My thesis advisor used to tell me, "If you cannot clearly explain your research work in 15 minutes to someone knowledgeable in your field, but not necessarily an expert, you are yet to fully understand your own work".
New Motobilt 4-Link Suspension
- Thread starter antighboatye
- Start date
- Status
My thesis advisor used to tell me, "If you cannot clearly explain your research work in 15 minutes to someone knowledgeable in your field, but not necessarily an expert, you are yet to fully understand your own work".
Up to you, just understand that you are associated with a company and several of us don't really care about the answers but how you react and come across. Right now I would consider purchasing from motobilt if a product met my need. If this all goes south, would I feel the same?
Weight and where it is placed would be one reason. Raising the entire frame to get the same ~19" belly height I got through raising the belly is a fairly sizable difference in how high the CoG is. Granted, there are a lot of moving factors when a body lift is involved in raising the drive train. But the frame still weighs a few hundred pounds. Yet things like that only matter when they matter.
jesseshoots
TJ Enthusiast
This right here is why my previous employer in the off-road industry refused to participate on the forums.
Let’s address the low hanging fruit. Low frame means less up travel, less approach and departure angle.
Approach and departure is very low hanging fruit. Give some quantification on the shock up travel. What is less?
I feel like we need to see an overlapping silhouette to visualize the difference.
Maybe that would be the best way to visualize it. I’ll see what I can do
No. Up travel and its ratio is completely dependent on what type of wheeling you do. More up travel like 6-7 “ allows you to hit obstacles harder typically east coast wheeling where as less like 3-4” works well when crawling. Again, this all changes with terrain and the individual driver.
Interesting. Do you disagree that increasing up travel improves stability in high articulation events like rock crawling by reducing how often the chassis is upset when the upper limit of travel is reached?
Last edited:
Are there any worthwhile examples of putting in hours of work or spending significant funds to lower COG? Not including spending a few extra bucks for a component in aluminum instead of steel, I mean real work. It seems like we're pretty quick to sacrifice COG any time it comes with a gain in clearance or uptravel. And this product seems to have a clear benefit in approach and departure angles and uptravel.
And that's exactly where the point about balance comes into play.
COG goes up, but have you maximized everything (stability, clearance, travel up and down) that you could get? How do you maximize performance with all these constraints? What is the best approach?
I don't know why we have the obsession with leaving absolutely nothing on the table. To truly leave nothing on the table leaves us with nothing even resembling a TJ. Everything includes compromises, even the WTJF holy grail of TJ builds.
But as far as maximizing...I see a frame that is farther out of the way of a drag link, farther from rocks, shock mounts and body mounts that are raised without having to chop them up, rear AND front frame sections that are farther out of the way, a skid that leaves room for any transfer case I want to put there...all stuff that other methods address, with lots of work. But it seems like it accomplishes a lot to me.
I have no dog in this fight and getting any midarm or longarm kit on my rig is so far out that it's purely hypothetical. I'm just calling out the attitude and thought process that has become the norm here that anything that isn't done the way a handful of members here would do it is inherently wrong, before anyone has even had their hands on it. Blaine and Savvy and you and jjvw and some others have found a way that works well for you, on your rigs, with your priorities, in your part of the country, but there's more than one way to skin a cat. Before we get behind our keyboards and dismiss something because of arm length or a COG that's 3/4" higher let's see somebody wheel it and prove it's up to the task or it's not. So far we've got 8 pages of web wheeling.
If that is what you see, then you are missing many aspects and nuances to what is actually being discussed.
What? More direct and relevant questions that get ignored?
Pay better attention.
There is no standard response. If you don’t know the very basics of how to set up a car for say rock crawling vs recreational wheeling vs over landing vs west coast vs east coast wheeling than my response isn’t worth anything. My “interview” is the simplest most effective way for me to skip all the BS and get the the meat of the post. You said “the geometry is way off”. My question to you is explain where and why you came to this conclusio. Seems to be a pretty simple request.
Absolutely! Let’s make sure we are talking the same thing. This is slow technical crawling. In essence what you are doing is nonce the shock bottoms out, that shock location becomes the new roll center.
- Status