-
Help Support Hardline Crawlers :
Rockwells make your sac swell!
- Thread starter Eddyj
- Start date
fordcontraption01
Well-Known Member
Most of the mrw wheels I've seen have the shell backwards for clearance and the beadlock is welded to the wide part of the wheel 
TBItoy
Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Re: Rockwells make your sac swell!
And that makes them a pain in the ass to mount!
fordcontraption01 said:Most of the mrw wheels I've seen have the shell backwards for clearance and the beadlock is welded to the wide part of the wheel
And that makes them a pain in the ass to mount!
fordcontraption01
Well-Known Member
Yes sir almost impossible without shitwrecking the tire bead
Eddyj
Well-Known Member
??Shitwrecking?? Can I please have a definition. Is it worser than what the head :afro: is doing to our country.
TBItoy
Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Re: Rockwells make your sac swell!
Its an east tn thing..actually had a buddy in college we nicknamed "shitwreck" cause he was the first person we heard say it.
Eddyj said:
Its an east tn thing..actually had a buddy in college we nicknamed "shitwreck" cause he was the first person we heard say it.
patooyee
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2008
- Messages
- 5,692
I just finished moving my steering from in front of to behind the axle. (From INCORRECT Akerman to CORRECT.) I used the same exact 10" DE ram in both setups. When the steering was in front of the axle I was using home-made hi-steer arms that were SLIGHTLY longer, less than an inch, but for the most part mirrored the stock arms. The new setup behind the axle uses the stock arms. BEFORE, with steering in front of axle, the knuckles bottomed out with about 1-1/8" travel still left in the ram. NOW, with the steering behind the axle, all 10" of ram stroke are used and the knuckles still have a little ways to go. (I could probably use another 1/8" to 1/4" of stroke if I had it.)
So I've obviously got way sharper steering now with the knuckles in the positions they were intended from the factory. The extra 1.125" of stroke I am using now as compared to before equates to roughly 6* of additional steering in each direction with no modifications to the knuckles, just using Ouverson shafts, and there is no shaft binding. (Stock steering stop bolts removed completely.)
The interesting part to me is that in BOTH configurations the knuckles were the limiting factor. IE, I turned them until they bound and set the ram stops accordingly. Yet, I am obviously getting more angularity out of the new setup than the old. So, at least in my case, running the knuckles opposite factory intent, with opposite Ackerman, and steering arm pointing toward the front, I was not only limiting steering capacity by having opposite Ackerman (Inside tire was wanting to fight outside tire in turns.) I was also limiting my overall knuckle angular capacity by having the knuckles bottom out before they normally would. It was a double whammy of steering suck which explains why my rear, with its correct Ackerman, was so much better than my front before I switched.
I know 6* doesn't sound like much worth worrying about, but figure that it is about a 20% improvement from before + the addition of the tires not fighting each other in turns and I feel like its something worth at least giving some consideration to. Plus, I eliminated a lot of weight from the axle and my steering is way more protect behind the axle itself now.
So I've obviously got way sharper steering now with the knuckles in the positions they were intended from the factory. The extra 1.125" of stroke I am using now as compared to before equates to roughly 6* of additional steering in each direction with no modifications to the knuckles, just using Ouverson shafts, and there is no shaft binding. (Stock steering stop bolts removed completely.)
The interesting part to me is that in BOTH configurations the knuckles were the limiting factor. IE, I turned them until they bound and set the ram stops accordingly. Yet, I am obviously getting more angularity out of the new setup than the old. So, at least in my case, running the knuckles opposite factory intent, with opposite Ackerman, and steering arm pointing toward the front, I was not only limiting steering capacity by having opposite Ackerman (Inside tire was wanting to fight outside tire in turns.) I was also limiting my overall knuckle angular capacity by having the knuckles bottom out before they normally would. It was a double whammy of steering suck which explains why my rear, with its correct Ackerman, was so much better than my front before I switched.
I know 6* doesn't sound like much worth worrying about, but figure that it is about a 20% improvement from before + the addition of the tires not fighting each other in turns and I feel like its something worth at least giving some consideration to. Plus, I eliminated a lot of weight from the axle and my steering is way more protect behind the axle itself now.
toreadorranger
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 199
NTIDWELL said:
What Kind of cost without the 5th hole.
Eddyj
Well-Known Member
Patoyee Pics of new set up?
Skidkid
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2011
- Messages
- 184
toreadorranger
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2012
- Messages
- 199
NTIDWELL said:
With the addition of the double shear front bolt I don't think it would be a problem.
Neal3000
Well-Known Member
toreadorranger said:
Thats not the case with dana 60 hi-steer arms, that double shear on your heim don't do **** to keep your knuckle studs from shearing
Neal3000
Well-Known Member
patooyee said:
Could you explain or define ackerman?
