Register now to get rid of these ads!

4 link question

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by kid berzerker, Feb 24, 2007.

  1. kid berzerker
    Joined: May 13, 2006
    Posts: 110

    kid berzerker
    Member

    i just bought a parallel 4 link set-up....i was wondering if i should have got a tri-4 link. Which is better? is the tri-link better because you don't have to use a panhard bar? does the panhard bar create clearance problems? let me know if i should take back the parallel set-up and trade it for the tri-link. If there aren't any "serious" issues regarding the one i have then i'll keep it.



    p.s. my truck's frame will sit on the ground when the bags are deflated....panhard problems?
     
  2. Rob Paul
    Joined: Nov 11, 2005
    Posts: 1,272

    Rob Paul
    Member

    Theres no downsided to running a parallel 4-link setup. With a normal ammount of suspension travel a panhard bar should not create any problems. It might help if you describe what you are building (coilovers, bags, spring) and your desired ride height and chassis modifications. Try the search function too. LOTS of good info like this has been discussed already. ROB
     
  3. kid berzerker
    Joined: May 13, 2006
    Posts: 110

    kid berzerker
    Member

    I'll continue to search the HAMB...but if anyone could give me a quick answer that'd be great.....ROB, thanks....the only thing bugging me now is the fact that i want the frame on the ground.....like stated before...panhard problems?
     
  4. The triangulated four bar is a clean install but may pose an issue for routing exhaust - that is if you dont' have open/baffled headers. You can use coil-over, buggy spring or bags to hold her up.
     

  5. jusjunk
    Joined: Dec 3, 2004
    Posts: 3,138

    jusjunk
    BANNED
    from Michigan

    Its a toss up but if you want it on the ground you shoulda got a triangulated 4 link setup. But,,, we dont know what your working on do we??
    Dave
     
  6. Candy-Man
    Joined: Mar 21, 2006
    Posts: 1,715

    Candy-Man
    Member

    If you are not going to make serious horsepower, I would use the tri-link. However; where are you going to route your exhaust and as others have asked, what are you building first?
     
  7. kid berzerker
    Joined: May 13, 2006
    Posts: 110

    kid berzerker
    Member

    sorry everybody....i'm building a '64 ford F100. it has a z'd camaro clip and a "monster" notch in the rear. I'm only bagging the rear. due to the notch, the frame is roughly 8" off the ground...this will be ride height. This is my first time bagging/4-linking anything so i was kinda nervous about panhard clearance. i was thinking that it might hit the driveshaft but a buddy just informed me that the panhard gets placed behind the axle.....if this is so, i feel pretty stupid.
     
  8. FiddyFour
    Joined: Dec 31, 2004
    Posts: 9,024

    FiddyFour
    Member

    if you are worried about the panhard, go with a watts link centering device. . . i built one for my PU and it kicks ass... straight up and straight down... lot more work and fabrication than a panhard, but IMO they look hella more cool in the end
     
  9. Rob Paul
    Joined: Nov 11, 2005
    Posts: 1,272

    Rob Paul
    Member

    Ok. If you get your 4-link kit to install without clearance problems your panhard should be a snap. You can mount it from your frame rail to the center of your pumpkin, or across to the other axle tube. You can mount it either in front or to the rear of the centerline of the axle. At your desired ride height mount the bar parallel to the ground. When you air down the panhard bar will be at an angle, and might have clerance issues. You should be able to fab up some brackets to get it in a place where it has complete range of motion through your whole suspension travel. ROB
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.