horizontal rear coil-overs / canitlever

Curtis Guise

Administrator
Posts
12,694
Reaction
3,554
Does anyone have any pics of a rear cantilever suspension with horizontal coil-over shocks? I know Eric from Go-desert has some pics of one from SEMA that I am waiting for him to post on his site with all the other SEMA pics. but I would like to see more trucks that have used this setup and maybe hear some of the pros and cons of using it.

I plan on building a new truck soon and I have always thought about doing something like that.
 

elcaprerunner

Well-Known Member
Posts
951
Reaction
3
One word: Baldwins.

DIRT'S FOR RACING, PRERUNNERS ARE FOR GETTING THERE!

H.O.R.E.
Hemet Off-Road Enthusiests
 

Kritter

Krittro Campbell
Posts
10,914
Reaction
296
That truck from sema is a Paradgim built Kudela designed truck for Jim Wimmer.

Kris
"Buy American before it's too late..."
 

jeff

Moderator
Posts
7,434
Reaction
325
Here ya go...


More can be found online at Off-Road.com and possibly Fly-n-high.com

Aloha
 

John Bitting

Administrator
Posts
11,951
Reaction
2,560
Here are a few. The only thing missing is the rod that went from the lever to the rear end housing.
 

jeff

Moderator
Posts
7,434
Reaction
325
Here's a pic of CST's SEMA truck with a similar setup.
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://bbs.off-road.com/photobb/data/535/2dscn0977-med.jpg>http://bbs.off-road.com/photobb/data/535/2dscn0977-med.jpg</A>

Aloha
 

singlehanded

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,584
Reaction
0
So, the question is why build a cantilever designed rear end . is it cheaper than a four link (doesnt look like it) does it work better. What are the pros and cons and jd fab what makes you want to build one or is it just to be different sort of thing?

midnight landscaper working overtime and I'm full throttle I'm full throttle tonight
 

Dylan

Well-Known Member
Posts
232
Reaction
0
mass distribution and polar moment

“Those of you who think you know so much really annoy those of us who do!”
 

drtdevil93

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,769
Reaction
11
a cantilever setup still utilizes a 3/4 link setup. it is simply a different way to mount the shocks. it works good and gives you some better options with your shocks. another advantage is you wont need to have such a big lower link, which increases clearance, and reduces unsprung weight. its also more complex, and another moving part to add to the madness that is the modern race truck. you decide.
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
I'm not so sure about the reducing unsprung weight part. The op-rod and approx 1/2 of the rocker's weight count as unsprung. I don't think you can take enough out of the lower arms to offset the weight of the rod and 1/2 of the rocker.

Then again, I don't think that should be the reason for going in this direction. Look to F1 cars, they all employ some kind of rocker design. Most have gone to a pull-rod arrangement, something I think will be difficult to do in this venue. We're likely stuck with push rods. If the damper has less total travel, by default it weighs less. They have gotten the total shaft movement down to such a small range that they are now running thru-shaft dampers because even with a reservoir the difference in oil volume btwn each side of the piston was introducing a tuning variable they couldn't easily control.
You can achieve all sorts of rising or falling piston speeds depending on the design of the total damper actuating system. Say you want the first 10% of travel from full droop to be falling piston rate and the remaining travel to have 9% piston rate rise. That's something you can't always easily do when mounted direct to the housing/linkage/spindle.

Asked to forecast the future of TT's, Class 1's, etc. I expect that, as Dylan pointed out, Polar Moment and CG location are going to become more and more important. I also expect to see the total weight of these racers start falling. Picture what something even a little behind the times as the Herbst Truggy could do if it weighed 2000 lbs. That's fantasy from where we stand now. In ten years it could be reality.
It also wouldn't surprise me to see industrial rodless cylinder technology become used in off road dampers. Most likely first would appear on the lighter vehicles and progress towards the heavier. I'm surprised it hasn't already been done. Maybe on a Paris-Dakar Rally car.....

TS

I used swerve around my halucinations, now I drive right thru them.
 

ACID_RAIN28

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,409
Reaction
60
what is a rodless cylinder? besides the obvious in the name. How does it work?

Anyone can escape into sleep, we are all geniuses when we dream.
 

Curtis Guise

Administrator
Posts
12,694
Reaction
3,554
Thanks for the pics everyone.

The first time I thought of doing this was when I was trying to think of how to build a good working 3 or 4 link suspension on a prerunner while keeping the stock bed so I would have plenty of storage space. So I thought of trying to design a cantilever setup like that to keep the shocks under the bed. But then after thinking about it some more, you would still need a cage to go through the bed in some places so there is no way around losing some of the bed space. and after looking at that Fabtech truck, if there was a bed it would still have to be cut in places for the cantilever and shocks.
I also thought about building a 4-runner recently and if I did I would probably go that route for sure. I don't think the person in the third seat in the back would want to have shocks a few inches away on either side of them. But I don't think that is going to happen, I am most likely going to find an Xtra cab Tacoma to build. And I am not going to keep the bed like I mentioned above, it will have glass bedsides. I will just figure out how to make room for some kind of an aluminum box for storage.
one of the new 4-doors would be nice but then I would be back to the rear cantilever setup again because the back of the cab ends at the front of the rear end. So its either shocks through the cab or shocks in the back somehow with a cantilever. But those trucks have only been around a year or so and are way more than I plan to spend on the truck.

Another reason I thought of the cantilever is that it's different. And I have plenty of time to build it, and the resources.

This is going to be a prerunner not a race truck ( but then again, I said that while building my last truck....)
 

ntsqd

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,429
Reaction
27
http://www.numatics.ca/rodless.htm

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.wcbranhaminc.com/cblcyldr.htm>http://www.wcbranhaminc.com/cblcyldr.htm</A>

From a google search.......

TS

I used swerve around my halucinations, now I drive right thru them.
 

ACID_RAIN28

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,409
Reaction
60
A few of the locals in my area have been able to keep the bed with a four-link. They used Airsprings instead of coilovers, and for shocks the used a very functional cantilever that runs four shocks behind the rear axle with a fuel cell in the back. I belive it pulls off around 16-18, and all adjustable. One truck is a 79 step side, and the other is a ranger. if you can get the geometry of it right they work good and alow you to save your bed for your bike.

Anyone can escape into sleep, we are all geniuses when we dream.
 

Curtis Guise

Administrator
Posts
12,694
Reaction
3,554
I remember there being a large thread about the weight of TT's or class 1's in the future. One or two of the drivers mentioned how they feel safer and/or more stable in something that weighs more. (at high speeds)
But I am sure the weight could drop to a certain point and still be a good handling race vehicle

I did a couple of searches but couldn't find the thread.
 

JrSyko

Jerry Maguire
Posts
7,889
Reaction
1,600
Not too far off topic but...I've always wondered why no one has used one of the older chevy's that uses a 3/4 link type rear end (no leaf springs) as a race truck in the stock full class? It seems like it would be an advantage as you would be running some sort of 3/4 link set up.

See ya in the dirt!
 
Top