Unfortunate design flaw - Page 2 - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK General Discussion Forum

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 10-05-2011, 04:01 PM   #31
Creeper

WF Supporting Member
 
nycdude777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
Why? Do Jeep brake lines, shocks, and sway links suffer from a similar "design flaw"? How about the drive shafts, which will also need to be replaced if you lift too much?
You're not getting my point. I see yours, yes you have to extend the drive shaft, the break lines, you are fixing a problem because they become too short when you put in a lift. With a track bar, however, the problem never goes away, my friend, its there when it rolls off the conveyor, its there when you lift your jeep, its still there when you put in a longer track bar. Can't fix the problem. It is an inherent problem of the design, hence, a design flaw.

Simply because it is widely accepted, doesn't make it right.

nycdude777 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 04:06 PM   #32
Jeeper
 
JIMBOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 9,916
It's raining counselor !

JIMBO

__________________
"ya gotta have class"
JIMBOX is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 04:15 PM   #33
MTH
Fun Killing Ninja
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
You're not getting my point. I see yours, yes you have to extend the drive shaft, the break lines, you are fixing a problem because they become too short when you put in a lift. With a track bar, however, the problem never goes away, my friend, its there when it rolls off the conveyor, its there when you lift your jeep, its still there when you put in a longer track bar. Can't fix the problem. It is an inherent problem of the design, hence, a design flaw.

Simply because it is widely accepted, doesn't make it right.
I get what you're trying to say, but what I'm saying is that it's ridiculous.

There is no "problem" when the Jeep rolls of the conveyor belt. Is it true that the axle shifts slightly on account of the track bar as the Jeep goes over speed bumps or pot holes? Yes. However, it is also true the Jeep leans slightly to one side when you fill the gas tank. Either way, there is no perceptable adverse impact on handling or any other function. My position is therefore that it is silly to suggest these issues are "problems."

The track bar does what it is supposed to do until you attempt to modify the Jeep. At that point, you need to modify a number of components.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 04:17 PM   #34
Creeper

WF Supporting Member
 
nycdude777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
I get what you're trying to say, but what I'm saying is that it's ridiculous.

There is no "problem" when the Jeep rolls of the conveyor belt. Is it true that the axle shifts slightly on account of the track bar as the Jeep goes over speed bumps or pot holes? Yes. However, it is also true the Jeep leans slightly to one side when you fill the gas tank. Either way, there is no perceptable adverse impact on handling or any other function. My position is therefore that it is silly to suggest these issues are "problems."

The track bar does what it is supposed to do until you attempt to modify the Jeep. At that point, you need to modify a number of components.

Agreed to disagree. Peace
nycdude777 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 04:18 PM   #35
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
You're not getting my point. I see yours, yes you have to extend the drive shaft, the break lines, you are fixing a problem because they become too short when you put in a lift. With a track bar, however, the problem never goes away, my friend, its there when it rolls off the conveyor, its there when you lift your jeep, its still there when you put in a longer track bar. Can't fix the problem. It is an inherent problem of the design, hence, a design flaw.

Simply because it is widely accepted, doesn't make it right.
Let's figure out what's "wrong" first. What IS wrong? Have you lost control, and tumbled through the desert, or down the road, due to this glaring flaw? Uneven expansion joints, poorly patched holes, "wedged" roads (do you have to live in Michigan to know what that means?), and so on affect the geometry of the vehicle more than this flaw, I suspect.
On a related note, I've figured out how to eliminate all leaks and wind noise from a Wrangler. Having access doors in a vehicle is a huge problem. Trouble is, how do you get into it? Sorry....end of the day....
__________________
2012 Unlimited Sahara
"D" Status 8/4, "D1" 8/23, "KZ" 8/31, Delivered 9/12!
Deep Cherry Red Crystal Pearl
5 Spd Auto, Dual Tops
RHR 730N Media Center, Max Tow
lowdutch is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 04:48 PM   #36
Upside-down Disorder
 
InvertChaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NoVa
Posts: 7,878
I don't see how it is a problem? So its not perfectly symmetrical when you go over a bump and the axle shifts slightly to one side. How is that an issue besides playing on someone's OCD for the fraction of a second it happens? I just don't see the issue.
__________________
|2004 Jeep TJ "Green Machine"|4.0L 5 speed Dana44|33x12.50x15 Goodyear Duratracs|2.5" RC coils + 1.25" body lift|OME NitroSport shocks|4.56 gears|Skid Row Engine Skid|BCC Sliders|Currie AntiRock|
InvertChaos is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 04:56 PM   #37
Sponsoring Vendor
 
Ibuildembig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Fruitland, Missouri
Posts: 8,259
Just do a 3 link and roll on
Ibuildembig is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 05:05 PM   #38
Jeeper
 
Tumbleweed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 150
Jimbox, I think you meant U of WD40!
Tumbleweed is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 05:09 PM   #39
Jeeper
 
JIMBOX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 9,916
NOPE !


