reverse 4 link?

Ok, you said these are bad in your intro post. Kinda funny cause my truck has one. So i have to ask, what's bad about them?

Kris, you must not read any of my other posts...

The reverse 4-link has many downfalls, it's only benefit is that you don't have to move the gas tank. The reverse link system will hold the truck off of the ground, but it has no dynamic benefits. In fact, they are counter-productive.

Let's take for example traction... When you accelerate, the tires rotate foward causing the rearend housing to want to rotate rearward. Since the link bars "couple" the rearend to the chassis, that dynamic force can be used to add traction. On a foward facing 4-link the twisting force is trying to lift the chassis up at the 4-link's instant center, where the reverse system is trying to push the chassis down. Initially it sounds better that the chassis be pushed down, because that means that it is pushing the rearend against the ground, but it doesn't work like that. If you were to stand on a typical bathroom scale and then try to lift something up, the scale would show more weight (more traction) and if you were to push something down, the scale would show less weight (less traction.) That's why most guys with reverse 4-links can do a mean smokey burn-out with a stock 4-cly engine.

Then there's the whole 4-link/driveshaft relationship and far too easily attainable roll-steer issues, but the biggest thing is the acceleration and braking issues.

I'm no fool, I realize that there are MANY reverse 4-links out there that have way too many miles on them, shit I have probably built 50 myself, but once you drive a nicely set-up foward 4-link, there's just no going back...

yea, i don't read many posts on here. One of the drawbacks of trying to keep SSM running is that i don't always get a chance to enjoy the site. But thanks for your response. I might have to rip my 4 link off and redo it (since we are redoing alot of it anyway)

If you are already spendin' time redoing stuff, it would be worth it.

Edited: 8/22/2007 10:44:52 PM by Forever Draggin

are u fellas talking about a triangulated four link? well let me phrase it like this, max does that include a triangulated four link?

huh?

Max,

I am about to re-do my links and set it up for bigger rims if I weld my axle to the c-notch what should the pinion angle be? and if I do bags on bars what would be "a nicely set-up foward 4-link" be for my 94 toy that is also going to be body drop'd with 20's? I am currently cutting out the binding set up now and dont mind relocating the gas tank. picks e-mails im any contact way would be great since I know that this is only the start of my questions for you.

ok question i'm getting ready to bag and stock floor (well mostly) body drop my 90 4 runner. I don't have a prob moving my gas tank, but even running my bars forward i can only get a 13 inch lower and running my uppers the appropriate lenght being triagled. but reverse i can get 20-24 inch lower bar lenght. what would be the best way to do go?
oh i would much rather go forward than reverse i agree with you in it not being the way to go, and i really don't want to have to custom build a cell.

James- the pinion angle should be equal to the trans minus 3deg. You really should check out airridetalk.com he has a pretty informative piece on there about proper driveshaft angles. I'm not sure what you mean by "nicely set up 4-link." A simple, straight foward, no frills 4-link with the bags on the bars is easy to build, relatively cheap and can perform quite "nicely."

Jeff- There is no reason to ever run a reverse 4-link on ther rear of any thing. If you are limited to a 13" lower bar then build a 4-link that has 13" long bars. If you need more travel than that will offer then ther are options, they just start getting involved. Why are your bars limited to only 13"?

they would run into the back seat. i think i'm just going to run an irs instead. i can keep the floor pretty low and still get a good ride.

thanks for answering though