Short Arm vs. Long Arm for JK 35" and Fox 2.5 FS DCS
#21
If you can afford the long arms do it. Why?
Besides travel, when you hit bumps the force is transferred upwards more directly through the shock and coil set up, with shorter arms the force gets directed towards the body more so than with the longer arms.
Replacing the arms with adjustable control helps, but they aren't as good.
Besides travel, when you hit bumps the force is transferred upwards more directly through the shock and coil set up, with shorter arms the force gets directed towards the body more so than with the longer arms.
Replacing the arms with adjustable control helps, but they aren't as good.
#22
If you can afford the long arms do it. Why?
Besides travel, when you hit bumps the force is transferred upwards more directly through the shock and coil set up, with shorter arms the force gets directed towards the body more so than with the longer arms.
Replacing the arms with adjustable control helps, but they aren't as good.
Besides travel, when you hit bumps the force is transferred upwards more directly through the shock and coil set up, with shorter arms the force gets directed towards the body more so than with the longer arms.
Replacing the arms with adjustable control helps, but they aren't as good.
#23
JK Jedi
Properly set up there is a benefit at any height with long arms, saying only tall lifts benefit is a myth.
#24
JK Junkie
#26
I said -- "....a wider stance also helps stability....",
and -- "....steel bumpers, winch, skid plates, heavy duty rock sliders, etc., help in lowering the CG."
Besides, this should be read in the context of what I replied to.
'Stability' is a pretty wide term, which consists of many variables. Those include both the sprung and unsprung weight, suspension properties and geometry, CG of both sprung and unsprung weights, roll center, tire grip, and more.
At high speed, aerodynamics become an important factor in stability.
Last edited by GJeep; 09-19-2015 at 08:21 AM.
#27
JK Jedi
Adding armor, winch, sliders does not help lower center of gravity and is wrong even the second time you stated it. Not sure what context you are talking about but adding weight above the roll center raises the center of gravity and makes handling or stability worse.
#28
Quote - "adding weight above the roll center raises the center of gravity"
The body has a CG of its own, which can be changed by added load location.
Added weight on a roof rack raises the body CG.
Added weight at the bottom of the body lowers the body CG.
Both, regardless of the roll center location.
(Ignore the image below, which I don't know how to delete...)
Last edited by GJeep; 09-19-2015 at 12:48 PM.
#29
#30
JK Jedi
Attachment 624898
Quote - "adding weight above the roll center raises the center of gravity"
The body has a CG of its own, which can be changed by added load location.
Added weight on a roof rack raises the body CG.
Added weight at the bottom of the body lowers the body CG.
Both, regardless of the roll center location.
(Ignore the image below, which I don't know how to delete...)
Quote - "adding weight above the roll center raises the center of gravity"
The body has a CG of its own, which can be changed by added load location.
Added weight on a roof rack raises the body CG.
Added weight at the bottom of the body lowers the body CG.
Both, regardless of the roll center location.
(Ignore the image below, which I don't know how to delete...)
B would be the most stable and you make my point. The roll center on a jk is below the body so if you add a bunch of stuff to the body you will decrease stability and raise the center of gravity on the jeep.
For stability you have to place the weight on the lower side of the roll center or the place below the suspension pivots on the vehicle. If you place the same amount of weight on top of the jeep it would roll more then if you placed it on the bottom of the body but both would add instability to the ride.
Last edited by TheDirtman; 09-20-2015 at 06:38 AM.