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumbleweed View Post
Jimbox, I think you meant U of WD40!
University of Weird Designs -(UoWD), but

I've hadda lotta on site training-

JIMBO
__________________
"ya gotta have class"
JIMBOX is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 05:17 PM   #40
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 31,468
*crickets*
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS=Frankinlift from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 05:35 PM   #41
Jeeper
 
97wrangler-242's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: poland indiana
Posts: 2,013
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10
*crickets*
*popcorn*
97wrangler-242 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:04 PM   #42
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 31,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by 97wrangler-242

*popcorn*
Dang it-- saw your avatar, clicked on your profile, found out you are a dude. Grrrrrr
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS=Frankinlift from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:13 PM   #43
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 764
Doesn't the ford super duty trucks use a similar setup with it straight axles and coil spring on the front end? Probably not a real issue for the average driver I would think.
KSCRUDE is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:25 PM   #44
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Broken Arrow, OK
Posts: 2,305
This has got to be the stupidest example of a design "flaw" I have ever seen. This is not a flaw, it's a compromise. This is the best that could be done without adding too much cost. The could have given us a Watts link and it would cost 10 times as much as the track bar. They could have done a triangulated 4 link, but that inherently binds. Then you'd be in here crying about how the control arms are twisted as the suspension moves through its travel. We can fix the binding by using Heim joints at all the mounting points, but those aren't cheap and most people are perfectly happy with the rubber bushings. Except you. That last 1% of articulation would keep you up at night wondering what could have been if only you had a Jeep with a nice set of Heim jointed control arms. You'd drive it a while and they'd start to wear a little bit and get noisy. Or worse they might squeak because that's what they do sometimes. Then you'd be in here crying about the noisy suspension that is obviously because of a design flaw. At the end of the day, if you're Jeep, you're money ahead to put something on there that satisfies 99.99% of all you customers because it doesn't matter what you do or how you built it, a Wrangler with a base price of $40k built with as little compromise as possible will still be nitpicked to death by someone who wakes up in the morning searching for some trivial piece of minutia to complain about on the internet. Does the track bar move the axle side to side a bit during its travels? Absolutely. Does it matter? Hell no. It probably moves less than an inch total from full droop to full compression. The old leaf spring suspensions allowed more side to side movement than that, and there was no way to predict where they might be at any point in the travel. What we have now is by no means perfect; if it was there wouldn't be so many aftermarket parts available for it. But it's as close to perfect as statistically possible given the price point of the vehicle and the wants/needs of the typical purchaser. If an axle that moves back and forth a little bit is such a problem you may be looknig at the wrong vehicle.

Do you honestly think this wasn't looked at and considered by the engineers, accountants, and production people at Jeep and deemed to be the best compromise that could be made before they built it?
__________________
2012 Silver Sport S, Silver, 6 speed, soft top, 3.73s, LSD, PCG, Infiniti, deep tint windows, Pro Comp 1028 wheels, 33" Duratracs, Smittybilt bumpers and steps, KC fog lights, Mopar slush mats and fuel door.

Happiness is a belt fed weapon.
oilwell1415 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:33 PM   #45
Jeeper
 
aelwero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Bliss TX
Posts: 1,669
Images: 1
There is a perfectly viable alternative configuration that eliminates the "design flaw"... it's called IFS, and it's on almost every single passenger vehicle built today, EXCEPT a jeep wrangler, which has an "inferior" front suspension with several (not just the track bars) "design flaws".

They are there on purpose, because jeep guys will stop buying new jeeps if they ever eliminate those "flaws"...

go buy an F150 or a dodge ram... they got a frames and torsion bars, eliminating the "problem"
__________________
'71 DJ-5 (that isn't a typo)
'10 JKU Sport RHD

RHD... it's a jeep thing
aelwero is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:44 PM   #46
Creeper

