link the front or rear?

zukijames

Well-Known Member
Location
not moab anymore
so this thread is going on a zuki forum and i thought i'd see what you guys have to say.. im linked front and rear.

I did the front first. If i could only pick one i would do the rear.. simple, adds tons of traction

so what does RME think about this..
 

Hickey

Burn-barrel enthusiast
Supporting Member
I linked the rear of my last rig. I plan to link the front first on my new Jeep. Reason being, leafs up front keep getting bent/ approach angle/ better ride and traction.

Link whichever end you have the most trouble with.
 
Last edited:

zukijames

Well-Known Member
Location
not moab anymore
better traction from linking the front? explain please.. approach angle is the only thing i can see especially if you have yj spprings or something like that.. but run a toyota rear or xj spring if your stuck on heep parts and that will help your approach angle alot... run more leafs in your spring pack and bump stops if your bending.

again everyone is different and we all know we are right haha
 

Herzog

somewhat damaged
Admin
Location
Wydaho
Rear is usually easier and less expensive to start out with. You don't have to mess much with steering and junk, plus there's a lot of good info on how to get a decent geometry with the links that will work well.
 

rockreligious

NoEcoNaziAmmo
Location
Ephraim
The only advatage I see to linking a sami in the front instead of rear is if your going full hydro and you want to really push your front axle forward for approach and wieght distribution, If you stretch the wheelbase way back on a sami and leave the front stock, they are too light in the rear. That said I would link the rear first and push the front forward either way, links or leaves. in the end your going to probably end up with nitrogen all the way around.
 

zukijames

Well-Known Member
Location
not moab anymore
if i was doing it and could only do one i would do toyota rear springs 92 and newer i believe and fj60(or any forward facing pitman arm steering box) shackle reverse. Lots of flex, good ride, great approach angle

and link the rear
 

zukijames

Well-Known Member
Location
not moab anymore
i like it! tons of separation at the axle sweet mounts. but.. the lowers dont have much angle.. so you will have rear steer( traction in back on one tire can swing your nose around) matters to some not to others.

also it would be nice to have the lowers up higher in the frame because that lowers your center line .

i dont know much though im sure some smarter guys will pitch in..

my lowers now have 10 degrees.. and im rebuilding loved it for awhile.. learned more and decided i would make something better for climbs (my crappy geometry climbed all the big stuff in moab )
the more you know the pickier you get and everyone has different needs and wants
 

Hickey

Burn-barrel enthusiast
Supporting Member
better traction from linking the front? explain please.. approach angle is the only thing i can see especially if you have yj spprings or something like that.. but run a toyota rear or xj spring if your stuck on heep parts and that will help your approach angle alot... run more leafs in your spring pack and bump stops if your bending.

again everyone is different and we all know we are right haha
No spring wrap, plus you can adjust anti-dive with links. With shackle forward, you bend leafs when forcing your front wheels to climb walls/ledges. I'm not stuck on Jeep parts. I could care less who manufactures the part, as long as it fits my needs.
 

zukijames

Well-Known Member
Location
not moab anymore
you dont bend alcans with a shackle reversal.. and not sure if youve noticed a rear axle has hop alot more than a front alteast on the rigs i have driven.

but everyone is different every rig, every trail , every driver

ps if the front wrapping you could try an anti wrap spring and set up your suck down winch on a pulley so that when you suck the front down it would stiffen up front and pull the pinion up keeping it from wrapping down..
 
Top