OK following a few discussions locally the questions about shock absorber bracket orientation needs discussion.
The questions relate to the bolt orientation on a live axle with rubber bushes. Taking into account the (albeit) arc of the rising/falling axle and
the torsional twisting of (limited) body roll.
never thought about it tbh, but markh snapped a shocker, he had it like everyone else does, side to side. Actually makes a lot of sense to me having it front back now you mention it.
Damn, I clicked the wrong one...
muppet
Take one away from side to side please!
I asked this a while back and the answer was front to rear, as there is more side to side axle twist during bump/droop, and as my shocks angle in
slightly it makes the effect even worse.
Does that help or just confuse? 
Cheers
Alex
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
never thought about it tbh, but markh snapped a shocker, he had it like everyone else does, side to side. Actually makes a lot of sense to me having it front back now you mention it.
Have got mine side to side, but they are on spherical bearings so have some movement in both directions.
Saying that i can really see the point in front to back. Especially as the panhard rod forces a sideways arc in addition to that of the trailing arms.
How about if you were using a watts linkage?
Rich
quote:
Does that help or just confuse?
(AGAIN) as I'm really quite pleased with the way the axles looking. On the upside
I've done what I think is a good job with a rear disc conversion using fiesta discs and golf callipers and they fit within 13 inch wheels (JUST)
and it was all guess work.
Definately front to rear for me, the same as the front shocks in fact !
All you have to do is imagine an excessive amount of travel to justify this, even if in reality its only a couple of inches.
Regards Mark
Front to back would be easier to get the shocker out after (wheel arch gets in the way of a side to side).
Pat...
I've gone front to back, as I think the biggest movement is required sideways.
quote:
Originally posted by Avoneer
Front to back would be easier to get the shocker out after (wheel arch gets in the way of a side to side).
Pat...
Found the post I was looking for
quote:
Originally posted by jroberts
When mounted with the bolts of the shock facing front to rear, the shock bush will cope with the amount of movement that is generated from vertical movement of the trailing arms.
If you were to mount them with the bolts facing left to right, the bush in the shock would have to allow for a situation where an extreme may occur, 4" compresion on one wheel and 4" drop on the other, for instance.
Where the most movement occurs is side to side, so the shock has to be mounted to allow torsional twist to happen.
It would be the same as turning your wishbone bushes through 90 degrees, so the bolts were vertical and still expect the front end to have suspension.
could you not mount the bottom ones diffrent to the top ones then it would allow movement both ways.
adam
Mmmmmmmm Good link Alex it looks like another Mk3 version of the axle is required. Ho Hum
Adam I could still mount the top front to rear I'll need to ponder it for a while. Adam
[Edited on 27/7/07 by omega 24 v6]
ha ha i take my last post back i dont think it would work lol. it would stop it moving both ways.adam
Well I've been out and had a look and the axle movement front to rear on full travel from the level position is +or- 5mm. However the torsional
movement is as the earlier post said HORRENDOUS. Looks like the angry tool will be required tommorrow on the plus side I'm working in the
morning so I'll need to be quick
and get a couple of cutting discs.
[Edited on 27/7/07 by omega 24 v6]
Thanks to all that posted and for all those that veiwed and did not post a vote I wonder how many of you have got a nigling(sp) doubt in your head now
(over a hundred views and less than half voted.
[Edited on 27/7/07 by omega 24 v6]
quote:
Originally posted by omega 24 v6
Well I've been out and had a look and the axle movement front to rear on full travel from the level position is +or- 5mm. However the torsional movement is as the earlier post said HORRENDOUS. Looks like the angry tool will be required tommorrow
[Edited on 27/7/07 by omega 24 v6]
Thanks to all that posted and for all those that veiwed and did not post a vote I wonder how many of you have got a nigling(sp) doubt in your head now (over a hundred views and less than half voted.
[Edited on 27/7/07 by omega 24 v6]
iam at this part putting the de dion on my saxo and thought about the bushs iam gonna mount them side to side.because they will have the movment in
the bush up and down the panhard rod should keep it from moving side to side to stop the side loading. and in the arc in the wheels with one up and
one down the bushs should take the arc movment because there wont be much. but if you mount them front to back the trailing arms acts as a scissor so
you would be loading the shock bolts and i think you would get stress fracture in the shock mounts.
adam
[Edited on 27/7/07 by oadamo]
[Edited on 27/7/07 by oadamo]
quote:
It really brings it home when you see the movement the axle goes thru on bump/droop
quote:
Originally posted by omega 24 v6
quote:
It really brings it home when you see the movement the axle goes thru on bump/droop
Does'nt it just
Oadamo I reckon if it was irs or trailing wishbones then it'd need to be side to side. But not in the case of a live axle. Ah well you live and learn. An old teacher of mines said if you go to bed having learnt something new then the day hasn't been wasted. Looks like he never built a locost LOL
if you see a saxo with the back end thats fell off thats me I have shockers with a turret type mount on rubber bushes at the top so they have full rotational motion at the top. The bottom is mounted off the top
axle mounting bolt so rotates in line with the axle. I think this is the original Westfield solution to the problem.
Caber
Vote for option not listed:
90 degrees between both to get a virtual U-Joint.
Direction of bolts depending on preference and space constraints.
$ 0.02 (Mexican Peso cents....)
quote:
90 degrees between both to get a virtual U-Joint.
A simple drawing should clear all kinds of doubts and close this can of worms FOREVER
[Edited on 29/7/07 by robertst]
Rescued attachment why.jpg
Sorry robertst BUT what about the torsional twist on a live axle??? I was going the side to side route until I put it all together hence the poll to see what others have done. As you can see most have gone front to rear and I hope they all read the original post about the axle being a live one.
quote:
Originally posted by omega 24 v6
Sorry robertst BUT what about the torsional twist on a live axle???
quote:
Originally posted by omega 24 v6
Sorry robertst BUT what about the torsional twist on a live axle??? I was going the side to side route until I put it all together hence the poll to see what others have done. As you can see most have gone front to rear and I hope they all read the original post about the axle being a live one.