Anybody using Watt's linkage in the rear?

[catalina34]

Are there any 3rd gens out there running Watt's linkages in the rear? I recently read up on the advantages of this type of linkage and was wondering why I haven't seen them used in the rear on T4Rs. I would think it would really improve the on and off road feel of the rear axle by providing better tracking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=dJNpS63N7Ao

http://full-traction.com/detail.php?MODELID=24&MAKEID=1&TYPEID=2&PRODUCTID=511&NOTES=

Thoughts?

 

[maclean216]

Looks like an interesting alternative to a panhard bar. I wonder how it flexes though.

If I am going to the trouble of a Watt's linkage, why not just 4 link the rear?

 

[catalina34]

Looks like an interesting alternative to a panhard bar. I wonder how it flexes though.

If I am going to the trouble of a Watt's linkage, why not just 4 link the rear?

Seems to flex pretty well.

CRC Link rockcrawl - YouTube

I'm not sure what advantages the 4 link or watts have over one another. I'm new to off road suspension designs, but trying to learn.

 

[sportscarfan]

A watts or mumford link will cost a lot more in design, fab., and parts to do what a panhard bar does "well enough" for a vehicle that will never need the performance advantages.
Can it be done and will it be superior? Probably. Will anyone buy it? Probably not.

 

[Pikeman]

Ok we have a 4 link from the factory and so does the JK. Although technically with a panhard bar it should be called a 5 link, but yes this could benefit us and be more efficient than our panhard bar. One of the things I can think of is it would reduce rear steer and the tendency to push the pinion into the gas tank with driver full stuff and passanger full droop. Cost effective probably not since it is not a production piece yet. Personally I would rather go with a properly designed traingulated 4 link and get rid of the track/ panhard bar all together. However in our trucks that would require relocation of the fuel tank.

 

[JWaldz]

However in our trucks that would require relocation of the fuel tank.

which isn't hard.. especially since some of us don't even use the spare tire carrier anyways. It's not a walk in the park, but considering the time and modification some of us have done (myself included)... it should only be time extensive.

As for the topic here, by the time you spend the money to do this to your already solid rear axle you could be well into a solid front axle swap.

 

[1985taylor1925]

Seems to flex pretty well.

CRC Link rockcrawl - YouTube

I'm not sure what advantages the 4 link or watts have over one another. I'm new to off road suspension designs, but trying to learn.

The advantage is that with a panhard bar your axel is always moving side to side as it acticulates up and down. With the watts linkage the axel will move straight up and down, which would make a more stable ride, especially at higher speeds. It seems like the advantages with this would be more applicable to on road driving. The side to side motion of the axel with the panhard bar really isnt a factor when climbing up or down a hill at 5 mph.

Toward the end of its range the watts linkage would also move the axel sideways, in opposite directions depending on if you were at the top or bottom of the range. But you would never be able to stretch the linkage that far anyways. Extending to the end of the shocks, or pinning the axel to the rear bump stops obviously limit articulation. And within that range the axel would move basically straight up and down.

You can see the range in which the axel is centered
Watt's linkage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[cordrayj1]

this doesnt look that difficult to fab up