Common 4X4 myths

[CJ007]

the best system I have eve seen to prevent axle wrap is the Nth Degree stinger system

it is like a centered traction bar, but it mounts to the diff and the trasfercase skid plate, it triangulates the axle so it cannot wrap at all and being centered it does not affect the articulation

I did quite a bit of research and even considered the bambar as one of the guys on my local sight built one. I had not heard of Nth Degree when I was looking at designs. I just found some pics and might haven given something like that a shot. Was he just not able to market it or were there any issues that you know of?

Either way, if either of you do one, please post it up.

 

[BajaEdition]

AEV carries it still

you buy 2 parts, one is the Slider, it is a very nice skid plate for the Axle, Hope you have a Dana 44 , or He has for other axles, if not I am sure we can get enough pictures for you to fab one up

once that is bolted on you put on the stinger, OK these are made for YJs and TJs, so like the one I am doing you may need to replace the a bar on it.

now if you do not get the cross bar you can get just the upper bracket, That is what I did and then you weld that to a cross bar or reinforced skid plate
it goes right under the upper ujoint on the rear driveshaft but over to the side a bit, you will see when you get under there. Anyway you want the driveshaft and it to swing on a parallel plan so there is no binding.

it is a great system as being centered it does not effect articulation one bit, and seeing how it triangulates where it grabs the axle, the axle cannot wrap at all. You will really be impressed on hill climbs, but even in the rocks you can now idle places you had to push it a bit because it is so stable

I know of a dealer out here if you want , he is in Big Bear CA, All J Products
All J Products - Aftermarket Jeep Products, Boulder Bars, Bumpers, Jeep Lift Kits, Skid Plates and MORE!

 

[CJim7]

I did quite a bit of research and even considered the bambar as one of the guys on my local sight built one. I had not heard of Nth Degree when I was looking at designs. I just found some pics and might haven given something like that a shot. Was he just not able to market it or were there any issues that you know of?

Either way, if either of you do one, please post it up.

Nth Degree went out in '07 and speculation was they got popular but with that popularity comes difficulty in production, customer service, etc....It's hard to keep up when your famous. A lot of great offroad aftermarket companies that started out small came to this realization. Jim and Nicole were very savvy and rather then let everything disappear in a cloud of smoke, their product line lives on through other manufacturers.
Dave at AEV was carrying a lot of their stuff the last time I visited the shop back in '07...but it's been a few years since I've been back home. At the time, they were going to expand the Nth degree inventory.

When I start my D60 build I will include the antiwrap in the write up.

 

[IOPort51]

OK boys, before I start this I hope you two know that I hold you both in the highest regard and value both your opinions very much .

BUT I can't buy into this SOA thing, I kind of have to think that the spring is a constant and shifting the weight in the vertical plane will have very little if any effect on the length of travel of that spring along that same vertical line. I do see where the change will affect the wheel hop/spring warp as it shifts the center of torque to a lower place that increases the torque load on the front of the spring.

I wish I had a smiley that was of a guy poking a pile of 5h1t with a long stick.

 

[BajaEdition]

I O
my biggest thing is that springs as we know are not designed for them, they are designed for SUA
Now a lot of guys run the SOA, And some of them admit it is not a simple mod to do. I think that the centered single traction bar does do a lot to get the thing under control and is a must, but as I said, we need a Single Leaf spring system to make it write.
that is my opinion, it is debatable. But I do stand by it.

and I have seen that smiley, yes we need CJ to get it for us

 

[BajaEdition]

HOLD THE PRESS

look at what I just found

Mono Leaf Springs

 

[CJim7]

HOLD THE PRESS

look at what I just found

Mono Leaf Springs

Someone a few years back came up with a single-leaf fiberglass spring...about the time the orbitals came out. I have not seen it around in a very long time, nor have I heard any reviews. I can only assume it didnt review well

 

[CJ007]

IMO, the SOA has several benefits. The obvious are lift, clearance gains (and clean look) at the base of the axle, and not having to use aftermarket springs that are arched up in one direction limiting drop.

