the_fablab_
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2022
- Messages
- 220
Au contraire, I love logic-
If Mikey complains it's too much work
Then it must be a great idea
Yeah what the heck do I know.
Au contraire, I love logic-
If Mikey complains it's too much work
Then it must be a great idea
Robby Gordon would sue him for that.I vote van 4wd conversion style with a weirdass v drive connecting left and right differentials.
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1712765-1980-econoline-w-rare-vemco-v-drive-4x4.html
https://www.blueovaltrucks.com/tech-articles/the_vemco_v-drive_system/
Sean
Such terrible geometry on those things and I’d be shocked to see a true working 18” of wheel travel.I acknowledge that this idea isnt quite "out of the box" enough compared to whats been mentioned already, but what about grafting a 4x4 frame section to the front end, and building something similar to the solo XLT kit that they offered (Im guessing they dont make it anymore since its not on their site) for the 86-95 platform trucks? IIRC, they claimed 18" of working travel using D44 hubs and custom axles. Im sure you could get uber-creative with the upper arms and possibly squeeze a little more travel out of it.
Thanks for crapping on my suggestion lol.Such terrible geometry on those things and I’d be shocked to see a true working 18” of wheel travel.
I removed a 2” wider TC kit on a 4Runner and installed some wide as fuck solo kit that cycled terribly and only actually gained 3” of wheel travel. Shit as sooo dumb. Lost his traction control and ABS too because of the gay as fuck d44 conversion with the kit.
Sorry, You mentioned solo and 4wd and I felt triggeredThanks for crapping on my suggestion lol.
Brians capable of "reimagining" their kit, with proper geometry and such...
Looks like his patent is for rear suspension if I am reading it right. It also specifically says for a rear/rear mid mounted engine in the claims. He wouldn't have been able to patent it otherwise since the front concept was prior art even if it was expired.Robby Gordon would sue him for that.
True, just don't drive in reverseLooks like his patent is for rear suspension if I am reading it right. It also specifically says for a rear/rear mid mounted engine in the claims. He wouldn't have been able to patent it otherwise since the front concept was prior art even if it was expired.
So front setup like that is fine, a rear setup lile that is fine as long as the engine is front/front mid mounted, and any of that is fine as long as he doesn't commercialize it.
(Not legal advice, get sued by Robby at your own risk)
Sean
This is missing a front diff thoughSome center-ish-mount motivation for you. Haven’t seen this thing in years.
Shiiiit, "The Plow" has seen more punishment than all of my vehicles (and probably a lot of others on this site) combined. I remember those guys driving the plow to the races, racing it, then driving it home (if still possible). Dog shit geometry, POS truck or not, those dudes got some serious smiles-per-miles out of that thing. The good ol MDR days...I was joking about that truck, it’s a pile. Engage is the company that had the lower arm bushing tubes rip because they used seamed tubing and had the seam face the center of the truck.