New Motobilt 4-Link Suspension

Status
Not open for further replies.
antighboatye

antighboatye

Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2019
Messages
34
Location
Pensacola, FL
Given that Motobilt is one of the few companies still trying to innovate and try new things on the Last Great Jeep, I’d like to see if anyone has any thoughts on this new double triangulated 4-link setup they just released today.

I’m not affiliated with them in any way, I just enjoy reading the discussions and am excited to see something new on the market.

https://motobilt.com/collections/ne...-suspension-mounting-system-for-jeep-yj-tj-lj
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrDmoney and TJ Starting
Typical bad geometry with a more work than a bolt on long arm kit requires.

How about that for a start? 🤣
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris and psrivats
jjvw said:
Typical bad geometry with a more work than a bolt on long arm kit requires.

How about that for a start? 🤣
Click to expand...

I mean it’s a cute response, I guess, but lacks any real substance. ;)

Can you be more specific about the bad geometry? Every new design warrants critique but I’m interested in actually learning something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tob, DrDmoney, SvtLdr and 5 others
antighboatye said:
I mean it’s a cute response, I guess, but lacks any real substance. ;)

Can you be more specific about the bad geometry? Every new design warrants critique but I’m interested in actually learning something.
Click to expand...

First and foremost, the belly pan is a major step backwards.

Here's some more, in no particular order:
1. It also adds a bunch of other hangy downie bits.
2. Long arms, which on the TJ platform make the front end really light
3. Looks to be incredibly heavy
4. Doesn't look to include the trusses, which are already bulky.
5. I don't know many people that can triangulate the front while retaining respectable up travel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris and jjvw
Uptravel definitely was not a priority with that design. The frame end link separation is almost non existent. Looks to be about a 4” drop in the skid. Unequal length control arms will roll the axle and could cause pinion angle issue

1664218673842.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: rasband, psrivats and jjvw
antighboatye said:
I mean it’s a cute response, I guess, but lacks any real substance. ;)

Can you be more specific about the bad geometry? Every new design warrants critique but I’m interested in actually learning something.
Click to expand...

The substance is there in almost every long arm thread in the last 15 years where antisquat, vertical separation and instant centers are discussed. And given how predominant these discussions are, it is a bit disappointing that Motobilt fell into the same old traps of poor geometry when they didn't need to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HornedToad, TJ Starting, rasband and 1 other person
Brianj5600 said:
I wheeled with a guy that had this kit and was impressive.
Click to expand...
Lots of people including me thought my RE long-arm suspension was impressive right after I installed it in 2001 or so. The warm feeling it gave me when it was still new quickly disappeared once I started taking it on tougher trails.
 
jjvw said:
Typical bad geometry with a more work than a bolt on long arm kit requires.

How about that for a start? 🤣
Click to expand...

Not saying this is a good kit by any means, but at least there appears to be more vertical separation at the frame than typical but it’s hard to tell how much.
E34A440D-DBC3-49BF-9372-4B1D57EA2B88.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: freedom_in_4low
Brianj5600 said:
The website tells how much separation at the frame.
Click to expand...

I'll save you the effort. 🤣

Front link vertical separation at the frame = 7-9/16”

Rear link vertical separation at the frame = 5-3/16
 
starkey480 said:
Not saying this is a good kit by any means, but at least there appears to be more vertical separation at the frame than typical but it’s hard to tell how much.
View attachment 362241
Click to expand...

Based on where the upper are, the kit doesn't require a body lift to fit. That means any added vertical separation is created by lowering the lower mounts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rasband and Mike_H
Brianj5600 said:
So what is bad about the separation numbers?
Click to expand...

Add a requirement for a body lift and the VS could be more and also not have the lower mounts hang so low.

Depending on what MB does on the axle side, this will affect where the instant center is positioned. And again depending on what MB does on the axle side, this will indicate several things like the available up travel and overall strength of the mounts.

My strong suspicion is that MB isn't building for up travel, not building for long travel shocks that are split 50/50, not building for belly clearance, and not preserving caster on the front as the suspension cycles.

Meaning this is a LCoG down travel design. That is a big pile of mall crawling compromises that don't interest me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HornedToad, JMT and rasband
Jerry Bransford said:
Lots of people including me thought my RE long-arm suspension was impressive right after I installed it in 2001 or so. The warm feeling it gave me when it was still new quickly disappeared once I started taking it on tougher trails.
Click to expand...

The echo Jerry, some of the toughest trails out in Johnson Valley can be conquered with a stock wheelbase TJ, ~5 inches of bolt on lift, 35’s, and lockers.

So there may be something to the idea that your rig’s suspension numbers dont have to be perfect to enjoy some of the hardest trails out there when it comes to rock crawling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SvtLdr and freedom_in_4low
jjvw said:
Add a requirement for a body lift and the VS could be more and also not have the lower mounts hang so low.

Depending on what MB does on the axle side, this will affect where the instant center is positioned. And again depending on what MB does on the axle side, this will indicate several things like the available up travel and overall strength of the mounts.

My strong suspicion is that MB isn't building for up travel, not building for long travel shocks that are split 50/50, not building for belly clearance, and not preserving caster on the front as the suspension cycles.

Meaning this is a LCoG down travel design. That is a big pile of mall crawling compromises that don't interest me.
Click to expand...

It surprises me bc I always had the impression that Rob Park (Bender) really knew his shit when it came to design and fab work.

It may be a compromise between trying to sell a product that’s a swiss army knife and sell something that is geared towards the weekend pro rock crawler.

If I had to guess, anyone building a Jeep to crawl with the best of them, with all the perfect numbers is building something home brew and isn't shopping for bolt in/weld in parts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brianj5600
So I recently swapped in Motobilt F&R bumpers. They are very nicely made but I was surprised just how heavy they are. Based on that, and assuming that skid system isn't aluminum, holy weight batman!
 
TJosh02 said:
So I recently swapped in Motobilt F&R bumpers. They are very nicely made but I was surprised just how heavy they are. Based on that, and assuming that skid system isn't aluminum, holy weight batman!
Click to expand...

Overall I like my front from them, but it did require mods to make it what it should have been for a modified rig. Deeper deck and no laser cutout M.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjvw
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back