LCoG and long arm lifts

Where are the rocks

Bomber Flex 2~2.jpeg
 
Interesting. But still not relevant to what the thing we are building here. Also, I don't know or care if the Bomber builds are LCoG or not. What I see are people building within the constraints of the platform.

Remember this thread stated in reference the OP building a LJ not a TJ. A lower CG long arm suspension would likely be easier on a LJ.
 
Here is what I am referencing to. See how flat the links are and how low the belly is. I would define the Bomber as a long arm low CG design.


P.S. At least get my name right, it is John not Bill, but you can address me as "Sir". Thanks 😎

You are fixating on one aspect of the build ("flat links"). Stop doing that. Also, in what world is that a daily driven streetable vehicle? If you are really an engineer, then you understand what "bounding the problem" means.

@mrblaine .. after seeing the responses in this thread, I entirely understand why the GenRight Tracer exists. And you were right.


Y’all are really estimating the track width based on a drooped axle on a rig that’s off camber? When did 64” axles become extreme track width?
View attachment 374498

Great photo. It's like none of the detractors even saw the link I posted earlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tworley and jjvw
how would you change one to shift the balance more toward crawling?

The answer would depend on what where you are crawling, is your crawler a trailer queen and what is your budget.

Example would be the OP, his zip code indicated he was in New York, he had medical issues that had eliminated him driving on the street. His intended use was his daughter would drive him to an off-road area where they both enjoy a little off roading adventure. Building the LJ project was intended as therapy but not his reason for life.

The OP was interested in a long arm LCoG bolt on build. I would tell the OP, "sounds perfect for your needs and expectations" let me help you with some of the details. I would point him toward a good LA kit with some custom valved adjustable shocks a moderate lift, maybe 35" tires on beadlocks, a big brakes kit and some gearing change for a starting point.

What would you recommend for the OP?
 
some of us are interested in offroad suspension in general, knowledge that translates outside of that specific to the TJ, and would like to see some of these ideas discussed instead of just shouted down because it's not a Jeep.

If we really need to keep it TJ related, then I suggest specifics of why a certain philosophy that works in a buggy doesn't work in a TJ.

The point is
Those are not Jeeps. You can't do this to a TJ. The frames are custom designed for massive up-travel at low ride heights. I wouldn't even call them LCOG because there is still going to be 7-8 inches of up-travel for a balanced 40/60 or 50/50 travel. Its not possible with a boxed ladder frame without massive modifications.

I'm very interested in these types of designs too, so I get your point. But looking at a bomber chasis and saying "thats a jeep" is like looking at this... and saying that bronco IFS works great rock crawling. These are custom designed machines that are built around the LCOG concept with maximum uptravel. They are very good at going fast.

67-pass-3-4-low.jpg
 
The Bomber chassis isn't in any way a TJ. Specific enough? 🤣

Maybe you could be specific, a Bomber has 4 wheels and tires, a straight axles and a front engine. Both can be driven on the street and off road. Both have approximately the same wheel base. Both use basically the same suspensions.
 
Maybe you could be specific, a Bomber has 4 wheels and tires, a straight axles and a front engine. Both can be driven on the street and off road. Both have approximately the same wheel base. Both use basically the same suspensions.

You're right. Using that criteria, those are both almost the same as this 4wd dump truck with a solid front axle.
fc3593fc-3852-4e6b-9694-fb1e7194e76e.jpg
 
The point is
Those are not Jeeps. You can't do this to a TJ. The frames are custom designed for massive up-travel at low ride heights. I wouldn't even call them LCOG because there is still going to be 7-8 inches of up-travel for a balanced 40/60 or 50/50 travel. Its not possible with a boxed ladder frame without massive modifications.

I'm very interested in these types of designs too, so I get your point. But looking at a bomber chasis and saying "thats a jeep" is like looking at this... and saying that bronco IFS works great rock crawling. These are custom designed machines that are built around the LCOG concept with maximum uptravel. They are very good at going fast.

View attachment 374519

And these are very good at going fast and crawling,

Screen Shot 2022-11-07 at 9.10.36 AM.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sancho
Y’all are really estimating the track width based on a drooped axle on a rig that’s off camber? When did 64” axles become extreme track width?
View attachment 374498

Maybe the fenderless/boulder line fenders are throwing people off too - it looks way more aggressive without fenders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brianj5600
The answer would depend on what where you are crawling, is your crawler a trailer queen and what is your budget.

Example would be the OP, his zip code indicated he was in New York, he had medical issues that had eliminated him driving on the street. His intended use was his daughter would drive him to an off-road area where they both enjoy a little off roading adventure. Building the LJ project was intended as therapy but not his reason for life.

The OP was interested in a long arm LCoG bolt on build. I would tell the OP, "sounds perfect for your needs and expectations" let me help you with some of the details. I would point him toward a good LA kit with some custom valved adjustable shocks a moderate lift, maybe 35" tires on beadlocks, a big brakes kit and some gearing change for a starting point.

What would you recommend for the OP?

I don't have a suggestion. I'm just trying to learn.

I'm aware of a general trend in longarms that sacrifices good geometry for packaging constraints...weirdness like lack of vertical separation at the frame end, discrepancies between upper and lower link length, the most common result being low antisquat and the light front end that comes along with that on steep climbs. Or, to get more VS the lower link mounts have to hang down and get stuck on things.

I'm also aware that an otherwise identical suspension geometry will have more AS on the longer wheelbase of an LJ. I'm interested in understanding whether your position is that the above mentioned sacrifices are a non-issue with the LJ, blown out of proportion to start with on the TJ, or something else. And when you talk about LCoG, what does that mean in terms of up and down travel, within the context of a TJ with shock mounts that are stock or at least don't intrude into the body?