The Silver Mullet:

[FortCollinsZJ]

I see no reason to lower it without seeing what bigger tires will do.

Sway bars will help. But the biggest return would be with wider axles and larger (heavier) tires. This would also allow for the shock mounts to be out wide. This setup yields an extremely stable drive.



I happen to like the stance Neil. I strongly suggest full width axles, bigger tires and wider shock mounts.

ALL of that is in the plans. Should be picking up my 60 soon. Started pricing tires, damn 37"+ tires get spensive!

I hooked my winch to the front axle, and sucked it down 2", that's where it needs to be, so today is being spent cutting down the old tabs on the axle, and lowering them 2", it makes the mounting width on the axle, a total of 3/4" narrower on each side, but I know the lower stance ill help a lot. Got the sway bar today aswell, I'll try to mount that this evening. Back to work!

[CrawlerReady]

I've got some 37" stickies I'll sell you

[it usually runs fine]

I've got some 37" stickies I'll sell you

Comes with bonus sticky keyboard!!!

[SirFuego]

I've got some 37" stickies I'll sell you

O rly? Are they the Trxus stickies? Shipping to 14094 if Neil isn't interested?

EDIT: I'm being serious.

EDIT 2: Sorry for the hi-jack. ZJ is looking SWEET!

[Jeeptech01]

I see no reason to lower it without seeing what bigger tires will do.

Sway bars will help. But the biggest return would be with wider axles and larger (heavier) tires. This would also allow for the shock mounts to be out wide. This setup yields an extremely stable drive.



I happen to like the stance Neil. I strongly suggest full width axles, bigger tires and wider shock mounts.

I fail to see how increasing unsprung weight will make a vehicle less "tippy" My interpretation of tippy is body roll FWIW.

If you are saying heavier tires/axles combined with a wider trac width will make the vehicle less prone to a flop then I totally agree.

If Im wrong please explain how so that I can understand. Im still fairly new at this.

[Jeeptech01]

ALL of that is in the plans. Should be picking up my 60 soon. Started pricing tires, damn 37"+ tires get spensive!

I hooked my winch to the front axle, and sucked it down 2", that's where it needs to be, so today is being spent cutting down the old tabs on the axle, and lowering them 2", it makes the mounting width on the axle, a total of 3/4" narrower on each side, but I know the lower stance ill help a lot. Got the sway bar today aswell, I'll try to mount that this evening. Back to work!

Im anxious to see how it sits with 2" taken out of it. Should change the handling drastically.

[chadjans]

I fail to see how increasing unsprung weight will make a vehicle less "tippy" My interpretation of tippy is body roll FWIW.

If you are saying heavier tires/axles combined with a wider trac width will make the vehicle less prone to a flop then I totally agree.

Unsprung mass is the very reason I run water in the front tires. It is mass below the center of gravity. Unless you go turtle.

Ten inches in track width is more of return than two inches lower body. Although lowering it has its benefits. Correct me if I am wrong but it looks like it will be close in the rear.




Load it with tools and drive it for a little bit. The springs will sag.

[FortCollinsZJ]

Got it done. It is definitely right now, after getting measurements from a another two ZJ's, (thanks Fuego and some guy on JF) I determined that it had 6.5" lift over stock, now it is down to 4-4.5 with plenty of room for tires and up travel. I can always adjust the coil overs for more lift when the time comes.

Got the sway bar on andI can tell just by jumping on the slider that it is MUCH more stable. I'll get a road report Wednesday.

Chad, what "looks close" in the rear?

[Jeeptech01]

Unsprung mass is the very reason I run water in the front tires. It is mass below the center of gravity. Unless you go turtle.

Ten inches in track width is more of return than two inches lower body. Although lowering it has its benefits. Correct me if I am wrong but it looks like it will be close in the rear.




Load it with tools and drive it for a little bit. The springs will sag.

Ok then yes I see what you are saying. Unsprung weight will stop the flop.

My interpretation of tippy is body roll which cannnot be corrected by adding unsprung weight.

ED: Neil we'd all love to see some pics when you get a chance!

[CrawlerReady]

O rly? Are they the Trxus stickies? Shipping to 14094 if Neil isn't interested?

EDIT: I'm being serious.

EDIT 2: Sorry for the hi-jack. ZJ is looking SWEET!

PM sent

Neil....shipping is even cheaper to you! Especially since we'll both be at GSW

[FortCollinsZJ]

Tyler, I kinda need something that would be better on the street, I'm leaning toward MTR's actually. I want something that will last a bit longer.

Did a little measuring, and this is what I came up with for changing the upper links around.

Do these numbers look oK for a four link FRONT, I
ll still have a trackbar too.

[IndyZJ]

Why the triangulated 4 link with a panhard bar? Won't that bind like crazy? You can get excellent driving and handling characteristics with a properly designed and built 3 link w/ panhard.

Anyway, I always thought you wanted the upper(s) as close to flat (parallel to the ground) as possible. You'll probably want a little more antidive than that.

Is this to solve the body roll issue? I would put money on it being mostly from the coilover angle (more or less what Chad was saying - search coilover mounting angle on pirate) and a relatively low roll center for the COG.

You can't do much with the D30 for the coil over angle, but what's keeping you from raising both ends of the panhard (as in keeping it parallel to the drag link, but raising it 3-4")?

[chadjans]

Chad, what "looks close" in the rear?

Tire versus the area directly behind the rear door.

[FortCollinsZJ]

Tire versus the area directly behind the rear door.

Ahh thats what I figured. I have trimmed and welded the fenders back here, and the rear is stretched probably 2" back. The 35 tucks with 2" to the door. I also have the gas tank raised, so I can push the axle even further back. and not worry about axle truss clearance.

[rstrucks]

Why the triangulated 4 link with a panhard bar? Won't that bind like crazy?

^ This. You don't want more than one roll axis, two will just fight each other. Either do it with the panhard/track bar or with triangulating the links, just not both.

Looking really good BTW.

[FortCollinsZJ]

Ahh. Thanks Indy And Ryan, I was thinking of the future, when I build the sixty, I'd like to have at least triangulated uppers, and though it wouldn't take much to do it now. Guess I'll leave it.

I am excited to see what it handles like now that it's 2" lower up front, the trackbar went from an 11* angle to about 7.5*, I think it's going to drive just fine now.

[FortCollinsZJ]

Just got back from a good 15 mile or so drive, handles great now. Definitely a lot more stable. Here is how it sits now.

[IndyZJ]

I'm digging the new front stance, but it still looks like a ZJ rearended a buggy

It looks like you still have a ton of uptravel up front. How much do you have, and do you use all of that shock travel?

[Joe Lynch]

Its screaming a back half...

Looks good mang.

[Arsonist_Bob]

Its screaming a back half...

Looks good mang.

yes^

cant have all that fancy tubing and sheet metal up front without any out back

[Jeeptech01]

Much mo awesome!! Im glad it was an easy solution.

Only one problem.. /\ they are right /\ it needs tube in back now. Ha it never ends. Nice work man.

[FortCollinsZJ]

Like this?

[xj-to-zj]

WOW thats going to look sick!

[CrawlerReady]

Do it. NOW.

[FortCollinsZJ]

Haha I want to, badly. Wouldn't be as much work as the front, I want to get 16" FOA's and swap them out for the 14's I have up front, then I could use the 14's out back, along with a fuel cell, and a small pile of tube.

I gotta get won-tons going first though. Maybe I'll get rear ended, and then I'll have some mo money! Haha

I'll let you know when to buy stock in sawzall blades.