Hello Guest
« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

IFS thought

  • 6 Replies
  • 3789 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline blacknight

  • 987
  • 1
  • Gender: Male
    • Gonzookin
IFS thought
« on: August 04, 2003, 05:54:43 AM »
Just had a thought with all the talk of going to straight axles. Why couldn't make an IFS work more like a straight axle by hooking the the two shooks/struts together in a way that would let the fluid from one shook goto the other and push or pull the other side.  So it would be more like a straight axle in that ex: the drive's side goes up it would push the pass. side down.  
Now with all that side I have no idea of how you could make it work but I thought it sounded cool
George
« Last Edit: August 04, 2003, 05:57:00 AM by blacknight »
Logged
*

Offline NY_SIDEKICKER

  • 2274
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • YOU WANNA RACE THE ZUKE !
    • OBSESSIVE BEHAVIOR !
Re: IFS thought
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2003, 11:45:21 AM »
HMMMMMMM........ ???
Logged
*

Offline Mikerpm4x4

  • 2875
  • 12
  • Gender: Male
  • Redline... all the time!
    • www.rpm4x4.com
Re: IFS thought
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2003, 02:32:50 PM »
So what would happen when both needed to go up? Sounds like a hard landing.  OUCH!

Mike
Logged
If your not living life to the fullest then your not living at all.

You wont really know if your wrong till your upsidedown
*

Offline 1bigtracker

  • 3409
  • 1
  • Gender: Male
  • F*** trail rated, try trail tested
Re: IFS thought
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2003, 04:46:34 PM »
thats a wicked idea but the thing behind straight axles is that they are smaller and take up less room,   and in most cases have more travel the IFS.  Specking of IFS has seen Walker Evans new rock buggy?  Now thats some crazy IFS.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2003, 04:46:54 PM by 1bigtracker »
Logged
   
*

Offline blacknight

  • 987
  • 1
  • Gender: Male
    • Gonzookin
Re: IFS thought
« Reply #4 on: August 05, 2003, 10:21:06 AM »
Ok I had some free time at work today and was thinking some more about this and  may be the way to go would be to lose the front coil springs and replace them with Air Springs.  This way your dealing with air which gives some ex a hard landing that both sides need togo up.  Another thing is that this is more do-able there are systems out there kind of like this for jeeps that I have read about.  But who knows how much they run? I bet they are an arm and a leg.  I have to do some looking into this hummmmm.
George
Logged
*

Offline MEDEL514

  • 52
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • Ramstein, Germany
Re: IFS thought
« Reply #5 on: August 05, 2003, 11:43:37 AM »
What about getting some dropped A-arms, like the ones from Calmini.  Those give you a good 3" rise.  Take out the stock coil springs and bump stops, and replacing the front struts with a long coil over strut for extended travel.  

The only problem I see with this is that the strut towers on the Trackers/Sidekicks were not designed to withstand coilovers because of its ladder chassis frame design.  If coilovers were installed, the tower would pop out of the hood or it would eventually rip the body off the chassis.  

But if the strut towers were somehow reinforced, this IFS would be the best way to go, IMO......
Logged
90' Tracker
- with some goodies
*

Offline LBC4x4

  • 78
  • 0
  • Gender: Male
  • 1992 4door 3" body 1"coil spacers 31x10.5
Re: IFS thought
« Reply #6 on: August 06, 2003, 06:00:29 PM »
I belive Land Rover put a similar suspension in its new model ment for mostly city driving. The system ingages when the vehicle is in four wheel drive.
But it still handles jumps because the linkes between struts and shocks can handle the pressure and alow the struts and shocks to function
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »