Long Travel BS Thread

1/8 with 14-15” of travel isn’t going to translate it anything on road that's concerning - I think irrc 1/4 is acceptable for desert and this conversation about bumpsteer feels like deja vu...

…not that there’s any reason to not try to remove any if you’re building a kit or moving things around.

Be happy you don't have rear steer - no 4wd swingsteer for 1st gens for that reason.

 

its been done for first gens just no commercial kits, I would argue the oem rack is just good enough there isn’t a huge need for someone to make a kit.

There is another guy I know of working on a swingset type steering with a box controlling a DE ram right now too.

 

Getting into some nitty gritty stuff for really getting my J-arm kit to be top notch in the geometry department.

Coming to the realization that almost all race trucks run some form of antidive in their systems. And really, it makes a lot of sense. But what I want to know, is why do people seek to eliminate it? Is it because someone made a kit to eliminate it, claiming it’s bad? Or something else?

Running some anti dive does allow for truly zero bump steer as the outer tie rod pivot allows for some angle change through travel along with many other benefits.

I’m just confused where everybody gets the “anti dive sucks” mentality?

 

Guessing you know this…It’s a cornering and handling concern, when the front end dives under braking the ass end gets light and breaks traction and then when you accelerate after the turn there is an exaggerated shift of that weight to the back end. So during cornering the dive and rebound weight shift creates unstable handling in the corner. There are a million variables but you have to look at the entire vehicle to try to create a balanced platform hence anti dive. So, yeah i’ve also never understood why anti dive is always referred to as a bad thing ?

I think the poor mans way of controlling dive is a stiffer spring rate but that is counter productive in off road applications so it is scrutinized a lot more in suspension design. In my old school scca experience for 99% of the people it was a suspension tuning item not a suspension design issue.

 

STOP IT Cory! I just looked at that post and pics and immediately looked for my wallet.....Im too old for heart jolts like that.....

 

Isnt antidive even incorporated into solid axle rigs for the big bouncer comps? I think Ive seen it in the spreadsheets when guys are designing the suspension on a new chassis.
Also a good source of some info could possibly be the forums for SCCA racing and auto cross. I dabbled in that back with my 92 Camaro way way back. Was fun as hell and I remember always fighting nose dive on braking. As Evenflow said. To much nose dive causes bad weight shift on acceleration and bad stuff happens then.

 

It blows my mind how many products exist that people buy to make their vehicle WORSE. I still have lots to learn in this world, and I’ve been doing this stuff for over 15 years starting in the go fast handling car world. But I can’t for the life of me find the pros of doing some of this stuff.

When the whole bump steer discussion was going on, it didn’t even cross my mind that people never took antidive into the equation of having zero. I’ve always been of the opinion anti dive is all pro’s with really no cons aside from some caster change bringing the tire rearward. Maybe that’s why people delete it?

 

Where’s the front diff and cv’s… lol I’ve seen a lot of swing steer on dr of prerunners / 2wd tundras but no 4wd. Am I completely wrong and there’s a diff?

When I was redoing the mounts for my upper arms I had seen my friend's race kit




and another 1G prerunner that had been the best performing leaf sprung 1G tacoma I had ever seen years ago (it's now V8 linked), which he had built from stock all himself.



I asked the second guy about how important removing my anti-dive was. He didn't really say it was a game changer as far as performance in his opinion, but he did say that the truck feels way different and it takes getting used to. Part of it is the simplicity of making upper mounts imo. This was enough to convince me to just make the gussets I had as a jig for my mounts.




Shock tuning could be a consideration. The video should start at 21:10 where he goes into his decision to put dive into the front. Pretty informative clip.

https://youtu.be/Fmp6bIC-iMU?t=1270

 

I think 0-50% anti dive is usually desired in high end fast offroad stuff with ifs. I think the biggest negative is the drastic body movement when braking or gassing it. In high end stuff I think they can get away with that with the help of a 30k shock package

It help lift the front with acceleration which will be nice in rough terrain to get more weight over the back.

currently, anti dive deletes that just make the upper arm close to parallel with the lower. That gets rid of caster change which would be nice and gets rid of the potential bump steer that goes with that. It also eliminates a lot or all of the wheel recession which kinda stinks, when the tire travels backwards as well as up when it hits a big ledge it will take the hit softer

would be interesting to move the lower arm rear mount lower to where it is parallel with the upper and see how that performed, to eliminate the caster change but keep the recession. (Similar to those pics of the tts)

 

yea I missed that 4wd part… It is the same truck in your second pic haha.

that guy with the tacoma buggy with a tundra front diff is working on it right now though, be interesting to see if he can make it fit or if he does full hydro.

I think 2wd or 4wd the space back there is about the same, only bummer is if you are crawling that box is pretty low especially in the pic I posted.

 

Yeah possibly - the front diff pinion lives right above the rack and I've been considering how to make a removeable steering rack cross member that will drop straight down to allow the front diff to be installed directly from below without having to get the pinion up and over the rack x member so I've been spending a lot of time looking at that space.

 

That video is how I’ve always looked at it as well. Allowing the tire to move upward and rearward is always going to help with the sharp edged hit. And almost all of the race trucks out there utilize it in one way or another.

I’ve driven vehicles that have terrible dive characteristics under heavy braking and it’s a very unsettling feeling.

I also feel as though it allows for a lighter spring which will make things work better than running a heavy ass spring to combat the tendency to dive.

 

You’re thinking backwards. Anti dive helps eliminate all bump steer as it allows for an angle change at the outer tie rod pivot through the whole range of travel. If that angle never changes, you will have some degree of bump steer regardless of what you do.

 

I wondered that too, as I've been working on how I want to setup my front suspension as well, and no antidive just doesn't make any sense to me.

Obviously the only pro to zero antidive is that the suspension stays 100% active under braking, but at the cost of massive weight transfer which would take up half your up travel anyway.

That said, I don't know where the balance is of too much antidive where the front loses braking traction due to not enough suspension movement.

 

I would hardly consider that a pro. Imagine checking up to a g-out and you’re already into the bumps. It ain’t gonna feel good.

 

yep exactly, though i alway blip the throttle in a scenario like that to lift the front back up personally. It's definitely a balance because you also don't want the front suspension to be completely bound up and the tires skipping over bumps extending your braking distance, and being way more uncomfortable

 

so they purposely put a lot of dive in to get the geometry to allow the suspension to absorb hits better…but the tuning and everything else gets tricky

 

Just a personal opinion, but i'd rather have an Ackerman angle that's anywhere even remotely close to good. No chance on a second gen without like 22+ inch wheels or a massive offset; could get it perfect on a first gen. I haven't really run into much of any of the weak steering issues everyone here has faced thoroughly so that isn't as much of a big deal to me (yet at least)

 

I’m confused what angle change you mean?

if I think of a setup with 0% antidive - that will dive hard under breaking - my understanding is that it needs to have parallel upper and lower arms to get 0% antidive.

Parallel arms keeps caster change through travel at 0 and that caster change is what I was talking about adding bump steer, super minor but it is another arc (front to back from caster changing) that the hub has to follow that the tie rod can’t match.

 

It might sound good in theory on a generic level, but 2nd / 3rd gen steering is superior in every way in regard to not having to remove the rack when replacing cam bolts / lowers if using oem style bolts, limiting travel to save the rack, and lame mounting bracket and hard to reach bolt heads for the vertical bolt. I'm guessing that's why as an oem they updated it going into the 05 model year.

Speaking of the psychotic fab Tundra, it's brother was up for sale:

https://www.instagram.com/p/C7XG1yUvw0P/?img_index=3

Looks very close to the psychotic truck.