Rear 4link with reverse upper links

[sdecurti]

Anyone have experience with reverse upper links on a 4link setup?

I feel like travel numbers would be limited due to drastic pinion angle changes?

I feel like your travel numbers would be directly proportional to your link lengths in order to prevent crazy pinion angle change?

Just looking for some knowledge or lessons learned from those that may have experience with this type of setup…

 

[Brett_408]

@deangraen did this on his 4runner I'm sure he could shed some light on what he found when setting it up. Does work well in his application tho.

 

[Giant Geoff]

My friend Miles did it on a 4-Runner that worked good but was limited on numbers. You can just do one upper link and a pan bar.

 

[Turboyota]

I presume we are talking Z-link.

Me & Ameribrade Keven designed one for a JK that produced around 19” of usable travel before Uber-shitty pinion angle changes. Original Turboyota design was similar, but had 21” travel pushing it to the limit with long upper link that pivoted aft of the rear bumper by a couple inches.

ODRMSE Roy did a few Titans and Frontiers that way as well as REV A of his Canyonero rear link setup. All were fucking legit.

TLDR 18-20” travel is attainable, more=shitty

 

[Motiracer38]

What if you put a 4link on the rear links so that it would extend as it drooped to get bigger than 18" of travel? Six link is where it's at!

 

[Kellyex1450]

You can get the Z link to work really well but all of them that I have seen are super weight sensitive. besides the driveshaft plunge issues they tend to want to bottom out when you floor it because of the geometry.

I personally would rather deal with parallel 3 link with a panhard bar to dodge a gas tank.

What I want to try on the next thing I link with a stock fuel tank is an offset wishbone three link. where the lower links are the same as a normal 3/4 link, and the upper axle side mount is centered between the frame, but the frame side of the upper wishbone is offset to clear the tank. The offset 3 link would cycle as much travel as a traditional 4/3 link, would handle symmetrically and the anti squat could be made correct. The Only issue with the offset 3 link is you would have to build an insanely strong cross member for it on the frame side and the wishbone itself would also need to be insanely strong. That being said, I think it's a great option to dodge a gas tank, that you rarely see.

 

[ADSRACINGSHOCKS]

A proper 3 link will be easier and more effective to execute like some of the others have mentioned. run a upper link mount with adjustments for anti squat and you will be smooth sailing

 

[deangraen]

I did a Z-link with trialing arms and it works amazing. Pulling 21" and the pinion angle isnt terrible. It is sensitive on where you set your ride height, but with proper setup it just works. A 3-link is easier to setup, but a properly setup z-link is just cool lol.

 

[deangraen]

 

[Heer_O]

Everytime y'all say "Z" link I think you're referring to a Watts link and I get really confused lol

I need to stop working nights. Shits messing with my head

 

[84projectFORD]

Anyone have experience with reverse upper links on a 4link setup?

I feel like travel numbers would be limited due to drastic pinion angle changes?

I feel like your travel numbers would be directly proportional to your link lengths in order to prevent crazy pinion angle change?

Just looking for some knowledge or lessons learned from those that may have experience with this type of setup…

are you looking to step away from the 3 link/panhard you have?


im jealous of all the room you guys have at the ass end of your rigs. my shit box is pretty much limited to the 3 link + panhard bar and shocks off the axle if i want to keep my back seats. cant even do a cantilever.