Visit The Dirt Forum for More Information

Author Topic:   Cantilevered Front Shocks!
FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 09, 2005 12:00 AM  
I'm planning on changing my front shocks over the winter to a cantilever style. I have a few pics of them and I have a pretty good idea of how to build everything. But here's my question: the attachment points on the upper control arms. I have the swedged tube adjustable upper a-arms and I'm looking for ideas of attaching the cantilever arm to the upper control arm. I want something that can easily be removed from one control arm to the next so if and when I bend a tube I don't have to build a whole new cantilever arm. So I'm sure some of you guys run this system and if you would have some pics of the attachment points that would REALLY help out. Thanks for any help you can provide!

Dale

------------------

http://www.freewebs.com/flynloracing17

mod4
Dirt Freak

Total posts: 223
posted July 09, 2005 06:52 AM  
I'd like to hear your reasoning on going to this system over a more traditional one ?

racer17j
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 5390
posted July 09, 2005 10:19 AM  
www.n2speed.com/ White Lighting Chassis out of Fayette Ark has some pictures under the chassis kit.

washeduptoo
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 155
posted July 10, 2005 11:17 AM  
Hey Dale,

We had White lighting that had a cantilever on it, a shock activator that clamped on both ends of the swedge tubes with bolts. The white lighting we have now has a premade job from them that does't use swedge tubes, but it is cantilever. Let me know me if I can help.

Drdirt
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 11
posted July 10, 2005 11:36 PM  
a couple years ago I saw a clamp on set up on the Jet Mods at Boone.Call Jet.

CUSTOMPERFORMANCE
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1172
posted July 11, 2005 12:03 AM  
I dont know why but most mods I have seen built end up going back to shocks out close to the spindles after trying them mounted canti lever style. I wonder why?

FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 11, 2005 03:46 PM  
Here's my reasoning. I am tired of replacing SHOCKS!! LOL! Plus its less unsprung weight. I hear that 1 pound of unsprung reacts like 10 pounds sprung. So the added weight of the cantilever arms shouldn't hurt it any.

A few guys at my track run these. One of the guys is VERY fast. I checked out my car this weekend, and normally the shocks mount to the front crossmember. Well my car has a 1 3/4" bar run right in the middle of this crossmember. So what I'm going to have to do is build a bracket to extend out over the drag link and bolt the shocks there. Shouldn't be a problem. I have looked at the pics of white lightnings cars (which one of the cars at my tracks is a Lightning) and I couldn't get a clear look at the attachments to the arm.

Kromulous
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted July 11, 2005 04:18 PM  
With the lower arm being longer, and the top arm having more angle in it at ride height, at least most cars do. I would tend to think the motion of the cantilever would be non linear.

It would probaly mess with the shock speed pretty bad (just thinking out loud here). Quick in the begining then slow down as it compresses. Not sure, gonna have to give that some more thought.

With the shock mounted to lower arm it would be more linear to the travel of the wheel. I think i would try to figure out how to cantelever it off the lower arm. Unless you manipulate the ratio of the top arm, to create more travel at the shock, then it might help.

Am i on the right track Custom? any ideas why they arnt used to much?

washeduptoo
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 155
posted July 11, 2005 06:09 PM  
I can tell why we did away with the cantilever is we kept braking hiems this year the with premade piece. Unless you are able to build the old activators, almost everytime you get hit hard enough to break a shock, it usually bends the swedge tube and/or the activators and they cost almost the price of the shock. Since we installed the standard shock setup, we've broken 3 shocks I think. We might have to rethink the cantilever again.

FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 11, 2005 07:09 PM  
where I'm breaking and bending them is not always because of a wreck. My car is a metric and it uses the factory lowers, not the Nova's. So there is not much clearence there for the shock. I'm usually bending the RF when the car rolls over, most especially on a rough track. I think I might could get away with some small body Bilstein's and it work like it is, but I really don't want to take that chance since those shocks are kinda expensive. What I figured I'd do was cantilever them and then buy 2 pair of those QA1 Re-valvable shocks. Thats the plan!! Don't know if it'll work.......

CUSTOMPERFORMANCE
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 1172
posted July 11, 2005 08:30 PM  
Like was stated you end up breaking almost as much as $$$$ in heims and tubes as a shock or shockes when hard hard.

flowers99
Dirt Roller

Total posts: 22
posted July 12, 2005 05:23 PM  
my current car (a Loose Gruff) has the shocks mounted in front of the control arms. no more bent shocks.

FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 12, 2005 05:42 PM  
I had also thought about that....... attaching the shocks to the outside of the lower control arms to get them out of the center of the upper control arm. So what about that guys, would you think that would be better??

mod4
Dirt Freak

Total posts: 223
posted July 13, 2005 10:58 AM  
I'm in a Gruff too, shocks in front.
Keepin' it simple!

Somebody already stated my thought - if you are hitting hard enough to hurt the shocks, you will hurt the cantilever too. I understand about the lack of clearance problem you are talking about, but I still think there are easier and cheaper answers then a motion ratio system.... jmho

Kromulous
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted July 13, 2005 11:57 AM  
I have the same issue as you Flyinlow, my thoughts were to use a different upper a arm.

Use the ones with the small screw in upper ball joint, should give you some more clearance over the regular bolt in deals.

U.B. Machine has some at a good price.

wfoondirt
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 505
posted July 13, 2005 12:01 PM  
quote:
Originally posted by FlyNLoIMCA17:
Plus its less unsprung weight.


Technically it would be more unsprung weight because 1/2 weight of the shock plus 1/2 the weight of the catilever is considered unsprung.

FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 13, 2005 04:11 PM  
My uppers do use the small screw-in ball joints. I was looking over the car about putting the shocks up front. I also have tire clearence problems there so that won't work either.

Kromulous
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 796
posted July 14, 2005 06:49 AM  
You use the small screw ins A-arms and it still hits the shock?

FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 14, 2005 03:41 PM  
yes.

rrrrick
Dirt Maniac

Total posts: 192
posted July 14, 2005 04:46 PM  
I have a metric frame and run my shocks in front of the a-frame for the same reason. The only problem I have is if I run a 3" Offset wheel onn the L/F I rub the shock on full right steering lock

FlyNLoIMCA17
Dirt Forum Champ
Total posts: 753
posted July 14, 2005 05:39 PM  
I run 4" offsets on both front wheels, but the rotors have bolt pattern adapters that are 1" thick. So basically I have 3" offsets on both wheels. I am wondering if most of my problem might be because I am running the metric frame with metric lowers and pinto spindles. I'm sure the Nova lowers would help this problem but I'm afraid to do that because I don't want to cause any other unforeseen problems that might cause. My wheel offsets look like this (keep in mind the front has 1" adapters)

LF 4" RF 4"
LR 2" RR 3"

That puts all the wheels in-line with one another except the LR is 1" further out. I'm not exactly sure how far the nova lowers set the front out I was thinking it was like 2" or so. So that would mean my front to rear tracking would be off a bit. I have be told (even by my chassis builder) that the car handles better when the front tracking is wider than the rear. I tried that on my car and I didn't like it. So I evened up the tracking and it handles alot better for me.

Back to the Archives