High travel, high clearance & high octane, a streetable adventure LJ story

I'll see if he can get some. 77 ford hp44 i narrowed to waggy width with flat top chevy knuckles and relatively straight arms.

If i remember right good ackermann follows a path from the center of the rear through the balljoint to the tie rod?

Ackermann is a bit like pregnancy. You are or you ain't. But yes, a line starting at the center of the rear axle and extended forward to end at the center of the tie rod attachment point should intersect the center of the kingpin axis.

If he has highly compromised Ackermann, the result will be darty steering with a very non linear response to steering input highly affected by road surface and chassis weight on a tire. As in whichever tire has the most weight on it will impart the most steering output.
 
I tested full articulation some more and found the with the 37" monsters (yes, they're starting to look bigger than they did before) and 14" travel suspension I am sending the tire through the spot welds on the fender.

Cutting out the spot welds will cause the inner-fender to separate from the outer fender. To prevent that I flipped the inner-fender flange from down to up.

So I ordered angled 16ga sheet steel (I ordered extra if anybody else wants to repeat this I can send you a few pieces), cut them down to 10", drilled a bunch of holes in them, put seam sealer on the back being careful to avoid the spot weld holes. I probably went overkill on the spot welds but I wanted to make sure this area didn't fail after all of the other cutting I've done.

Paint sanded away:

View attachment 51748

New flange cut to length and drilled:

View attachment 51749

Spot welded in:

View attachment 51750
(carpet will be covering this later on)

View attachment 51751

It hurts to be ruining the paint I did last year but it's the only way to progress.

I then mounted a tire and would lift, mark what needed to be cut out, lower, cut, and repeat until I had clearance all the way around the tire. This picture is part way through that process:

View attachment 51752

Once I was happy with my wheel arch I traced it to a sheet of cardboard and copied it to the other side:

View attachment 51753

At this point I am very happy that I didn't go with 16" coilovers. I never would have fit them...

Now that’s it’s been a few years, are you still content with the 7 up 7 down travel?? I’m doing 14” 2.0 radflo coilovers this winter with the motobilt rear frame kit which is similar to the rails you made
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashvilleTJ
Now that’s it’s been a few years, are you still content with the 7 up 7 down travel?? I’m doing 14” 2.0 radflo coilovers this winter with the motobilt rear frame kit which is similar to the rails you made

So sorry for the delay, I am still happy with that. HOWEVER, I only put on about 2k miles and 3-4 days offroad on this suspension.
 
When you get the front done and it is steering and driving, we'll chat and I'll explain a lot of stuff that will help get it tolerable. My learning style can best be described at persistent brute force trial and error. As such, I keep at it until I figure it out or give up. The rig will have some steering issues. I've explained what I've done to a very smart guy and he has explained back to me that although most of my terminology is only accurate if you understand the issue, my solutions are dead on and work as predicted.

The problem will be darty steering due to the inability to achieve Ackermann. We are going to mitigate the problem by adding some toe out and increasing the caster. The trade-off will be a slower response off of center, but it will be very tolerable and certainly more desirable than the darty way it was.

This comment was very interesting to me when reading this thread through a second time. What about his build causes the vehicle to not be able to get a correct Ackerman angle?

My thought would be because these axles are designed for vehicles with a much longer wheelbase so the angles don’t end up correct?

Edit: ok just saw the posts on the last 2 pages. So the tie rod location determines Ackerman angle? How would one go about knowing where to put the tie rod to get it correct?

I am not building anything so this is just for knowledge, but when people to swaps of stock axles and keep OEM tie rod locations does that help them avoid these problems?
 
Last edited:
This comment was very interesting to me when reading this thread through a second time. What about his build causes the vehicle to not be able to get a correct Ackerman angle?

My thought would be because these axles are designed for vehicles with a much longer wheelbase so the angles don’t end up correct?

Edit: ok just saw the posts on the last 2 pages. So the tie rod location determines Ackerman angle? How would one go about knowing where to put the tie rod to get it correct?

I am not building anything so this is just for knowledge, but when people to swaps of stock axles and keep OEM tie rod locations does that help them avoid these problems?

Ackermann determines tie rod end location. There are descriptions and diagrams out there to study. But wheelbase determines the angle. The F-450 is a much longer vehicle so the tie rod end locations are a lot more inboard that they should be for a shorter wheelbase rig.
 
Ackermann determines tie rod end location. There are descriptions and diagrams out there to study. But wheelbase determines the angle. The F-450 is a much longer vehicle so the tie rod end locations are a lot more inboard that they should be for a shorter wheelbase rig.

That makes since, thank you.
 
The diagram on the right has the lines perpendicular to the front tires intersecting at the center of the turning circle if the tie rods are set up as on the left

images (3).jpeg