air over leaf or 2-link?

[cochino12]

I'm not concerned with laying frame, just want to be able to get the rear level or close to the front (lays crossmember) when aired out and I also want to be able to haul an open car trailer occasionally. Can I run a 2-link or aol without getting axle hop/wrap? This truck has mild 454 with roughly 425 hp/500 torque.

So, can I get away with running either of these setups or do I NEED to save some more $ for a 4-link? thanks for any input

[davidfre21]

You sound like you want it all lol. A 2link with bag over axle should work pretty good for towing and getting low. It's the setup I'm planning on my Jimmy. The hp I'm not so sure about though, but if you don't beat on it i don't see why not. The main reasons of the 4 link vs 2 is the triangulation will keep your rear end centered and it allows the suspension to travel without pinion angle change.
Posted via Mobile Device

[cochino12]

Originally Posted by davidfre21

You sound like you want it all lol. A 2link with bag over axle should work pretty good for towing and getting low. It's the setup I'm planning on my Jimmy. The hp I'm not so sure about though, but if you don't beat on it i don't see why not. The main reasons of the 4 link vs 2 is the triangulation will keep your rear end centered and it allows the suspension to travel without pinion angle change.
Posted via Mobile Device

yep I want it all AND cheap I don't mind the rear moving a little since I wont be running too large of a wheel setup. I'm not sure what size the bars are on the ekstensive kit, I'll have to call and find out.

[andrewmp6]

Have you looked at porterbuilts trailing arm kit or ridetech?

[lolife99]

4-link would be my choice.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by cochino12

I'm not concerned with laying frame, just want to be able to get the rear level or close to the front (lays crossmember) when aired out and I also want to be able to haul an open car trailer occasionally. Can I run a 2-link or aol without getting axle hop/wrap? This truck has mild 454 with roughly 425 hp/500 torque.

So, can I get away with running either of these setups or do I NEED to save some more $ for a 4-link? thanks for any input

Nobody asked.... C10 or what?

[cochino12]

Originally Posted by andrewmp6

Have you looked at porterbuilts trailing arm kit or ridetech?

Originally Posted by lolife99

4-link would be my choice.

I was leaning toward the dropmember but I read some reviews on the ekstensive 2-link and it seemed like a cheaper option that should do everything I need it to. I wasn't real sure of the strength of the bars, wheel hop...

Originally Posted by SCOTI

Nobody asked.... C10 or what?

'84 CCSB converted to 1/2 ton

[lolife99]

Originally Posted by cochino12

I was leaning toward the dropmember but I read some reviews on the ekstensive 2-link and it seemed like a cheaper option that should do everything I need it to. I wasn't real sure of the strength of the bars, wheel hop...

'84 CCSB converted to 1/2 ton

There is a tone of articulation concerns with a 2-link, that have been argued back and forth since bags have been around.
Get a KP componets 4-link (not 6-link), with a simple panhard bar,... and add your bags where you want them.

Are you running a small c-notch or a step notch?

[blazer2007]

If it,s for your blazer no one makes one,not a bolt in type.If you find one I will buy one too

[cochino12]

Originally Posted by blazer2007

If it,s for your blazer no one makes one,not a bolt in type.If you find one I will buy one too

not for a blazer, Nate did make me one for that blazer that was bolt it but I don't think he does that anymore.

[Rochlow]

I used a 2-link with a watts link in my 97 for years. 0 problems. Never trailered. It's still being used in the truck with no note problems

I know it's not the best design. However, i know of a few trucks that ran these with no issues.
Posted via Mobile Device

[PBFAB.COM]

The main concerns with the shorter 2-link are the amount of pinion angle change and plunge of the suspension through its travel... along with some performance and handling drawbacks when compared to other designs. There are pros and cons to EVERY design available. There are better options available... but they are also more expensive.

If you decide to go with a standard 2-link, the one recommendation I would make is to not run the bag on the bar, but mount a sleeved bag over the axle. This will give you a better set-up for driving and the occasional tow.

Nate

[cochino12]

Originally Posted by Porterbuilt Street Rods

If you decide to go with a standard 2-link, the one recommendation I would make is to not run the bag on the bar, but mount a sleeved bag over the axle. This will give you a better set-up for driving and the occasional tow.

Nate

Thanks for the advice Nate I think I will do that. I assume you guys decided not to release the 2 link you were contemplating?
Posted via Mobile Device

[davidfre21]

Aren't the trailing arm setups glorified 2links anyways? I haven't paid much attention to them sense mine isn't TA, but just laying it in my head. They seem about the same.
Posted via Mobile Device

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by davidfre21

Aren't the trailing arm setups glorified 2links anyways? I haven't paid much attention to them sense mine isn't TA, but just laying it in my head. They seem about the same.
Posted via Mobile Device

Yes & no....

The T/A set-ups are more than twice as long (51" on center), utilize I-beam construction (to allow some flex/twist), & are not parallel w/the frame (triangulated = more articulation). Those 3 factors make a big difference vs the low-cost aftermarket 2-link set-ups.

[davidfre21]

My guess the I beam design was more about strength than twist. I can picture the triangulation in it though. And a two link bar can be any length
Posted via Mobile Device

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by davidfre21

My guess the I beam design was more about strength than twist. I can picture the triangulation in it though. And a two link bar can be any length
Posted via Mobile Device

The I-beam most likely was for strength, flexibility..... & production costs.

And you're right... a 2-link can be any length. But, just like w/a Panhard bar, the longer the length of the bar the better the results. The factory front leaf mount that most people opt to use w/the common aftermarket 2-link set-ups yields less than 25" from C/L of the front mounting pivot to the rear axle C/L. The shorter length means alot more pinion change through the range of normal travel. I measured pinion change vs travel when I looked into doing this on my 74. It was something like over 6° of change w/4" of travel.

[cochino12]

Thanks for all the help guys. Nobody has mentioned anything about wheel hop/traction issues, any input there? has anyone actually bent a bar?

Originally Posted by SCOTI

I measured pinion change vs travel when I looked into doing this on my 74. It was something like over 6° of change w/4" of travel.

This may be a dumb question but if the pinion is set at ride height does the amount of change really matter? Assuming the truck is always driven at the set ride height.

[SCOTI]

Originally Posted by cochino12

This may be a dumb question but if the pinion is set at ride height does the amount of change really matter? Assuming the truck is always driven at the set ride height.

Originally Posted by davidfre21

If set at ride height and drove at ride height then there shouldn't be any issue.

This is what I thought as well. After reading about the amount of change, I tested it myself over the 4" of travel I previously mentioned. Using a digital angle finder & benchtop vise to measure during travel (2" up/compression from ride height & 2" down/extension) = less than 3° w/the OE truck arm length & >6° w/the shorter 25" bar.

[cochino12]

Originally Posted by SCOTI

This is what I thought as well. After reading about the amount of change, I tested it myself over the 4" of travel I previously mentioned. Using a digital angle finder & benchtop vise to measure during travel (2" up/compression from ride height & 2" down/extension) = less than 3° w/the OE truck arm length & >6° w/the shorter 25" bar.

Which translates to premature ujoint wear? And any other issues?

Overall Im ok with the negatives of the 2 link when compared to the pricing of a bolt on type 4 link. As long as it will hande the power of the big block.

Thanks for all the help
Posted via Mobile Device

[davidfre21]

If set at ride height and drove at ride height then there shouldn't be any issue.
Posted via Mobile Device

[tinydb84]

I'm not going with a 2-link but I have a long bed with a two peice drive shaft. I figure if you can mount the front of the bars in line with the middle U joint then it wouldnt be as much a problem right? Just a though/wondering