WF Supporting Member
 
nycdude777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilwell1415 View Post
This has got to be the stupidest example of a design "flaw" I have ever seen. This is not a flaw, it's a compromise. This is the best that could be done without adding too much cost. The could have given us a Watts link and it would cost 10 times as much as the track bar. They could have done a triangulated 4 link, but that inherently binds. Then you'd be in here crying about how the control arms are twisted as the suspension moves through its travel. We can fix the binding by using Heim joints at all the mounting points, but those aren't cheap and most people are perfectly happy with the rubber bushings. Except you. That last 1% of articulation would keep you up at night wondering what could have been if only you had a Jeep with a nice set of Heim jointed control arms. You'd drive it a while and they'd start to wear a little bit and get noisy. Or worse they might squeak because that's what they do sometimes. Then you'd be in here crying about the noisy suspension that is obviously because of a design flaw. At the end of the day, if you're Jeep, you're money ahead to put something on there that satisfies 99.99% of all you customers because it doesn't matter what you do or how you built it, a Wrangler with a base price of $40k built with as little compromise as possible will still be nitpicked to death by someone who wakes up in the morning searching for some trivial piece of minutia to complain about on the internet. Does the track bar move the axle side to side a bit during its travels? Absolutely. Does it matter? Hell no. It probably moves less than an inch total from full droop to full compression. The old leaf spring suspensions allowed more side to side movement than that, and there was no way to predict where they might be at any point in the travel. What we have now is by no means perfect; if it was there wouldn't be so many aftermarket parts available for it. But it's as close to perfect as statistically possible given the price point of the vehicle and the wants/needs of the typical purchaser. If an axle that moves back and forth a little bit is such a problem you may be looknig at the wrong vehicle.

Do you honestly think this wasn't looked at and considered by the engineers, accountants, and production people at Jeep and deemed to be the best compromise that could be made before they built it?
For one, Engineers and Accountants... are like water and oil. they don't mix, so whatever compromise they do come up with is to be challenged.

If you trust accountants, you get Wall Street. If you trust engineers blindly, well, idk, you will get Matrix. You gotta question. My point is, it doesn't matter how many people looked at something before, you can always challenge it. Without that, we'd still be in dark ages.

How else do you improve something if you ignore the details?

Lastly, the definition of flaw is sinonymous with imperfection. If a diamond has imperfection, it is said to have flaws. You still gave your girlfriend the diamond, cuz that's all your a$$ could afford at the moment, but its still a diamond. So I don't know where you get off saying that its a stupid example when you say in your own words that the design is by no means perfect. See my point?
nycdude777 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:45 PM   #47
Jeeper
 
BRADWRANGLER2011's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Canon, Ga.
Posts: 120
When it rains it pours.
BRADWRANGLER2011 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:47 PM   #48
Creeper

WF Supporting Member
 
nycdude777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by aelwero View Post
There is a perfectly viable alternative configuration that eliminates the "design flaw"... it's called IFS, and it's on almost every single passenger vehicle built today, EXCEPT a jeep wrangler, which has an "inferior" front suspension with several (not just the track bars) "design flaws".

They are there on purpose, because jeep guys will stop buying new jeeps if they ever eliminate those "flaws"...

go buy an F150 or a dodge ram... they got a frames and torsion bars, eliminating the "problem"
aelwero, LOL, it kinda sounds like you're supporting my point, but you keep putting the "design flaw" in sarcastic quotes
nycdude777 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 06:58 PM   #49
Jeeper
 
aelwero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Bliss TX
Posts: 1,669
Images: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
aelwero, LOL, it kinda sounds like you're supporting my point, but you keep putting the "design flaw" in sarcastic quotes
You're in the wrong forum to voice it is all

solid front axles, with their inferior wheel placement issues, are FAR superior for off road vehicles, because you gain flexibility. The very thing you are describing as a flaw is a distinct advantage on the trail...

Let's look at Florida... very humid, hot, never freezes... for someone who likes snowskiing, that's a major flaw... for a citrus farmer though, having it called a flaw just doesn't compute. You're trying to sell citrus farmers on the downside of not having snow to ski on...
__________________
'71 DJ-5 (that isn't a typo)
'10 JKU Sport RHD

RHD... it's a jeep thing
aelwero is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:20 PM   #50
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 47
If the Wrangler's suspension setup is a flaw, you might as well say that Chrysler's use of steel in the vehicle is also a flaw; someday it will rust, and they could have built it out of stainless steel instead. As was said before this isn't a flaw: it's a compromise.
sirrobin4ever is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:22 PM   #51
MTH
Fun Killing Ninja
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
Lastly, the definition of flaw is sinonymous with imperfection.
In the context of diamonds I suppose. But surely your position is not that, unless a mechanical design is "perfect" (whatever that may mean), it is "flawed"?? As I said earlier, that simply means every design is "flawed" in your eyes.

That's fine to hold that opinion I guess, but I don't think it's shared by most, as it's really more philosophical than practical. So you probably ought to make your position clear at the outset.

