Rear airbag mount on trailing arms (not stock location)

[shortbed70]

I thought about mounting the bags further forward and welding a cross brace on top of the trailing arms so it triangulates the rear without using a panard bar and getting more lift than mounting in stock location.

[smokekiki]

Originally Posted by shortbed70

I thought about mounting the bags further forward and welding a cross brace on top of the trailing arms so it triangulates the rear without using a panard bar and getting more lift than mounting in stock location.

I don't think that would work very well.It would still let the rear move side to side on the bushings.It would not keep the rear centered.

[XXL]

Originally Posted by shortbed70

I thought about mounting the bags further forward and welding a cross brace on top of the trailing arms so it triangulates the rear without using a panard bar and getting more lift than mounting in stock location.

You'd lose the "in" in independent rear suspension by doing that. They each get to move up on their own, which twists the rearend a bit, but without it, every bump on the left side would also affect the right side and/or you'd rip your welds, etc., apart.

[shortbed70]

I dont understand how it's independent suspension when its a solid rear axle. Corvettes and jags are independent rears. Its hard for me to explain how I would do it without drawing a picture. Just want to clarify not trying to start an argument. OK. Thank you Troy. Even if I kept the track bar I think it could be done without problems with driveshaft clearence or just use a mount that goes on the outside of the frame and mounts to the trailing arms. Just a thought.

[XXL]

Originally Posted by shortbed70

I dont understand how it's independent suspension when its a solid rear axle. Corvettes and jags are independent rears.

I was simplifying things a bit... true, a solid axle is not independent in the way that Corvette and Jag IRS units are. However, try this exercise-- slide a floor jack under the left side of the rearend and raise it 12" or so. Note that the right side of the rearend has NOT risen the same 12" (possibly not at all). What you will see is that the rearend is no longer horizontal, however. That's because the two sides have some "location independence" as a result of the independent swingarm movement. If you tie the two swingarms together, you will lost that independence. I recommend a good suspension tutorial to anyone who is planning on experimenting with these kinds of changes. Vehicle suspension is non-trivial, and you don't want to get into a dangerous situation with it.

[shortbed70]

I agree with that but that does not mean that the trailing arms are twisting does it. If the rear end is firmly bolted in place its not going to move and you still have that movement so why would it matter if you had a mount further forward? Wouldn't boxing the frames be the same? Your incressing ragidity to the assembly.

[XXL]

Originally Posted by shortbed70

I agree with that but that does not mean that the trailing arms are twisting does it.

In fact, they are. If you eliminated the rubber bushings on the pivot point, and replaced with "no give" steel points, you'd tear something.

[shortbed70]

OK it can't be done my way...

[1FaastC10]

Originally Posted by XXL

You'd lose the "in" in independent rear suspension by doing that. They each get to move up on their own, which twists the rearend a bit, but without it, every bump on the left side would also affect the right side and/or you'd rip your welds, etc., apart.

the axle bolted to both trailing arms kills the "in" in independent suspension. agreed though, a bridge between the two would cause the suspension to lose travel. would just ride like crap.

[1low1967]

I bagged my 67 in the rear. I built my own mounts and bridge. I also flipped the trailing arm brackets upside down for better pinion angle. I'll post some pics soon but i get About 26 ins of lift with the front down. And it will lay frame on 20s with a 275/45. i'll post some pics as soon as i get home.