes into the bed?
And what's wrong with cutting springs and removing leafs? Any particular explanation as to why that would prove detrimental? How about keeping the stock suspension and just loading the bed to level the rake?
I wonder if you could weld some lead weights to the front to accomplish the same?
#21
Originally posted by LightningGuy
. . . And what's wrong with cutting springs and removing leafs? Any particular explanation as to why that would prove detrimental? . . .
. . . And what's wrong with cutting springs and removing leafs? Any particular explanation as to why that would prove detrimental? . . .
1. Removing a leaf softens the rear spring rate, which almost always negatively affects handling.
2. Cutting the coils increases the spring rate, which, in combination with #1, is f'in stupid, as you have now thrown the front/rear balance way out of whack.
Than again, we could just throw in several hundred pounds of ballast and move it around it it feels right.
#22
Originally posted by ~nightcrawler~
If you have a lower than stock suspension though there will be less room for travel, so less room for lateral movement by the panhard right? Would this excessive lateral movement damage components or just affect the handling characteristics?
If you have a lower than stock suspension though there will be less room for travel, so less room for lateral movement by the panhard right? Would this excessive lateral movement damage components or just affect the handling characteristics?
Looking at it another way -- if at triple digit speeds while cornering you are hitting things so hard that you are concerned about suspension travel limits, you probably have more to worry about than axle movement.
The "excessive" lateral movement comment I made was in comparison to an optimum (i.e., longer) bar, not to mean that the suspension is bummed out by the lateral movement introduced by the relatively short Ruslow bar. The plain fact is that the panhard prevents excessive lateral movement, not causes it. In the process of stopping erratic 1" side-to-side movement, you introduce consistent 1/4" side-to-side movement (these numbers are just pulled out 'o my rear for illustration).
But if you are on a budget, a panhard should be way down on the list. I think of a panhard as the single-blade throttle body of the suspension/brakes -- it works, but should be one of the last things you do after the more fundamental bits are in place. Others may disagree.
Last edited by Tim Skelton; 07-22-2004 at 10:19 PM.
#23
Just cutting "height" from the installed coil springs will almost always induce handling problems which is almost inevitable. Any coil spring has a designed set of "dynamics" relative to compression and decompression rates built in to it relative to the type of steel used and it's wire thickness - and the loads it's designed to carry, etc. When you cut off a portion of the coil spring - you change all of this - including your control arm geometry and all designed handling characteristics will be changed, standard shock packages are ineffective, etc. If your "objective" is "appearance" only, and you're not going to be driving it hard and fast, then lowering your truck by cutting coils and/or removing leafs from rear springs might be ok.
#24
Originally posted by Tim Skelton
Looking at it another way -- if at triple digit speeds while cornering you are hitting things so hard that you are concerned about suspension travel limits, you probably have more to worry about than axle movement.
Looking at it another way -- if at triple digit speeds while cornering you are hitting things so hard that you are concerned about suspension travel limits, you probably have more to worry about than axle movement.
Originally posted by Tim Skelton
But if you are on a budget, a panhard should be way down on the list. I think of a panhard as the single-blade throttle body of the suspension/brakes -- it works, but should be one of the last things you do after the more fundamental bits are in place. Others may disagree.
But if you are on a budget, a panhard should be way down on the list. I think of a panhard as the single-blade throttle body of the suspension/brakes -- it works, but should be one of the last things you do after the more fundamental bits are in place. Others may disagree.
Thanks again for your educated assistance
#25
Originally posted by ~nightcrawler~
I think we got mixed up on what I was trying to say. . . .
I think we got mixed up on what I was trying to say. . . .
Let's say that a stock rear suspension has 6" of travel.
You now lower it 3". But you also put in lower bump stops (mine are not even 1"). So you still may have 4-5" of travel.
But for 99.9% of your driving, it doesn't matter, because you are still in the same range (not on the bump stops) that you were before -- say +/- 2" from rest.
Because of the arc of the bar pivoting on the frame mount, a panhard pulls the axle to the right as it moves up or down. That sideways movement is a fraction of the up and down movement (maybe 1/10th or less). But it increases at an increasing rate, so at the extremes of travel, it does in fact shift the axle more to the right in an unlowered truck -- because the axle can move farther up.
My point is that this is all but irrelevant, because 99.9% of the time, there is no difference in travel between stock and (properly) lowered.
And since the panhard is designed to remove the shackle/spring slop on hard cornering, if you are bottoming or topping out the suspension under panhard-hard cornering, the little bit of extra pull of the axle to the right is the least of your concerns.
#26
Four inch shackles will turn your ride into sh*t. Hell, I had 2 inch shackles on my truck and went back to stock to eliminate some of the slop in the rear.
If you want to lower the rear correctly, go with either a Roush full system or the Hotchkis rear leafs. The latter will maintain your load capabilities while the Roush system will halve it.
For the fronts, I would suggest anything above 1000#s from Stan, which has his custom made by a company called Hypercoil. With Hypercoil, unlike other manufacturers like Belltech, their claimed spring rates are pretty damn close to their actual rates. I personally went with a set of 1000# coils because roads here are riddled with potholes.
Be sure to match up your endlinks and keep your swaybar [ears] parallel to the ground. I believe Mr. Skelton's site has a wealth of information on matching endlink with expected drop. A word of advice is to stay away from the Competition Engineering adjustable endlinks since they are only a tad shorter than the stockers. I found out the hard way and ended up having to drill up on my frame anyway. The SoCal adjustable endlinks are the way to go if you are squeamish about drilling.
As for the shocks, it seems the only alternative to the QA1s is the Hotchkis Bilsteins (if you're after a performance shock). I wish someone made double-adjustable shocks for our trucks! Penske makes a great set too, but they're ridiculously priced. I've heard rumors of adapting Koni's to the Lightning, but I'm still on the fence about that as they don't seem to be the Yellow's. I don't think Roush wants to disclose details on their shocks, but they could be an option as well since their spring rates are pretty similar to the Hotchkis ones (coils and leafs).
Stan's panhard is a bit short, but it works and is pretty much our only option. There were rumors of Competition Engineering coming out with one for our trucks, but no solid news as of yet.
Finally, go to Lowe's and pick up some concrete or sandbags if you want to dial in your truck's ride height a little more
If you want to lower the rear correctly, go with either a Roush full system or the Hotchkis rear leafs. The latter will maintain your load capabilities while the Roush system will halve it.
For the fronts, I would suggest anything above 1000#s from Stan, which has his custom made by a company called Hypercoil. With Hypercoil, unlike other manufacturers like Belltech, their claimed spring rates are pretty damn close to their actual rates. I personally went with a set of 1000# coils because roads here are riddled with potholes.
Be sure to match up your endlinks and keep your swaybar [ears] parallel to the ground. I believe Mr. Skelton's site has a wealth of information on matching endlink with expected drop. A word of advice is to stay away from the Competition Engineering adjustable endlinks since they are only a tad shorter than the stockers. I found out the hard way and ended up having to drill up on my frame anyway. The SoCal adjustable endlinks are the way to go if you are squeamish about drilling.
As for the shocks, it seems the only alternative to the QA1s is the Hotchkis Bilsteins (if you're after a performance shock). I wish someone made double-adjustable shocks for our trucks! Penske makes a great set too, but they're ridiculously priced. I've heard rumors of adapting Koni's to the Lightning, but I'm still on the fence about that as they don't seem to be the Yellow's. I don't think Roush wants to disclose details on their shocks, but they could be an option as well since their spring rates are pretty similar to the Hotchkis ones (coils and leafs).
Stan's panhard is a bit short, but it works and is pretty much our only option. There were rumors of Competition Engineering coming out with one for our trucks, but no solid news as of yet.
