Board index

My Home Page

PilotOdyssey.com By hoser...


PilotOdyssey.com Chat Room

PilotOdyssey.com Photo Album

* Login   * Register * FAQ
http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/smiley_cool.png PilotOdyssey.com Chat    http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/find.png PilotOdyssey.com Google Search    http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/emoticon_tongue.png FL400 Parts    http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/emoticon_grin.png FL350 Parts    http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/emoticon_evilgrin.png FL250 Parts    http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/emoticon_unhappy.png Admin Email    http://www.pilotodyssey.com/PO/adm/images/imagemenu/emoticon_grin.png PilotOdyssey.com V2.0   
It is currently Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:04 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: FL350 Build - Round 2
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:41 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
Original build: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16561

I may finish my original build one day but have turned my attention to this project. I decided to do a weld on sub frame to get the front wheels in closer. They are now just about as wide as the rear tires. I also added some gussets to the front sub frame and rear frame to strengthen it. I'm currently working on the upper shock mounts and and then steering. How It is currently set up, I have 13 inches of travel through the flex of the a-arm suspension. The shocks that I have are advertised at a possible 12 inches. I do not want the nose of the FL350 to be to high up so I am planning on using 10 inches of travel. I also have the option to use smaller tires in the front now to help lower it if needed. I feel a lot better about this project and my first attempt was a good learning experience.

Attachment:
image1.PNG
image1.PNG [ 410.12 KiB | Viewed 1099 times ]


Attachment:
image2.PNG
image2.PNG [ 415.36 KiB | Viewed 1099 times ]


Attachment:
image3.PNG
image3.PNG [ 365.96 KiB | Viewed 1099 times ]


Attachment:
IMG_4650 - Copy.JPG
IMG_4650 - Copy.JPG [ 46.84 KiB | Viewed 1099 times ]


Attachment:
image5.JPG
image5.JPG [ 141.77 KiB | Viewed 1099 times ]


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:44 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
Attachment:
image4.JPG
image4.JPG [ 143.91 KiB | Viewed 1098 times ]


Attachment:
image3.JPG
image3.JPG [ 111.23 KiB | Viewed 1098 times ]


Attachment:
image6.JPG
image6.JPG [ 145.51 KiB | Viewed 1098 times ]


Attachment:
image2.JPG
image2.JPG [ 111.79 KiB | Viewed 1098 times ]


Attachment:
image1 - Copy.JPG
image1 - Copy.JPG [ 42.02 KiB | Viewed 1098 times ]


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:49 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
Attachment:
IMG_5105.JPG
IMG_5105.JPG [ 138.04 KiB | Viewed 1097 times ]


Attachment:
image1.JPG
image1.JPG [ 125.56 KiB | Viewed 1097 times ]


Attachment:
image2.JPG
image2.JPG [ 124.39 KiB | Viewed 1097 times ]


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 6:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 7:23 am
Posts: 330
Location: Pennsylvania
Looking Good, I look forward to seeing the finished Product!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 4:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:19 am
Posts: 4397
Location: Hope, B.C Canada
Looks good so far.
I do have a question, why do you want the front narrower than the rear ?? Or am I misreading your intentions here ?? My brother and I have found that the oddy will turn better if the chassis is square -- that is the front and rear wheels at the center line are at the same width. My race car was a 70's Lola T360 chassis and at that time engineers believed in the wedge (wide back narrow front). That pig just would not turn in a slow speed corner. In the 90's they believed in a reverse wedge (wide front narrow rear). This worked much better. I am a believer in the square chassis. I feel that this is the best for high speed and handling. With the square I could control the drift at very high speeds on the race track. With the throttle I could drift the car to the edge of the track at will at speeds of 153 mph. Unfortunately that is the concept for road racing so I don't know if it is relevant to off road but that is just what I feel when I run the oddy at high speed.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:48 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
Thanks guys! :-) I am also looking forward to the finished product so I can finally get behind the wheel. The chassis is now square and that is what I was trying to accomplish. Same width, front and rear. Even with my efforts on the last build, the front tires were still wider then the rear.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:58 pm
Posts: 1977
Location: near NJ rider
Yeah man. looks good!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:52 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
canadian oddy wrote:
oddy will turn better if the chassis is square -- that is the front and rear wheels at the center line are at the same width.


