100% agree. If just the information, respectful opinions and guidance we given we would all be a lot further along. This thread went to hell in a hand basket right when negativity entered.
So based on what I just read above you are saying that the JW Geo Correction does improve the wheel hop issue on a short arm lift such as the Currie lift mounted to OE locations and still using the Currie track arm relocation bracket?
I’m in Idaho, clean rocks and extreme traction are a rarety. My biggest hope is that I can eliminate or reduce at least, the hop-bounce while snow wheeling. I’m stoked to actually get some unbiased opinion on the JW Geo Correction so thanks for that.
I've wheeled a lot of loose dirt hill climbs and I've actually found that there is a huge difference when you change geometry.
The vertical separation at the frame is what I changed. I raised the frame side UCA hole 3/4” in the stock bracket.
The sad part about your bullshit is you actually believe it.
You are also running the JW Geo Correction brackets correct? Did the improvements come from the full install of these brackets PLUS raising the frame side UCA mount 3/4”. Did you feel improvement with just the JW stuff before you did the additional mod?
I for one appreciate your post including your opinion.I have no stake in this game, so the below is hopefully an unbiased comparison/viewpoint. I currently have a 4" lift short arm with no geometry corrections and it currently performs adequately for me as compared to my existing budget. If my performance needs and/or my budget changes in the future, then I will evaluate based on the below.
Raising a vehicle and keeping the same control arm mounting points, changes the geometry and thus changes the Instant Center (IC) and other geometry characteristics such as Roll Center, Roll Axis, etc.... The below will only discuss IC. IC is defined as the the point where the upper and lower links would intersect.
Going from stock lift height (where the upper and lower control arms (CA) are basically "flat") to 4" lift height without changing CA mounting locations changes the direction of the control arms from basically flat to now being angled up. This affects the IC and induces a high anti-squat/anti-dive.
Making any changes to the control arm attach locations will have an effect on IC. So if you keep the short arms and change the mounting locations using the Nth degree or JW method, there will be an effect (as compared to stock control arm mounting locations). Keeping the short arms and just changing the mounting locations in the vertical direction, even though it does have an effect, is limited to how much it can actually change since you are only working in one direction (vertical). Whether or not this change is beneficial or worth your effort/spend is up to you and should be dependent on how you utilize the vehicle and your time/budget. So as compared to a 4" lift with stock mounting locations, the answer to everyone's question is yes the JW brackets affects the geometry and is "most likely" an improvement over the 4" lift with stock mounting locations. "most likely" is subjective but change looking at geometry as related to IC, there would be an improvement as compared to 4" at stock locations.
Since the JW brackets only utilize the vertical plane for IC correction, you can improve the IC even more by not only utilizing the vertical plane but also the lateral (fwd/aft) plane. You can have a greater affect on the IC by not only altering the attach locations in the vertical location but also by extending the control arms and moving the frame side attachments forward. There are prepackaged kits to accomplish this geometry change in the vert/lateral plane or you can design and fabricate your own. Again, you have to evaluate your ability/effort required/time/spend to determine if the IC change is worth it to you. The savvy mid-arm is a prepackaged method for addressing the geometry by utilizing both the vertical and lateral planes, the prepacking has been done in such a way to gain the most improvement (as determined by testing and user feedback) within the "confines" of the existing structure. In addition to the IC correction, the prepackaged savvy midarm also triangulates the uppers which allows for the removal of the track bar (reducing number of attachments frees up the ability to move).
From my point of view (this is opinion) -
I am currently comfortable with the Short Arm (no geometry correction) and have somewhat pushed the limits but have learned the limits. So I am currently not wanting a "step" correction or a correction that will get me a "little" more improvement. When I go to invest the time/effort/spend, I am going to try and get as much improvement as possible. Thus, I am going to be looking at making changes that require use of all planes (vertical, lateral, possibly longitudinal). The major benefit of the Savvy MidArm is that it has been proven to provide improvement while utilizing the existing confines (you will need a 1.25" BL and may need to some trimming on the TC skid). If you are willing to go outside the confines (major changes to body/frame/axle brackets/etc...) you may be able to get even more improvement or you may actually decrease the improvement if you do it incorrectly. Years of testing and tweaking is hard to come by in your own backyard with a single vehicle, so in addition to cost you also need to evaluate a prepackaged system with known results vs your own ability to change/test/tweak. Thus, my changes will probably mimic some of the Savvy MidArm in order to try and benefit from that proven experience while also incorporating the needed changes due to my current confines and budget.
Your current rig/experience/ability may differ and the "step" may be just what you are looking for, nothing wrong with that. or you may want to do numerous steps. Or you may say f' it, sell the TJ, and go buy a full blown Ultra4 car.
Flame away, I am bored today
I think you need to determine what improvements you want. Helps drivability on the road is pretty broad and has many determining factors (tires/wheels/shocks/geometry/etc....). What specifically are you trying to improve? Or worded another way, what actually bothers you while you are driving your Jeep?
