Check the prices of these for comparison.

http://www.hyperracing.com/pages/produc ... gory=14305

What else could be used besides heims? Ball joints? Machine a taper into the housing and put a balljoint sideways? That would be cheap and tough.

Never mind, that would kill the front mounts for the trailing links.....carry on.

2 rod ends + 2 bungs + 2 jam nuts + 1 tube + 4 spacers PER LINK all x 10 links.

I did consider swedge bars, but haven't priced them up to compare.

Your bringing me down man!

Think positive....and cheap!

For mild steel parts for 1-side, the 5-link hardware is $135.96 shipped.
For chromoly parts for 1-side, the 5-link hardware is $219.13 shipped.

Prices are from QS Components (Muncie, IN). Rod ends, jams, bungs, cone spacers, and tubing. Doesn't include the Polaris driveline stuff, custom carrier bracket for trailing links, or tabs/bulkheads.


Hardware + swedge tubes from Hyper Racing....the cost per side drops barely to $135.06. However...swedge tubes would eliminate the need for cutting/welding/painting link rods, look "fast" and would be off-the-shelf parts. I like it.

That's not bad, How much are stock 350 axles going for?

I like the off the shelf-ability too. Easy to carry spares and easy to replace.

I can tell you the aluminum radius rods are tougher than most think also.

How about some pics of your bracket models?

I figure I can always sell the pair of axles, carriers, fuel tank, etc that came off this rig to recoup costs. $250-$300 for a pair of good original axles and maybe another $100 for the rest. It'll work out.

Got my hub machining in the lathe queue, but its behind some "real work".

I'll have to snap some JPEGs of the trailing link brackets sometime today. Busy day as I was out all day yesterday with Montezuma's Revenge thanks to either Jimmy Johns or McDonalds, lol. I did get to stay home and watch some PIR though!

Also...now that my morning boring conference call is over...I did manage to set the Polaris driveline next to the buggy for a comparison this morning. Honestly, the width isn't really going to be all that much more than the stock Oddy. All thanks to the offset of the stock wheel required to clear the stock trailing arm & shock. The Polaris carrier will allow the Polaris wheel to sit more inboard, hence absorbing some of the width in the longer axle + adapter. I just need to be careful my 2 forward links and the bracket don't ax the wheel clearance. The stock Oddy wastes a lot of width on both the long 2-bearing carrier as well as the lop-side wheel offset with fatty tire.

More thoughts...

Looking at what Arctic Cat did on the Wildcat 1000 to manage rear width and shock travel, they used front links that curve out at the rear, and, they mounted the shock in front of the tire and on the lower link.

Notice no rod ends, just bushings and tubing. But that might be a cost-play on their part (not sure why they'd care about $300 of hardware with the heartbeat-skipping price-tag that's on these factory rigs!). Even the front link mounts are bushings. It 100% limits the adjustability.

They also have 2 upper inner links and 1 lower, which is opposite than some of the others I've seen/shown.

Lastly, someone came up with the curved rear/lower link to prevent "trail-snag".

More pics from the ACWC1k...

And more on the radius arms and conversion to rod ends...http://www.wildcatforums.net/forum/wildcat-general-discussion/2148-high-lifter-rear-raduis-arms-5.html These UTV guys care WAAAAAAAY too much about "matching paint color" and suffering "paint scrapes", lol!!

And one more thing I found in my morning slack-off web browsing...I could buy a complete rear a-arm setup off an arctic cat atv with spec 10" travel (+4.1" over stock Oddy) including arms, bushings, and knuckles for $120 total. That's LESS than ONE SIDE of 5-link hardware! Insane. But I already knew the big con to 5-link is cost. ATV axles are $70 each + $25 each hubs...BUT...no outboard brakes. Still, with a little bit of fab work & proper setup you could pretty easily jump your rear travel +70% for ballpark $300. Sell your rear stock parts and you could even break-even.

Back to the deep-dive on the Wildcat rear setup...
The 2 front trailing links connect at the knuckle via big hex nuts and ride on bearings. Simply not an option with the Polaris knuckles.

The lower front pivots are pretty cool.
The rear radius rods would probably work, but like you said no adjustment.
They sure are trying hard to make it complicated.

Just dumping some pics for you, Maybe you can get some ideas from them.

You can see the angle of the trailing links in the tops view, pretty low angle, shouldn't be a problem with a straight bracket....maybe.

Finally...had to get home to my external drive to get my model pulled up. Here is the first idea.

Second idea's model is failing b/c I changed a bunch of crap, but its similar with a solid plate (big hole in middle for axle) across the back of knuckle with an upper & lower tab making all 4 corners of the knuckle connected. Just an idea to spread the loads across the knuckle & steel more evenly and not isolate one corner of the carrier. And then a 3rd version is like V2 but with a shick mount on top of the carrier.

No cone spacers on the front links, no bolts, no jams. And front link rod ends aren't angle back towards the chassis like they would be (too lazy to setup the angle datum and axis).

Would be neat to find a longer swedge tube for the that rear/lower link to where it could be bent on my bender into a radius arm to gain clearance.

On with the CAD porn...which is DISCLAIMER: all theoretical, virtual. Nothing is complete & final whatsoever. None of this is worth anything unless the axle adapter is a success. lol

Thanks for the detailed pics of that carrier!

I think the Polaris knuckle still has favorable wheel spacing even if I were to just bolt a bracket on like my original model. The heim and spacers would easily handle that shallow of an angle with the bracket perpendicular to the carrier, but angling the bracket back isn't difficult. My first attempt was with a piece of rectangular tubing hacked into a bracket.

The 2nd idea with the solid plate backside...I'll try to sketch it up today...would allow me to push the 2 front links further inboard plus angle them in, all while spreading out the force to all 4 corners. It'd kinda be a halfway point between using the knuckle and straight up rehashing the whole knuckle.

Fun stuff!

I need to measure up potential landing zone for the front link chassis mounts. Need to make sure there won't be any issues with the axle arc. Axle will swing on an arc with the hub slightly behind the output shaft to absorb bumps a little more naturally (axle rake?). So as the suspension bumps, it cycles up and slightly back.

No Problem, I'll take some more of other parts that may help.

Not a fan of the single lower link, just doesnt look right to me. Also, Id rather have that upper link rod end mounted as close to the carrier as possible, being that it carries the shock.

My lower front links are the same aluminum tube as the other three.

Great job on the models so far.

Cad modeling is the EASY part! lol

Gonna' be -8F here on Sunday with wind chills to -30F. So about the only thing I can do for this project is cad stuff.


I made some JPEGs of the other model I was talking about...backplate idea...which is bulkier but I like it better and it actually does have two links on the bottom. Won't be able to upload them off the thumb drive until closer to lunch (EST).

Use this one for the lower front? 3/16", plenty strong and cheap and you don't have to make it.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... DsQMygNMA0

Use something similar to this for the the upper front, but machine a stub on the housing side that presses into the housing to take the load?

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... C8QMygTMBM

Done!

BTW...how do I load pics from my Iphone? I tried it and it didn't work. Im not too good with this stuff.

Here is one of the overkill designs I did. You can get REALLY out of hand in the virtual world. Still, this is nothing but a plasma-cut puzzle welded together. If the measurements are close enough, it doesn't take much to send a blob of DXF files to get cnc'd.

Buuuuut this is also where I peaked on Mt. Dew and decided I needed to revisit the drawing board and simplify. For instance, the two front tabs could easily be an off-the-shelf part.

It was modeled in 1/8" plate, which is too light IMO, and a simpler version in 3/16" would prob do. This assembly is ~5.0in3 of material volume and weighs 1.5# (0.284 #/in3 mild steel), not including a bazillion welds.

Fun to spill the brain onto the canvas, spin it around, take a gander, and process in cad.

I like it

Man your so close to a whole new upright! A couple more tabs and bolt on a unit bearing...

I like to keep things as simple as possible.

1/8"...go look at the upright pics I posted..its like .030 in some spots....but with weld washers.



Hmmmm...one upper rear link...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2006-Polaris-Ou ... f8&vxp=mtr

Those outlaw IRS and also TRX 700 IRS arms are not exactly common on the market...nor cheap really

After a half dozen or so buildouts, I'm guessing the market would be pretty bare for those parts and then it would be a bunch of people waiting

Agreed. I like the easy-simple links.

Don't think the machinst got around to my hub this week. Hopefully next week.

I cant find any double shear tabs that would be tall enough for both a bolt head and clear the rod end head.

I did notice the pics of that 5-link carrier is fairly thin. I started with 1/8" because it's commonplace...even Lowe's carries it! The sections taking the abuse are washered and gussetted on my rev2.

