Danny

iTrader: (16)

I知 thinking of putting in a 4-link setup on my 4th gen Camaro when I install my 8.8 rear. I知 going to be reusing the existing lower-control arm mounts on the car. Now I just need to figure out where to mount the upper control arms. I know the upper control arms need to be positioned at a 45 degree angle but the metal around or near the tunnel is pretty thin. I don稚 want to back-half the car or chop it all up. So before I start hacking and wacking the car, does anyone have any pictures of their 4-link suspension? No latter bar setups please. I知 looking for 4-link setups only.

I've looked at a few posts here but the only ones I've seen her back-halfed cars.

Thanks guys.

orange88ls1s-dime

my advise would be to leave the torque arm set-up but convert to tubular torque arm and control arms. since you are using an 8.8 you may have to fab up a bracket to bolt torque arm to rear end housing but would be much simpler than trying to figure out an instant centre on the home made 4 link.
ive built lots of 4 link set ups and lots of torque arm set ups(for non torque arm cars) and unless you build an actual 4 link set up your not gonna see a huge gain
ill post pics of some if your interested
just my 2 cents worth
Beaudacious

Danny

iTrader: (16)

Can you post some pics please.

orange88ls1s-dime

some pics

Tig

Would you think a torque arm would work in my Tahoe, its a 99 2dr 2wd? I have been thinking about a 4-link for years. If its easier than figuring out everything involved with a linked rear I am all for it. What are your thoughts?
Thanks

Sorry, hope I'm not jacking the OPs thread.

orange88ls1s-dime

torque arms are good for lots of vehicles. it all depends on your fabrication background.
4 link is obviously the most tunable rear suspension setup to use but i would only use this on an all out tube chassis car
i like torque arm suspension because of its ease of tuning and construction.
also torque arm is better than conventional ladder bar in that the instant centre changes more linear through its arc of suspension travel because the forward points of the lower bars and the forward point of the torque arm aren't welded together. also allows you to run your springs on top of the axle tubes for better control, as running them on a pedestal behind tube can use pinion climb to disrupt the way the work.
some of these points may sound out there but ive tested all possible scenarios out and have came up with this info so please dont bash if you dont agree
thanks
Beaudacious

Tig

Well, I'm a welder by trade and enjoy building/fabricating. I have wanted to build a 4-link for some time but recently was reading about torque arm rear set ups being a very succesful design for street and track (auto-x) use. Granted this was for my foxbody but, figured why couldnt it work for my Tahoe to. I think I have more room for a torque arm then a 4 link and I wouldnt have to cut up my hoe to make it work. The only difference is I would be using coil-overs instead of coils/shocks or rather leafs and shocks.

Not here to bash man, I'm a listener and still learning about this stuff. Any and all means of info is much appreciated, regardless.

Thanks for the info, I appreciate it.

orange88ls1s-dime

coil overs are definately a better choice but still to get full benefit of them they need to be on top of the tube.
about the bashing, i know how easy it is to start wars on theses type of sites so since i was stating some info that was a bit out there and quite a bit opinionated, i figured someone would have lashed out. no worries
thanks
Beaudacious

Tig

I think I have enough room on top of the axles and run them up into the wheel wells. I may lose space for wider wheels but you cant have it all.
Know all I need is a decent image of the front torque arm mount to figure out the mounting situation.
I hear yah about flame wars, its get out of hand on the boards.

orange88ls1s-dime

as for the front all you have to do is build a secondary cross member just like an aftermarket company so you dont rip the tranny mount out with the torque of the pinion climb. then weld a tab to the cross member to fasten a bracket to torque arm so that as it travels through the suspension arc the front torque arm mount can move forward slightly to eliminate binding. if this doesnt help then ill draw a diagram as i dont have this truck any more and cant take more pics of it
sorry
Beaudacious

Tig

That drawing would be very helpful and much appreciated.
Thanks a bunch.

orange88ls1s-dime

well im no artist but can you gather anything from this?

Tig

I sure do. Thanks man, I appreciate it.
Does the torque arm have some movement forward and back?
I thought it would be bolted directly to the crossmember and be more of a pivot point. If I explained that correctly
Thanks

Tig

Heres a couple of images that I found for front mount locations. After spending a little time under my Tahoe I realized I have the same two mounts. The rear mount is bolted in and easilly accessable. I'm debating on building a new one with a location to mount the torque arm or I could just modify the exsisting one.
What are your thoughts?

orange88ls1s-dime

well that always depends on where your math makes your instant centre end up. if you are able to dial in the geometry while using factory mounting locations then great, but dont settle for a generic spot if you dont feel like fabbing a mount
hope this helps a bit
Beaudacious

noahfecks

What is this suspension on? I come from an off-road background so I have never seen a torque arm with a Watt's Linkage to control side movement. Sorry if this is an ignorant question I come on here to learn. It's hard to see in that pic but is there some method of decoupling on that torque arm to control brake hop?

Jeff Smith

iTrader: (44)

I agree with orange, best way to leave F-body torque set up.With watt s link good idea..

Tig, good looks and excellent job

Tig

How do I figure out my IC? Do you know of any reading material that has this info? That and anti squat. I was just saying for the location of the front mount because of other set ups I have seen. I will fab what needs to be made, its not a problem.
Thanks for the help, I appreciate it.

I'm almost posotive that is a newer Mustang. No question is an ignorant question. To be honest, I'm quite new to this, so I'm still learning. But, if I do understand what you are saying, it is solid mounted in a bushing up front. Not like a slider type front mount.

I wish that was mine. I'm trying to figure out a set up for my 2dr 2wd Tahoe.

orange88ls1s-dime

instant centre is the imaginary line where the upper and lower suspension bars would intersect if the could be extended. a good rule of thumb for a car with up 1000hp is to have an instant centre at 46" forward and 6" off the ground as measured from the centre of the axle tube
the good thing about a torque arm is that once you figure your math out the front point is the intersection point. now i know people will say thats what a ladder bar setup does but you cant get a ladder bar long enough to work properly(somewhat of my opinion because lots of guys are having good luck with ladder bar)
anyway taking the MRS and the little guy to Red Lobster
hope this helps a bit
Beaudacious

Tig

I wonder if I could use those same measurements for my Tahoe. Whats your thoughts on that?
Thats my biggest problem, figuring out the math, hah. I suck at math to say the least.
Another random question. Would a truck arm suspension be more suitable for my application? It doesnt seem as involved as a TA or linked rear.
My other problem is having a level spot to actually layout the truck on stands and figure these things out.
The truck arm was pointed out to me as a secondary idea.
Thanks again man, i appreciate your help and info.