In theory, the step wise change makes sense. I had the same thoughts originally. But, in practical testing, it’s not really what I saw. My jeep hopped badly with unaltered short arm geometry, and also hopped badly with the geo correction towers. There wasn’t a huge discernible difference. When I raised the upper control arm frame mount 3/4”, it made a very noticeable difference in reducing hopping. Theoretically according to the calculator, the geo correction brackets reduced AS by ~ 50% and my change reduced it by another ~20%. Why I didn’t notice any changes until the last 20%? I do not know other than it is what I experienced. I’m guessing this is the reason why many experienced suspension builders say the calculator is bullshit other than an initial learning tool of how IC affects AS and AD.I have no stake in this game, so the below is hopefully an unbiased comparison/viewpoint. I currently have a 4" lift short arm with no geometry corrections and it currently performs adequately for me as compared to my existing budget. If my performance needs and/or my budget changes in the future, then I will evaluate based on the below.
Raising a vehicle and keeping the same control arm mounting points, changes the geometry and thus changes the Instant Center (IC) and other geometry characteristics such as Roll Center, Roll Axis, etc.... The below will only discuss IC. IC is defined as the the point where the upper and lower links would intersect.
Going from stock lift height (where the upper and lower control arms (CA) are basically "flat") to 4" lift height without changing CA mounting locations changes the direction of the control arms from basically flat to now being angled up. This affects the IC and induces a high anti-squat/anti-dive.
Making any changes to the control arm attach locations will have an effect on IC. So if you keep the short arms and change the mounting locations using the Nth degree or JW method, there will be an effect (as compared to stock control arm mounting locations). Keeping the short arms and just changing the mounting locations in the vertical direction, even though it does have an effect, is limited to how much it can actually change since you are only working in one direction (vertical). Whether or not this change is beneficial or worth your effort/spend is up to you and should be dependent on how you utilize the vehicle and your time/budget. So as compared to a 4" lift with stock mounting locations, the answer to everyone's question is yes the JW brackets affects the geometry and is "most likely" an improvement over the 4" lift with stock mounting locations. "most likely" is subjective but change looking at geometry as related to IC, there would be an improvement as compared to 4" at stock locations.
Since the JW brackets only utilize the vertical plane for IC correction, you can improve the IC even more by not only utilizing the vertical plane but also the lateral (fwd/aft) plane. You can have a greater affect on the IC by not only altering the attach locations in the vertical location but also by extending the control arms and moving the frame side attachments forward. There are prepackaged kits to accomplish this geometry change in the vert/lateral plane or you can design and fabricate your own. Again, you have to evaluate your ability/effort required/time/spend to determine if the IC change is worth it to you. The savvy mid-arm is a prepackaged method for addressing the geometry by utilizing both the vertical and lateral planes, the prepacking has been done in such a way to gain the most improvement (as determined by testing and user feedback) within the "confines" of the existing structure. In addition to the IC correction, the prepackaged savvy midarm also triangulates the uppers which allows for the removal of the track bar (reducing number of attachments frees up the ability to move).
From my point of view (this is opinion) -
I am currently comfortable with the Short Arm (no geometry correction) and have somewhat pushed the limits but have learned the limits. So I am currently not wanting a "step" correction or a correction that will get me a "little" more improvement. When I go to invest the time/effort/spend, I am going to try and get as much improvement as possible. Thus, I am going to be looking at making changes that require use of all planes (vertical, lateral, possibly longitudinal). The major benefit of the Savvy MidArm is that it has been proven to provide improvement while utilizing the existing confines (you will need a 1.25" BL and may need to some trimming on the TC skid). If you are willing to go outside the confines (major changes to body/frame/axle brackets/etc...) you may be able to get even more improvement or you may actually decrease the improvement if you do it incorrectly. Years of testing and tweaking is hard to come by in your own backyard with a single vehicle, so in addition to cost you also need to evaluate a prepackaged system with known results vs your own ability to change/test/tweak. Thus, my changes will probably mimic some of the Savvy MidArm in order to try and benefit from that proven experience while also incorporating the needed changes due to my current confines and budget.
Your current rig/experience/ability may differ and the "step" may be just what you are looking for, nothing wrong with that. or you may want to do numerous steps. Or you may say f' it, sell the TJ, and go buy a full blown Ultra4 car.
Flame away, I am bored today
Hopefully the above answered your question! My journey in this started with the sole objective of getting rid of typical hopping short arm behavior. Aside from that, the raised trackbar mount on the brackets was noticeable to me in reducing body roll a bit on the road but was not something I was focused on.
My chase is very similar to @starkey480 but I would actually enjoy the benefit of less body roll, however I have the Currie trackbar relocation bracket welded into mine which is super close to the JW from a quick eyeball. The hop is extremely annoying and in snow which is where I notice it most often nobody really tests there so that adds to the difficulty of "will it help?"...and on top of that it also can't or hasn't more likely been addressed for what the Savvy kit would do in the snow as snow isn't where they focus their testing.
Much appreciated, I follow your build and watched as you did some testing and that's what really started me thinking on the JW brackets. When you moved the UCA frame mount was this a simple re-drill or did you cut the brackets off, move them and re-weld them? My guess on the 50% un-noticeable then the additional 20% get to where it WAS noticeable is there is a curve at which point you peak before it drops back off and the sweet spot is near the peak of that AS-IC curve...speculation of course.
I just redrilled a new hole that is halfway between the top of the bracket and the existing hole. If this was staying long term I would put a weld washer on there.