After reading this again I do not believe that my setup is square as you are defining it. The center line of the front and rear wheels is not the same. If measuring between the center of the wheel, the front is wider. I measured from the tires' outer edge for the front and rear. I am not sure what is prefered for off road applications. I believe that people modify ATVs to run wider in the front.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 7:23 am
Posts: 330
Location: Pennsylvania
The oddy has inherent challenges to being nimble due to the live rear axle.. Square seems to be the way to go for most applications.. It appears that when quad front suspensions are adapted to the 350, there is an increased amount of control or perceived improvement in the control of the vehicle, due to the over compensation of the rear, by the front. I realized that the front suspension that was on my 350 wasn't necessarily poorly designed, it was the systems totality that was challenged.

Without the power to man handle the rear end...rear steer, or just plain be aggressive, one must consider what is really occurring if all else is designed and executed correctly. Just a thought..

Canadian oddy, on your race cars..would you have ever built one with a much wider front set up? You already answered the question for us, but it leaves lingering ideology for many who don't normally travel this path of thought, but it seems the statement may be relative. Most converted oddys are wider and higher in the front end. Perhaps the meaning is ... just not as wide as one normally sees..

I digress, I love to watch the builds unfold and see what fabricators are brewing....hahahah......Come on,,it's close to Halloween ..that's a maniacal laugh..


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:32 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:58 pm
Posts: 1977
Location: near NJ rider
The Briggs builts are wider in the front.

Outside to outside anyway, not sure what the CL to CL is.

I read something about weight transfer when turning.

I'm with Methodical, steer with the throttle anyway.

I think the odys end up wider in front because they do, not because they "designed" it that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 11:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:19 am
Posts: 4397
Location: Hope, B.C Canada
I guess it has a lot to do with driving style as well. My brother is a trail braker and I am not. I like to dive in real deep, brake hard and only turn in when the correct amount of speed has been scrubbed off. I am the king of late brakers. Trail braking seems unbalanced to me and not as safe as my style. Also my brother liked braking with his left foot and I did not. Our styles were totally different but I think I have to admit that I think my brother was faster in my opinion.
The Datsun championship car had a live axel (welded diff), just like the oddys. Under heavy braking coming into a corner it would step out and you came into the turn a bit sideways. It had the square chassis. I too steer the oddy with the throttle, just like the Datsun. The Lola was just plain poor at turning with that wedge shape.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 04, 2016 5:33 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
You guys brought up some good points that I had not considered. I really just didn't like the look of the front wider than the rear. It is not easy to accomplish this with the side frame setup. You would need to make your own a-arms. With the components that I am using for the build, I feel that I have got the Oddy as close to "Square" as I would like to. Time will tell how she fares. I am hoping to get more steering/turn out of this setup then an OEM setup and that should also help. I haven't driven an Oddy in years but I do remember that the steering was minimal and throttle the rest of it.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:07 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
I had some time today to work on my project. I got the upper shock mounts installed today w/long travel shocks. I can't believe the difference of the works shocks over the OEM TRX450R shocks. With no weight on the shock, I set the upper shock bolt center to provide 11" of travel. With the weight of the buggy on it, it dropped about 1 1/2". I know these shocks are pretty nice and I need to learn how to adjust them properly. Although, they feel great bouncing on it. I could have made the front higher off the ground but I think it looks good at this hight & feels good sitting in it. I'm happy with the progress so far. I took some measurements today and turns out it is actually closer to being "square" than I thought. About 1/2" wider in the front on each side. 8" wide front tires

Next up is the steering. This will also be different than my 1st build. I ordered the remaining parts that I need to finish it today so hopefully be back at it soon.

Attachment:
image1.JPG
image1.JPG [ 48.21 KiB | Viewed 932 times ]


Attachment:
image2.JPG
image2.JPG [ 39.5 KiB | Viewed 932 times ]


Attachment:
image4.JPG
image4.JPG [ 99.62 KiB | Viewed 932 times ]


Attachment:
image3.JPG
image3.JPG [ 59.05 KiB | Viewed 932 times ]


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:39 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:58 pm
Posts: 1977
Location: near NJ rider
Looks good.

Slick shock mounts!

Is there any droop left? Or are the shocks fully extended?

If you ride somewhere smooth, dirt roads, groomed track, etc., why do you want it so high? Lower the better for me.

If you'll be in big ruts, then different story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 9:44 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
Thanks! I am pretty sure that I can get more droop out of them if I make the shocks softer? I sat in the buggy, had my father jack the front of it up and down and that spot just felt right. Some of the riding I will be doing will be on dirt roads but also some old logging trails with obstacles that require clearance. Here is a vid of me (140lb), Engine & trans installed, bouncing on it, as is. Not sure if anything can be judged by it or adjustment recommendations.

https://vimeo.com/189563988

If I were to lowered it I would lose suspension travel.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2016 7:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:17 pm
Posts: 2858
Location: Wichita ks
I would look and see if your pre load can be adjusted before messing with any thing. The top of the shock have a collar and snap ring which you can most likely move up as long as you do not have any free space on the springs. Also look to see how many transitions spacers are in the spring package. you may be able to play with this and soften up the front with a shorter stack depending upon rate of the top spring in your dual rate set up.

You would also want to make sure with 11" travel your frame does not bottom out at full compression. Let all you air out of the front and rear tires with the springs removed from the shocks. If it bottoms out before travel bottoms out your be in for one heck of a ride. The last thing you would want is the front to dig in on a g-out at speed, one of two thing will happen ,you will either blow it out or end up on your back side.

This is one reason with long travel one runs so much sag. Other wise the front end is way up in the air. Another item to consider is terrain, a higher center of gravity will help clear obstructions in your path with out you rear puckering up.

Either way it still looks cool. Thanks for sharing


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:27 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
adnoh wrote:
I would look and see if your pre load can be adjusted before messing with any thing. The top of the shock have a collar and snap ring which you can most likely move up as long as you do not have any free space on the springs. Also look to see how many transitions spacers are in the spring package. you may be able to play with this and soften up the front with a shorter stack depending upon rate of the top spring in your dual rate set up.

You would also want to make sure with 11" travel your frame does not bottom out at full compression. Let all you air out of the front and rear tires with the springs removed from the shocks. If it bottoms out before travel bottoms out your be in for one heck of a ride. The last thing you would want is the front to dig in on a g-out at speed, one of two thing will happen ,you will either blow it out or end up on your back side.

This is one reason with long travel one runs so much sag. Other wise the front end is way up in the air. Another item to consider is terrain, a higher center of gravity will help clear obstructions in your path with out you rear puckering up.

Either way it still looks cool. Thanks for sharing


Thank you for the info and your reply. I did as you said and adjusted the snap ring just before the free space occurred. This did lower the front end quite a bit. Now, with just the weight of the buggy it droops 3 inches, and drops another 1.5 inches with me sitting in the buggy. 4.5 inches total. Is that enough sag/droop?

With the suspension at full droop and with the tires inflated, I have 15 inches between the ground and the sub frame. I thought that would have been enough to not bottom out?!? Is it possible to limit the shock if needed?

There were 3 transitions spacers are in the spring package.

Attachment:
shock.jpg
shock.jpg [ 31.58 KiB | Viewed 830 times ]


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:17 pm
Posts: 2858
Location: Wichita ks
check your shaft travels verses wheel travel. if by raising the preload you sag 4,5" what does that leave you for shaft in way of bump


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 5:09 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
adnoh wrote:
check your shaft travels verses wheel travel. if by raising the preload you sag 4,5" what does that leave you for shaft in way of bump


It would leave me 10.5" before a bump. In order to check the shaft travel do I need to drain the gas from the shock and completely disassemble it?

Since I have adjusted the clip ring the suspension feels softer. I can push in down a little with just my thumb. Is that normal for a long travel setup? I can't test the steering and highs speeds yet but I feel it would be a good characteristic.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 7:31 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:58 pm
Posts: 1977
Location: near NJ rider
Curtis, your not understanding what Adnoh is saying.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 7:46 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
bullnerd wrote:
Curtis, your not understanding what Adnoh is saying.


I believe that I do. The flex of the suspension is not the same as the travel of the shock itself. While the suspension is flexing up and down doesn't necessarily mean the shock is traveling that same distance. Am I wrong? I don't want to take apart these brand new shocks unless I have to. How hard Is it to do this, I haven't taken shocks apart before.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 10:49 am 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
If I were to jack the front up until I reach full droop, remove the shock, and take measurements between the upper and lower shock eye mounting holes. Would this be the same or no?

I'm going to call Works tomorrow and see if I can get some more information on the shocks. Now that I know the difference between vertical suspension travel and actual shock travel, I am not sure what these shock are actually rated for.

My problem is I purchased them second hand, but brand new in the box. The gentleman told me where they were originally purchased from and when I looked them up it stated...

"They will provide about 12" of travel with the kit."

With the kit would make me think they are revering to suspension travel, not shock travel. Regardless, I don't have the kit, mine is homemade.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 3:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:17 pm
Posts: 2858
Location: Wichita ks
Sorry for not explaining myself better. Since you adjusted your pre load via the collar which allowed your ride height to be lower it did indeed make the shocks softer. It also reduced the amount of shock shaft you have for bump. This also changed your bottom out poundage. What that means when the suspension goes into bump or compresses the spring poundage is less. Basically your spring rate from cross over has changed for a given amount of shaft available. Not a real big deal as the car may bottom easier that all.

Here is a pic of the shaft. and what to measure.
With the shaft length and the wheel movement allowed by the shaft you get an lever ratio. Wheel moves 12" with a six inch shaft its a 2 to 1. wheel moves 6 inches and the shaft is 6" than a 1 to 1. if you eye to eye is 22" with a six inch shaft the compressed eye to eye would be 22-6=16.

Now you can remove the shock set the wheel at 22" eye to eye on the shock mounts than raise the wheel until the eye to eye is 16. then take the vertical wheel movement number and divide it by the shafts length. Now we have a lever ratio to work with.

See when you raise that ring at the top of the shock which takes away preload poundage. the shaft will be at a shorter distance to bottom than before. This also changes the way the tender (top) spring bottoms out against those rings and goes on the Main spring. we call tis transition to the main. If you combined rate of the two springs are 100 lbs and the main spring is a 200 then the this leaves you with less bottom out poundage. Ill write you something up and post. no big deal. I was just wanting to make sure you did not soften it up too much. It can be simple fix just by adding additional spacers on the tender so it crosses over to the main sooner. Since you have no valve adjustments like low speed compression.


Attachments:
8 inch travle pilot front with works 001 - Copy.jpg
8 inch travle pilot front with works 001 - Copy.jpg [ 76.43 KiB | Viewed 783 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 3:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:17 pm
Posts: 2858
Location: Wichita ks
Sorry for not explaining myself better. Since you adjusted your pre load via the collar which allowed your ride height to be lower it did indeed make the shocks softer. It also reduced the amount of shock shaft you have for bump. This also changed your bottom out poundage. What that means when the suspension goes into bump or compresses the spring poundage is less. Basically your spring rate from cross over has changed for a given amount of shaft available. Not a real big deal as the car may bottom easier that all.

Here is a pic of the shaft. and what to measure.
With the shaft length and the wheel movement allowed by the shaft you get an lever ratio. Wheel moves 12" with a six inch shaft its a 2 to 1. wheel moves 6 inches and the shaft is 6" than a 1 to 1. if you eye to eye is 22" with a six inch shaft the compressed eye to eye would be 22-6=16.

Now you can remove the shock set the wheel at 22" eye to eye on the shock mounts than raise the wheel until the eye to eye is 16. then take the vertical wheel movement number and divide it by the shafts length. Now we have a lever ratio to work with.

See when you raise that ring at the top of the shock which takes away preload poundage. the shaft will be at a shorter distance to bottom than before. This also changes the way the tender (top) spring bottoms out against those rings and goes on the Main spring. we call tis transition to the main. If you combined rate of the two springs are 100 lbs and the main spring is a 200 then the this leaves you with less bottom out poundage. Ill write you something up and post. no big deal. I was just wanting to make sure you did not soften it up too much. It can be simple fix just by adding additional spacers on the tender so it crosses over to the main sooner. Since you have no valve adjustments like low speed compression.


Attachments:
8 inch travle pilot front with works 001 - Copy.jpg
8 inch travle pilot front with works 001 - Copy.jpg [ 76.43 KiB | Viewed 783 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:15 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 6:33 pm
Posts: 256
Location: Rhode Island
Thank you for further explaining this to me. Suspension is a bit new to me but I am starting to understand it better. I appreciate anything you are willing to share. The shocks come apart so easy! :-) Does the black cone bushing in the shock travel measurement actually compress?

Measuerments
eye to eye: 18.25"
shock travel: 6.5"
Wheel moves vertically: 12"

That means my lever ratio is: 1.85?

Attachment:
IMG_5374.PNG
IMG_5374.PNG [ 385.41 KiB | Viewed 775 times ]


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Registered users: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], bullnerd, Challenger 250, chamagol, CurtisR401, DC, dipnadactyl, DMoneyAllstar, Duneit, FloridaEdd, GAPILOT, go oddy, Google [Bot], jknarfal, mforbes, Q, Randman, rarerat, rmesser, RoboRex2005, Superlite_Don, Yahoo [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group