Shoot! I didn't think of the bolt head on the stock bracket, good call.

Can I request a model version?

Can you modify the last model to just show the links , without your bracket and with the links aligned with the upper and lower pivot bolts in the carrier? Just for a visual. If not , no problem.

D$, looking at the Wildcat rear sus:

Those big bearings (# 47 in the parts phish) are rod ends – they allow angle change as well as rotation.
If you think about it, the knuckle moves in and out with suspension stroke so the relative angle of the trailing link to the knuckle will be changing.
The link ends are rod ends also (#13 and 42 in the parts phish), but there advantage is they have really good protection from the elements, rubber boots.
Traditional rod ends tend to be high wear items.
I don’t see a need for adjustability.
It is unlikely this buggy will be used for racing where the set up needs to be tuned for the track.
That type of Odyssey racing just doesn’t happen anymore.
If it’s “just because” that’s fine (your $) but a urethane bushing is cheaper and low maintenance.

Also on the Wildcat, the front of the trailing links are on a U-joint to keep the links from rotating from the effect of the bend and the shock mounted to one side.
I don’t prefer the shock mounted in the middle of the link if it can be avoided.
The bump stop is when the shock bottoms out and there is a big bending load fed in to the link.
There is also a huge load fed in to the frame, this is easily missed be sure to do a free body diagram before you finalize this direction.
If you get that calculation wrong (and there will always be a bigger air than what the designer thinks is reasonable) then bad things happen.
I like the idea of the shock mounted to the knuckle but this has a longer shock travel (more $).

One of the things I don’t like about the 5-link suspension is the track change with large wheel stroke.
When you get one airborne the track width is noticeably narrower and you’re not always landing flat, having as much track with as possible when you land has it’s an advantage.
The advantage of the 5-link is lots of suspension travel without funky toe change.
The Wildcat has more travel than the RZR of the same design vintage.
The RZR1000 has 18” but the trailing link pivot is in front of the driver’s back-side.
That link is huge long to pull that off (and there is all that stuff about the loading).
To maximize the suspension travel on a FL350 frame the 5-link will be more compact.
Still, do you need all that travel or just want it? (hey it’s your build so make your decision and go for it).

I went out in to the barn and dug out some parts for show and tell.
The suspension is off a Daryl Smith Sand Car SCORE class 44 buggy.
They had 12” of rear travel as I recall.
The drive shaft is out of a water cooled VW product, the shaft is hollow.
VW used the hollow shaft on one side, the plan was to use the hollow shaft on both sides to reduce the weight.
I don’t think Daryl made any cars that way but he sure thought about it, and passed the idea on to me (or let it slip).
This is just another idea to think about.
The bearing carrier is simple, a machined tube with snap ring grooves at both ends and some pipes welded on.
You can see these have been raced and modified, the wheel size was increased and a brace added.
Also the hubs have a ring welded on and a second set of studs to take a VW bolt pattern.

The carriers that Bullnerd is showing are nice and light.
I would love to know more about them, what about the links?
I think that type of carrier would take a little more effort to fabricate.
They have a semi outboard CV set up.
Good for increasing the drive shaft length and maximizing the CV joint angles.

Thanks for the info, Lee!

And yes, this definitely a "just because" type of build. I tend to over-complicate things and then go simpler & more affordable; make sure it makes sense in my head, cover all the bases, weigh out the pros/cons, etc. My shop time is limited so i spend a lot of time thinking it through.

But this is just for my Rotax buggy project. I just want it to "be all that it can be" before my wife gets fed-up and makes me sell some toys, LOL!


I don't see too much issue with a shock mounted center on the upper link, so as long as the link and the mounts are stout enough. Mounting to the side will only create torque on the link mounts. Briggs cars made it work.


That orange SCORE car looks like it prob floats across the dessert. Its nice to see another version of the same animal, so much thanks for sharing. Looks very simple and was actually proven on real terrain. That front shock angle looks funky though.

I get the wear issue with urethane bushings vs. rod ends. To be honest, I wish that I could tell you I was going to ride it enough to actually wear ANYTHING! haahahaaaa...ha...ha...boohooohooooo.

Think I'm done with the cad-playground for a bit. Need to get the axle stuff done. Once I can attach the axle and can hang the knuckle/hub, I'll really get a clear look at the next step.