Finally, go to Lowe's and pick up some concrete or sandbags if you want to dial in your truck's ride height a little more
#27
Tim,
I understand you now. Sorry about that. I have another question though. If the panhard bar is setup where it pulls to the right, why not have another one on the opposite side that pulls to the left to balance eachother out? Or maybe I just don't know what I'm talking about...
LightningGuy,
Thank you that was a better suggestion for what I was looking for, but I think the 1000# coils up front may be too stiff for my daily driven roads. That's why I thought maybe the new hotchkis with softer rate springs. I have 2" shackles on now and I don't think the handling suffered too badly in place of the new looks. Thanks for the other info though.
I understand you now. Sorry about that. I have another question though. If the panhard bar is setup where it pulls to the right, why not have another one on the opposite side that pulls to the left to balance eachother out? Or maybe I just don't know what I'm talking about...
LightningGuy,
Thank you that was a better suggestion for what I was looking for, but I think the 1000# coils up front may be too stiff for my daily driven roads. That's why I thought maybe the new hotchkis with softer rate springs. I have 2" shackles on now and I don't think the handling suffered too badly in place of the new looks. Thanks for the other info though.
#29
lay two pencils down horizontaly in front of you with the earasers touching.
Now with the outside ends stationary, lift tem in the center. See the gap grow.
Your frame would have to be made of rubber to allow that double panhard setup to be used .
This whole suspension thing is crazy.
People buy these trucks because they are fast and usefull as well as look the part.
The factory has to design the system to be comfortable, practical and haul or tow varied amounts of weight. And above that keep the rubber side facing down at triple digit speeds.
There is a great seires of books out by "Carroll Smith" that covers the basics very well if your serious about suspension and how it works. I am holding in my hand one of them called Prepare to win. ( I would be willing to bet Tim has the whole set)
http://www.insmkt.com/csmith.htm
The whole point of suspension tunning is to allow as much rubber contact on the ground at all times as possible. Check out the 4X4 guy's and there Rancho shock setups that allow you to change the ride firmness while driving..... (neat concept)
It is frustrating at times to see what happens to our trucks for the sake of apperance and short term trends. It seems the very thing that some people are trying to do is make there truck look similar to a fast version high speed airodynamic race car but they go about it all wrong.
Allmost all performance enhancing suspensions will sacrifice ride comfort and when using urethane components you get that extra sqeak as a bonus.
Now with the outside ends stationary, lift tem in the center. See the gap grow.
Your frame would have to be made of rubber to allow that double panhard setup to be used .
This whole suspension thing is crazy.
People buy these trucks because they are fast and usefull as well as look the part.
The factory has to design the system to be comfortable, practical and haul or tow varied amounts of weight. And above that keep the rubber side facing down at triple digit speeds.
There is a great seires of books out by "Carroll Smith" that covers the basics very well if your serious about suspension and how it works. I am holding in my hand one of them called Prepare to win. ( I would be willing to bet Tim has the whole set)
http://www.insmkt.com/csmith.htm
The whole point of suspension tunning is to allow as much rubber contact on the ground at all times as possible. Check out the 4X4 guy's and there Rancho shock setups that allow you to change the ride firmness while driving..... (neat concept)
It is frustrating at times to see what happens to our trucks for the sake of apperance and short term trends. It seems the very thing that some people are trying to do is make there truck look similar to a fast version high speed airodynamic race car but they go about it all wrong.
Allmost all performance enhancing suspensions will sacrifice ride comfort and when using urethane components you get that extra sqeak as a bonus.
#30
Originally posted by ~nightcrawler~
Tim,
I understand you now. Sorry about that. I have another question though. If the panhard bar is setup where it pulls to the right, why not have another one on the opposite side that pulls to the left to balance eachother out? Or maybe I just don't know what I'm talking about...
Tim,
I understand you now. Sorry about that. I have another question though. If the panhard bar is setup where it pulls to the right, why not have another one on the opposite side that pulls to the left to balance eachother out? Or maybe I just don't know what I'm talking about...