In any event . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
If you trust accountants, you get Wall Street. If you trust engineers blindly, well, idk, you will get Matrix. You gotta question.
Alright, so let's just back up a minute and say that what you were doing here wasn't really declaring something an objective "design flaw," but, instead, only questioning whether it was really the best overall design available.

Have you now received sufficient responses and explanation such that you are of the opinion that it probably is not a "design flaw," but, rather, is a sensible design that ultimately accomplishes its goals in the most practical manner while of course being subject to improvement as new design arises? Or do you still maintain that it is an irreparably foolish, outright, and objective "design flaw."
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:31 PM   #52
Upside-down Disorder
 
InvertChaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NoVa
Posts: 7,878
Still don't see what's flawed about it...it doesn't affect performance...
__________________
|2004 Jeep TJ "Green Machine"|4.0L 5 speed Dana44|33x12.50x15 Goodyear Duratracs|2.5" RC coils + 1.25" body lift|OME NitroSport shocks|4.56 gears|Skid Row Engine Skid|BCC Sliders|Currie AntiRock|
InvertChaos is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:36 PM   #53
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 31,468
What the hell is this thread about?
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS=Frankinlift from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:37 PM   #54
MTH
Fun Killing Ninja
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,542
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10 View Post
What the hell is this thread about?
Your Jeep is flawed.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:42 PM   #55
Nerf gun assassin

WF Supporting Member
::WF Administrator::
 
distortedtj's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: yep right there.
Posts: 21,230
Send a message via Yahoo to distortedtj
Keep the conversation civil. Only warning.

There is no need to be rude or proceed with name calling.
distortedtj is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 07:45 PM   #56
Creeper

WF Supporting Member
 
nycdude777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
In the context of diamonds I suppose. But surely your position is not that, unless a mechanical design is "perfect" (whatever that may mean), it is "flawed"?? As I said earlier, that simply means every design is "flawed" in your eyes.

That's fine to hold that opinion I guess, but I don't think it's shared by most, as it's really more philosophical than practical. So you probably ought to make your position clear at the outset.

In any event . . .



Alright, so let's just back up a minute and say that what you were doing here wasn't really declaring something an objective "design flaw," but, instead, only questioning whether it was really the best overall design available.

Have you now received sufficient responses and explanation such that you are of the opinion that it probably is not a "design flaw," but, rather, is a sensible design that ultimately accomplishes its goals in the most practical manner while of course being subject to improvement as new design arises? Or do you still maintain that it is an irreparably foolish, outright, and objective "design flaw."
Oh boy, this will go on forever... its not about stances. I see lot of guys in here take my comments to the heart. I can understand that, when you love something, you identify with it, and any criticism is felt painfully as if it were towards you.

I am the same way.

But, okay, lets take a step back, and understand what is a design flaw...

Someone earlier in this thread said that why not remove the doors to reduce the noise, only then, how do you get in... Well, the doors are not designed to reduce the noise or have anything to do with the noise whatsoever. Their primary function is to swing out when you pull the handle, let you get in, shut tight and prevent you from falling out. As far as I know, they do just that, so there is no functional problem there, they are 100% functional to the spec.

With trackbar however, its purpose is to keep the axle from moving laterally. There are 3 dimensions in which the track bar can move, front-to-back which is limited by control arms in a rigid manner, up and down controlled by the coil springs and the shock absorber, and lastly prevent side-to-side movement with track bar. Well, track bar, due to the compromise, whatever it may be, simplicity, cost efficiency, iprovement potential for future up-sales or whatever, is not doing its job 100%. Its slight (an inch) latteral movement is tolerable yes, but it is not 100%. The reason for that, is geomerty. Can't use two bars to cross, or the axle won't move up at all.. Anything else is expensive, so yes, it is a compromise, with "acceptable" play. Nevertheless, it is imperfect due to that compromise. It is a compromised design. Perhaps that is the term. And don't take me wrong, I still love my Rubicon and will be first to defend it and tell everyone that its the vehicle to drive. But the truth remains, that the imperfect axle housing is due to a compromised design.

It doesn't matter how you say it, you guys all know its true, so stop attacking me please, making me feel very unwelcome here... what do you want a bunch of lambs joining this forum who don't think and just listen with their dropped unhinged lower jaws to you guys? c'mon...

And to say that this particular "flaw" is the reason for jeep's superiority on the trail is plain silly. Its superiority is due to the fact that its suspension is NOT independent like on most cars. But if the axle was not shifting side to side you would also have better highway handling, its just physics. I am not making this up.
nycdude777 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 08:02 PM   #57
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 31,468
My iPhone has an antenna flaw
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler TR 2.5 coils/rear TB/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Teraflex monster TB/Synergy highsteer,tie rod, ball joints/Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/MC front SB links/Rancho geo brackets & shocks/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS=Frankinlift from hell.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 08:03 PM   #58
Jeeper
 
sneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
Oh boy, this will go on forever...
But if the axle was not shifting side to side you would also have better highway handling, its just physics. I am not making this up.
I think I found your problem. Granted my jeep is a dd, but I bought it knowing it wasn't the gti or bmw i was also considering. I got it for an all around all terrain awesome vehicle. But to say the jeep, while handling offroad amazingly has a poor design because its highway handling leaves something to be desired is pretty much why everyone is all over you. its an offroad vehicle. dont complain about its on road performance.
sneck is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 08:13 PM   #59
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 724
Quote:
Originally Posted by nycdude777 View Post
Someone earlier in this thread said that why not remove the doors to reduce the noise, only then, how do you get in... Well, the doors are not designed to reduce the noise or have anything to do with the noise whatsoever. Their primary function is to swing out when you pull the handle, let you get in, shut tight and prevent you from falling out. As far as I know, they do just that, so there is no functional problem there, they are 100% functional to the spec.
Some would argue that the very fact that its held by a strap is a "design flaw". It does not prevent the door from opening into the fender when not attached (easy to do), it doesn't keep the door from closing on you when you are trying to get in or out...

By YOUR definition, that is a flawed design.

Quote:
With trackbar however, its purpose is to keep the axle from moving laterally. There are 3 dimensions in which the track bar can move, front-to-back which is limited by control arms in a rigid manner, up and down controlled by the coil springs and the shock absorber, and lastly prevent side-to-side movement with track bar. Well, track bar, due to the compromise, whatever it may be, simplicity, cost efficiency, iprovement potential for future up-sales or whatever, is not doing its job 100%. Its slight (an inch) latteral movement is tolerable yes, but it is not 100%. The reason for that, is geomerty. Can't use two bars to cross, or the axle won't move up at all.. Anything else is expensive, so yes, it is a compromise, with "acceptable" play. Nevertheless, it is imperfect due to that compromise. It is a compromised design. Perhaps that is the term. And don't take me wrong, I still love my Rubicon and will be first to defend it and tell everyone that its the vehicle to drive. But the truth remains, that the imperfect axle housing is due to a compromised design.
EVERYTHING on a motor vehicle is a compromised design. Don't kid yourself, nothing on any vehicle is perfect. The point of a suspension system is to keep the tires flat on the road...a solid axle is piss poor at accomplishing that (but has other advantages in very uneven terrain at very low speeds)...but fact remains even ultra exotic independent systems have their limits...

Quote:
It doesn't matter how you say it, you guys all know its true
No one is arguing that a trackbar operates as such...they're arguing you calling it a flawed design. Its not...it is a characteristic of the design. If you're going to nit-pick about that, we absolutely must hear your opinion of a camshaft.
__________________
--------------------------------
Jeep Snobs Are The Worst
--------------------------------
Bubba68CS is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 10-05-2011, 08:20 PM   #60
Creeper

WF Supporting Member
 
nycdude777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City
Posts: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba68CS View Post
Some would argue that the very fact that its held by a strap is a "design flaw". It does not prevent the door from opening into the fender when not attached (easy to do), it doesn't keep the door from closing on you when you are trying to get in or out...

By YOUR definition, that is a flawed design.



EVERYTHING on a motor vehicle is a compromised design. Don't kid yourself, nothing on any vehicle is perfect. The point of a suspension system is to keep the tires flat on the road...a solid axle is piss poor at accomplishing that (but has other advantages in very uneven terrain at very low speeds)...but fact remains even ultra exotic independent systems have their limits...



No one is arguing that a trackbar operates as such...they're arguing you calling it a flawed design. Its not...it is a characteristic of the design. If you're going to nit-pick about that, we absolutely must hear your opinion of a camshaft.
This is becoming a waste of time, really

__________________
2011 Black Rubicon 4dr. 6 sp manual.

4" Long Arm Skyjacker Lift
18" KMC XD Monster
35x13x18 Nitto Terra Grapplers
Rusty's Adjustable Track Bars
Rugged Ridge Side Steps
nycdude777 is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sub Box Design jwells36 Communications and Electronics 16 12-16-2012 11:36 AM
Input needed for Mud Hole Design & Rock Crawling YellowDog Land Use Forum 4 06-16-2012 03:06 AM
WOW stock driver seat design is stupid rd-wrangler YJ General Discussion Forum 6 07-18-2011 09:08 AM
Jeep's design director wants our questions Trebormojo JK General Discussion Forum 0 04-22-2011 01:53 PM



» Network Links
»Jeep Parts
» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC