[firehawk]

I was bored this evening and was checking things out on my front end when I began looking at the disco's. Question I have with the TeraFlex setup is, they pivot on the top where they connect to the swaybar. When the suspension pushes up dosen't the pivot swivel downwards? Dosen't that reduce the amount of upward pressure to the swaybar? In effect won't that cause unnecessary body roll since it is NOT putting the pressure on the swaybar like a stock straight link would?

Would it be possible to cut the upper pivot off, and weld a piece with a threaded stud onto the disco so it would act like a stock link? Wouldn't that reduce body roll? Would it work?

 

[xjjeepthing]

You must be bored, LOL. But good question.

 

[muddeprived]

These?

I don't see the flaw. The upper part is the stud conversion bracket which eliminates the stock stud style mounting, which limits flexability of the sway bar link. When you flex, the SCB (stud conversion bracket) as i call it, allows the link to move forward and back as it flexes, which doesn't place any strain on the bushing. The stock stud style links use the bushing to flex, which results in bushing wear and bind. When i removed my stock tj sway bar links, the bushing was so trashed on one side because of the link movement when flexing.

I run warrior products sway bar conversion kit:

http://www.tellico4x4.com/product_info.php/products_id/23313

It's pretty much the same as Teraflex's but non-disconnect. It works great and reduces sway just like the stock one did.

Forgive me if you have a different style link or i'm not making sense

 

[firehawk]

Yes those. When the upper mount pivots it isn't applying pressure to the swaybar it allow some body roll?

 

[xjjeepthing]

Maybe Kim, but not sure its enough to make a difference. I'm running the Warrior links that Mudd is running except I removed the stock lower stud and use a clevis pin from TSC and made them disconnects. I have driven with the fronts disconnected and there is a big difference.

 

[Jeepin Jason]

Yes those. When the upper mount pivots it isn't applying pressure to the swaybar it allow some body roll?

How is it going to pivot without applying pressure to the swaybar? Like I said over on JF, the lower mount is already an eyelet, so having the upper mount as an eyelet too doesn't make any difference. None of the links can move independently of each other unless you unbolt or disconnect something.

The only time the swaybar should come into play is when the axle is trying to rotate relative to the body. This means that one side is pushing up on the swaybar, the other side is pulling down. It doesn't matter how the endlinks are connected to the swaybar (stud or eyelet), the forces are still the same, only now the endlinks won't be binding on the studs.

 

[cosxjfan]

I have the JKS set up, and they are built the same way as the top photo. They work fine when hooked up, meaning that they prevent body roll. All the anti-sway bar does is apply the same pressure to one end of the axle that is being applied to the other end. Meaning they try to push the other side up if it gets pushed up on one side and vise-versa. This keeps BR to a minimum. HTH!!

 

[kmanxj5050]

yeah i have JKS too and im assuming it is not like stock, but you can tell i ginormous difference with it hooked up and i hav ehad no problems with the set up

 

[2drx4]

I have the JKS set up, and they are built the same way as the top photo. They work fine when hooked up, meaning that they prevent body roll. All the anti-sway bar does is apply the same pressure to one end of the axle that is being applied to the other end. Meaning they try to push the other side up if it gets pushed up on one side and vise-versa. This keeps BR to a minimum. HTH!!

Uh, you could describe it that way, or you could say it increases the independent spring rate... The sway bar is a torsion bar, it twists. The material and diameter of the bar gives it a torsional rate, and factoring in the lever arm on it a guy can figure out his independent spring rate. Not that anybody should care, since it's there for feel. From the factory the XJ ran relatively light coils (I believe them to be in the 130lbs/in mark), and a heavy enough swaybar to keep body roll relatively under control. Which gives a comfy ride, and only a little 'oh-shit' feeling in the corners. Of course, you have to realize that body roll control and roll over control are two totally different things in a live axle application. Read; thicker sway bar ain't gonna stop you from rolling.

 

[cosxjfan]

Uh, you could describe it that way, or you could say it increases the independent spring rate... The sway bar is a torsion bar, it twists. The material and diameter of the bar gives it a torsional rate, and factoring in the lever arm on it a guy can figure out his independent spring rate. Not that anybody should care, since it's there for feel. From the factory the XJ ran relatively light coils (I believe them to be in the 130lbs/in mark), and a heavy enough swaybar to keep body roll relatively under control. Which gives a comfy ride, and only a little 'oh-shit' feeling in the corners. Of course, you have to realize that body roll control and roll over control are two totally different things in a live axle application. Read; thicker sway bar ain't gonna stop you from rolling.

:agree:

 

[firehawk]

After rethinking my original idea, I now see it was wrong.:brickwall: The stud in the upper pivot mount will keep the mount from pivoting when the suspension pushes up on the swaybar. Uhhh... except when you bend the stud like I did awhile back. I found out you cannot flex the suspension too far while the disco's are hooked up.

Appreciate all the input.:cheers: