Alibro
Well-Known Member
LOL, I never thought of it like that.The replacement wheels look much better!
Is the lift so high you need the wooden step Alibro (see pictures above)? Lol
Much more boring really, as the car was on stones I wanted something with a broad base to put under the car as a before and after comparison.
Alibro
Well-Known Member
I was hoping to get the boot door in undercoat today but being dragged out to church and family life put paid to that.FWIW Warren at MuddyMods now has 5mm spacers.
I reckon my 70 series tyres have given me about an extra inch of lift. I've decided not to fit my 50mm lift kit
as SWMBO wasn't impressed at having to get into the Hippo with just the change from the tyres.
So with not much done I was thinking about the 5mm wheel spacers I've ordered and remembered what Rich said earlier.
I checked the spacers on Muddymods site here
https://www.muddymods.com/products/5mm-wheel-spacer-accurate-cnc-laser-cut
They look much more substantial and I suspect the would fit very nicely but are 4 times the price. If the ebay cheapies prove to be rubbish I might just try Joe's trick of cutting the face off some old disks I have lying around. Hopefully the new ones will be here tomorrow and so I can try them and report back.
I also forgot to mention yesterday I have pretty substantial camber on my front wheels even after taking the car up and down our rough lane and into a field so will have to investigate that. Hopefully I've the camber bolts in the wrong way round and it'll be a simple fix.
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
Hi Ali, I presume the issue is excessive positive ? - it may be that you have hit the limit on the camber bolts ... hopefully not. - maybe just a tweak needed.I was hoping to get the boot door in undercoat today but being dragged out to church and family life put paid to that.
So with not much done I was thinking about the 5mm wheel spacers I've ordered and remembered what Rich said earlier.
I checked the spacers on Muddymods site here
https://www.muddymods.com/products/5mm-wheel-spacer-accurate-cnc-laser-cut
They look much more substantial and I suspect the would fit very nicely but are 4 times the price. If the ebay cheapies prove to be rubbish I might just try Joe's trick of cutting the face off some old disks I have lying around. Hopefully the new ones will be here tomorrow and so I can try them and report back.
I also forgot to mention yesterday I have pretty substantial camber on my front wheels even after taking the car up and down our rough lane and into a field so will have to investigate that. Hopefully I've the camber bolts in the wrong way round and it'll be a simple fix.
If there is an issue, the usual way is to fabricate and fit fixed or adjustable camber plates at the strut tops to bring the 3 bolt holes inboard.
I would imagine you are going to have considerable toe out now as well.
The tracking will sort that no worries. I would be a little concerned also re bump steer. I don't think it would matter on a pure off roader but may be a little troublesome in normal use. If you cannot get the camber set with camber bolts (hope you can) then the inevitable pronounced bump steer would be even worse -well - the worse part will be 'un-bump' steer .. where the front end lifts after a bump - it will be far more pronounced than an upward push.
Sorry if that all sound really negative - not meant to - just observations.
A bit of measuring may be called for.
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
Yes, agreed, it will have pulled off a bit of positive no doubt.
The rear camber should be adjustable more than the camber bolts by the traverse rod...
Rear toe in is also expected to increase (from first observations) but I can see little one can do about that.
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
Might be a tad expensive for adjustable one - Maybe homemade - cut, drill tap and rosejoint ? - or preferably the quality cheap way - cut -carefully fit external sleeve ie - (hack it in half and bash a bit of pipe over it) - then adjust length and weld it.
Alibro
Well-Known Member
Only fronts but I might still be able to get the rear bits too. Might be worth a try as I don't want to screw up the ones on the car. Would it still pass MOT if the were cut and lengthened? I suppose I could swap them over after getting MOT.Yup, that'd work just as well
Ali, haven't you got a spare set of suspension components you can modify if needed?
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
Absolutely no issue for the MOT Ali. It just needs to be finished neat and tidily with any rough welding ground back and feathered - and it will be absolutely fine.Only fronts but I might still be able to get the rear bits too. Might be worth a try as I don't want to screw up the ones on the car. Would it still pass MOT if the were cut and lengthened? I suppose I could swap them over after getting MOT.
Over sleeving an arm is quite simple and extrmely neet when done. Many times the arms are hollow and can take an insert internally then welded at both ends of the connection. You can also drill through the outer and partly into the inner and weld the two parts and grind the result. Loads of ways and they all look excellent. If done at one end of the arm it looks totally factory anyway. Even in the middle it is simply a case or symmetry on both sides and a good finish and it looks factory also.
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
Potentially really really easy... just look at medium weight commercial steering tie rods at a breakers, they tend to have all the opposing thread parts and are available as internal and external threads - HGV's can supply humongous units so the range is every possible combination.If you're really clever, you may be able to put in a turnbuckle in there to provide fine-tuning adjustment
GrumpyGel
Well-Known Member
I may be a bit thick here... but this extending the trailing arms is so that the wheel sits in the middle of the arch - when the suspension is compressed - won't that push your wheel into the arch (bodywork at the rear of the arch) as the trailing arm swings up? Presumably the arm is quite angled down now so if it compresses to horizontal (or near horizontal), the wheel will move backwards a fair bit.
Joe_H
Well-Known Member
Edit - this started as a quick response ..
- but... forgive any math errors or otherwise.. it is early and I have been up since 5 AM..... if any of my angles are t!ts up then please let me know..Hi GG, you are absolutely correct and of course the amount of movement is related to the increased angles. If you take - for example - a hypothetical 500mm trailing arm at horizontal with a pivot point at one end - (x), call the 'movable' end (y) then if you 'drop' (y) 50mm from the horizontal the movement in the longitudinal axis is less than 3mm. - however, if you drop it 200mm then the longitudinal 'shift' is around 39mm.
LR originally set the suspension so that the trailing arm was inclined downwards when normally laden so that the wheel moves 'backwards' as bump increases. max drop angle (down from horizontal) was always greater than the max bump angle (up from horizontal) .. so as we approach high defections upwards there is a virtually null area.
ie, - from 5 degrees 'down' from horizontal to 5 degrees 'up' - the longitudinal shift is only +/- 2.5mm. if the arm is set - at normal laden conditions - at, say, an angle of 15 degrees 'down' then for the first 10 degrees of movement (which is a 'bump' of about 100mm) the shift is around 20mm to the rear. As above though, once it approaches and passes horizontal -5 to +5 degrees the shift is only +/- 2.5mm.
Herein lies the problem with 'lift kits' if you do not alter the suspension arm fixed pivot points at the same time.
All you can do (if you are not prepared to alter the fixed points) is to find a compromise so that the wheel 'looks' ok and remains clear of the arches through the range of travel. The issue with the rear wheel being close to the forward arch is that as 'drop' increases - which it certainly will off road! - then the wheel will move forward at a much greater rate. The shift from a static angle of - 10 to -15 is a movement of 12 mm towards the arch, however, from 15 to 20 is a further 16mm.and from 20 to 25 is another 30mm !!!!
So with a horizontal arm of 500 mm at 0 degree drop there is no deflection of course, but the FORWARD movement of the end of the arm (y) from the horizontal / 0 degrees are approximately -
5 degrees = 2.5mm
10 degrees = 10mm
15 degrees = 22mm
20 degrees = 37mm
25 degrees = 70mm !!!!
extremely non linear as would be expected. - and that equates to a downward movement from the horizontal of around 250 mm.
Whether this amount of drop is actually achievable (FROM THE HORIZONTAL ARM ANGLE) with the FL suspension when the 50mm lift is added I do not know - It would be useful to know the full range of a normal setup suspension travel from full bump to full drop - but shows the huge increases in wheel shift as the angle increases. As the kit has increased the downward angle of the lower arm we can see the results on the wheel movement already in the images, and this will only increase at a non linear rate as the wheel drops
So - by fitting a lifting kit (at the rear)we hit two issues - well FOUR actually....
First is that the trailing arm is deflected down at a greater angle than design leading to the issues above - a MUCH greater amount of longitudinal wheel movement in drop or bump.
Also, if the angle of the trailing arm is increased downwards at rest - as it is due to the lift, then the position of the wheel will move rearward as the bump increases FAR more than was originally designed. A wheel set at arch centre on a raised kit may well move backward up to 70 mm depending on the length of the arm - and that is only to the pint of the arm being horizontal !. the 70mm is for a 500mm arm at 25 degrees down from horizontal (at rest) - greater angles will cause greater shift.
The wheel could well hit the REAR of the arch under bump.
The 'sweet spot' that the manufacturer builds in - ie the point where under normal expected high bump the arm effectively pivots around horizontal giving minimal movement after the initial rear shift is lost as the vast majority of the travel is below horizontal.
The camber is positively increased far more than standard when static and is only exacerbated under droop / drop
The toe in is increased far more than than standard when static and is only exacerbated under droop / drop
So, it ends up a real hotch potch to say the least.
All that can be done really is to get the wheel in a position where it clears everything through the full travel range and also where possible is aesthetically pleasing.
An increased trailing arm length is actually beneficial as it reduces the rearward deflection on bump.. (edit - see gg's actual arm measurements for problems in setting the wheel centre for aesthetic purposes)
A 500 mm arm would show a horizontal deflection of around 70 mm at 25 degrees whereas a 530mm arm would only deflect 56mm at 25 degrees and the added bonus is that for the same drop the angle is reduced with the longer arm.
It is a can of worms really.
The rear can cause some quite unpredictable handling on road. - to say the least.
The front though ... is a complete new ball game.
The freelander though is not a sports car, however, at the front the biggest concerns would be caster shift, camber, tracking and bump steer all of which are potentially dangerous - some alarmingly so.
Then there are the deflection changes - the above potential 'issues' for the front are merely presuming the differences from 'normal' remain STATIC - they dont - they always shift with movement but the manufacturer allows for this. By making a considerable change this all goes t!ts up - and what is 'not too much of a concern' when static can become 'yikes - adrenaline is brown' when travel shift is taken into account. (it really can be very dangerous). One would presume that the manufacturer of the 'kit' would have done all the tests and measurements and provide all the info you needed to know and appropriate advise / warnings - apologies DD - if you do this already - ..
- at the very least - if the kit has not been properly assessed for changes and potentially dangerous issues, then a warning that 'it has not and you fit it completely at your own risk' should be included to warn the user and cover the seller.What you would normally do is assemble the system without the springs and measure the important angles at full drop and full bump. .. it is a veritable minefield.
Joe
Last edited:
