Originally posted by dirtman13
View Post
Originally posted by rat
View Post
Originally posted by aw12345
View Post
I think the need for reinforcement is sort of a no-brainer when you consider that without holes, the 2x2, .250" wall crossmember is of similar strength to the 2" .250" wall links. If I need my lower links to be that strong, and two of them are putting pressure on the side of the crossmember, then it probably isn't strong enough (tubing being a lot stronger in compression than bending). Messing with things like Triaged's 4-link calculator just reinforces this. The DOM links don't have an overwhelming factor of safety when you figure in enough Gs to account for things like bouncing, falling, jumping.
The link brackets themselves will also be braced. They stick out kinda far, and I see the potential for them to put torque on the crossmember. This aspect of the design is part of what postponed me actually going through with it. However, it's a problem with a solution. I alluded to this a few pages ago as well.
So there will be (Lord willing and the creek don't rise) plenty of bracing for the lower crossmember. It's just being put off until later. For one, I have several different schemes bouncing around in my head. The other thing is, I'm working with pretty limited resources in some ways, so I have to prioritize things more carefully. Not that the bracing isn't important, but doing the front 3-link is moreso. Making the Jeep safer for the highway is higher priority than wheeling. Not that wheeling isn't important...
Comment