The articulation comes from the fact that the tires are now further from the fender and the axle is not as close to the bump stop since only the u bolt plate sits on top. Your gains come from the extra room for the axle being allowed to push up further before hitting the bump stop as you gain the entire width (3-4") of the tube in the ability to flex up, and in the setup the ubolts pointing up have Limited factor (unlike pointed down below axle as a fully compressed spring pushed up is just wide enough for the ubolts to sit outside the frame.

So, in effect you have more clearance above and below to articulate. When one side is compressed it comes up more, when the other side drops (because it is flat) it drops more. From what I see that equals more articulation.

 

[BusaDave9]

Here's the smiley IO was asking for.
I think we are in agreement that the SOA will experience more axle wrap. But I disagree on the reason. Whatever side the axle is mounted to you have the axle perch (and axle) on one side of the spring pack and a flat plate is mounted on the other side.

The spring pack is clamped in between. Either way there is about 5 inches of spring that can't flex because it is clamped between steel. The spring pack flexes everywhere else.
Now, the reason SOA experiences more axle wrap is leverage. With the axle mounted on the bottom it is farther from the spring mounts on the frame. This gives more leverage as the jeep accelerates and decelerates. That's why I think SOA has more of a problem with axle wrap.

 

[BajaEdition]

I think someone realizes what I said
the spring is not designed for the application

 

[IOPort51]

The original premise was to have the original spring, a flat single leak spring changes the entire concept. however what you gained moving the axle you lost in spring arch. With a flat spring articulation will be restricted by shackle travel. once again I gotta say SOA may have a place in the world but it seems like an idea that has gotten out of hand. I could see a coil over suspension being better and just as cost effective.

 

[BajaEdition]

I am totally sold on doing a front Coil over, control arm swap out, the rear though I think Leafs are just fine. I think a well tuned front coil over with both dampening and rebound adjustability would give enough articulation to wheel very well

 

[BusaDave9]

I am of the opposite opinion. At least on my CJ, I love my front leaf spring suspension. I get great flex, stability, control and articulation. Now the rear often gives me trouble. I dont' get much rear travel but I get axle wrap to the point that I get the U-joints binding. My pinion even used to hit the bottom of my tub so I angled my rear axle lower than I would like. There's a lot of room between my axle and my tub so I am amazed that the pinion twists up that far. And I don't even have SOA.
Take a look at this video to see what I am talking about:
Jeep Axle Wrap - YouTube
So if I were to modify my suspension I would keep the front leaf springs and put it four link suspension in the rear. It's harder to fit four link in front but a control arm would work (like what you are talking about Baja).

Leaf springs are great for their simplicity and I love simplicity. I wouldn't have a CJ if i didn't.
Otherwise the 4 link is a better system.

 

[CJ007]

I think someone realizes what I said
the spring is not designed for the application

That is true, in that a good amount of torque is produced on stock springs. And typically 35s are added when u do an soa so that adds to the fire.

But for clarity, the application in itself is successful and can be found in just about any truck or suv on the road. I can't say I know the differences in setup but If I were to regear a truck and add tires, and there was nothing present, I would also consider some kind of anti wrap device as part of a complete lift kit.

You can successfully run soa with hd springs but it depends on your wheeling type.

Sorry guys I don't how to add the terd

 

[CJim7]

SOA is not a perfect design by any means. It has it's drawbacks in high speed offroad, hillclimbing, and acceleration on hard surfaces. It shines in low speed rock crawling, and that's what it's intended use should be. We've replaced many spring packs that were fatigued due to axle wrap because of things like desert racing and high rpm hill climbing. Usually adding an antiwrap system at customer request after advising them of the reasons. And a poorly designed/built SOA is dangerous, ill-performing, and compromises good parts.

In this day and age, you are seeing a trend for lower COG rigs...a step away from SOA (and even coil overs in some applications). People are doing more fender cutting and relocation of the axles to fit larger tires while minimizing lift. Guys are putting 39 and 40 inch tires under rigs with only 2½ inches of lift ...and staying spring under

I love the coil over design. It really is the ultimate suspension system that can be built into a Jeep. But for the amount of work to fabricate a CO into a CJ, I would start with a different build platform...something with a stronger frame like a YJ or a TJ. The company I work with frenches the coil mounts into the frame front and rear...I just dont trust the CJ frame unless a lot of reinforcement is added. But that is on this particular design, other designs may support it. However, the frenched design is the cleanest and best functioning I have seen to date.

A coil over is super expensive to fab up....there's nothing cheap about it at all, a lot of time, planning, labor, and part $$$ is involved. Once it's done however, it kicks but as far as articulation.

But me...*sigh*...Im old school leafspring guy

 

[JR74CJ5]

I'd like to throw in a few tire / rim myths I've heard over the years...

(not sure the actual number we're on, so:

JR's#1: You should choose a rim width at least X" smaller than the planned tire width. The reasoning given to me was obvious, less scrubbing / scraping and damaging the side rim sealing section of the rim over rocks etc. My main question with this is what is "X" If I am running 12-1/2" wide tires, should I run 10" 9" etc rims width.

JR#2: If you put tube inside the tubeless tire, you can air a lot further down without worrying about the bead blowing off. (similar to using beadlocks.) Is there any drawbacks to doing this? I imagine it would be easy to twist the tire and possibly the tube inside and therefore damage or hurt the valve stem.

JR#3: Beadlocks are not DOT approved for road usage. Here in California, I've heard this many times... But here is a huge thread I have encountered while reading into this. Beadlocks illegal in California? [Archive] - Pirate4x4.Com

So those are my "Noob" myths, that i wish to discuss with you all.



~ JR

 

[CJim7]

JR#1. Im running 8" rims with 12.5 tires. As you mentioned, narrower rims offer better protection. They also aid in keeping the bead under low tire pressure situations. The key to doing this properly depends on tire height however...the taller the tire, the easier it is to run narrower rims.

JR#2. Tubes are making a comeback! A lot of guys are reverting to using tubes inside the tire. The reason? You dont have to worry about losing air if you break a bead. The downside is you can still break a bead and roll the tire which is always the risk you run without beadlocks.

JR#3. DOT is a bunch of nazis lol. Most people enforcing DOT in a non-inspection area dont even know the DOT laws.

 

[BusaDave9]

There are exceptions but almost all beadlock wheels are not DOT approved.
Here in Colorado (and many other states) they just don't enforce this law. We don't have to pass an inspection here (they do on the front range). But the cops cant tell if the wheels are DOT or not.

 

[Old Dog]

JR's#1: You should choose a rim width at least X" smaller than the planned tire width. The reasoning given to me was obvious, less scrubbing / scraping and damaging the side rim sealing section of the rim over rocks etc. My main question with this is what is "X" If I am running 12-1/2" wide tires, should I run 10" 9" etc rims width.

JR#2: If you put tube inside the tubeless tire, you can air a lot further down without worrying about the bead blowing off. (similar to using beadlocks.) Is there any drawbacks to doing this? I imagine it would be easy to twist the tire and possibly the tube inside and therefore damage or hurt the valve stem.

JR#3: Beadlocks are not DOT approved for road usage. Here in California, I've heard this many times... But here is a huge thread I have encountered while reading into this. Beadlocks illegal in California? [Archive] - Pirate4x4.Com~ JR

#1 I like to run a 10" rim with my 33x12.5's. I run 8# offroad and haven't any problems. I think it lets them get a wider footprint than 8" rims do. I do have rock rash on them but it hasn't hurt anything but looks.

#2 I don't know anyone running tubes but I guess I can see it helping if you break a bead, but I think you also have a very good chance of turning the tire and riping the valve stem.
I've aften though of buying some of these though. InnerAirLock, LLC - Inner Air Lock ~ Home

#3 We've never had the cops give us any greef over this so

 

[BusaDave9]

JR#2: If you put tube inside the tubeless tire, you can air a lot further down without worrying about the bead blowing off. (similar to using beadlocks.) Is there any drawbacks to doing this? I imagine it would be easy to twist the tire and possibly the tube inside and therefore damage or hurt the valve stem.


~ JR

I agree.
Most bead locks only lock the outside rim. The inside bead doesn't have anything holding it up to the rim. Why does this prevent you from breaking a bead and loosing your air? Because a common reason you break a bead is because the tire turns on the rim and then the bead breaks loose and the air escapes. Having only one beadlock on the outside of the rim is enough to prevent the tire rotating.
Now if you have an inner tube you can still rotate the tire on the rim. This will rip the valve stem out of the inner-tube.