Anyone here have watts linkage in the back?

1985taylor1925

1985taylor1925

Senior Member
This is actually something I really want to do. I like the idea of coil springs rather than leafs, especially for a suspension lift, but I don't like the concept of the trac bar. The horizontal motion of the panhard bar is just a weird concept considering the entire back end of the truck literally shifts as suspension articulates. Very slightly, but there is still horizontal motion. I know that watts linkage also creates horizontal motion at the two extremes, but on a vehicle you would never see that happen. Suspension would either be fully extended or hitting the bump stops before that part of the geometry would be reached.

Anyone on the forum have watts linkage, or have ever ridden in a vehicle that has it? Id like to hear some opinions from someone who actually has experience with it.
 
Register to hide this ad
I've only seen it in person once, it was on a bagged and body-dropped S10, the minitruck world seems to be the only ones I see using them, sure a few hot-rods I've seen pictures of used them, but I've never seen it done on a 4x4 of any kind.
 
UnderFire said:
I've only seen it in person once, it was on a bagged and body-dropped S10, the minitruck world seems to be the only ones I see using them, sure a few hot-rods I've seen pictures of used them, but I've never seen it done on a 4x4 of any kind.
Click to expand...

Heres a 4x4 off road showing a ton of articulation. Works quite well. Just have to make all 4 joints heim joints the way he has it set up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJNpS63N7Ao
 
1985taylor1925 said:
Heres a 4x4 off road showing a ton of articulation. Works quite well. Just have to make all 4 joints heim joints the way he has it set up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJNpS63N7Ao
Click to expand...

OK [MENTION=59951]1998[/MENTION]5taylor1924 I am so upset with you. You made me think now there are a million ideas running through my head. I have to do more and more research on this topic after already spending the last 1/2 hour reading on it.

My original response to this was to say, why? Basic logic dictates it is mostly unnecessary for a rock crawling rig, although I now see some benefit to eliminating the tall axle end bracket on a lifted truck.

The CRC version is what made me see it differently. The traditional Watts linkake has the center link vertical, which seems like it would be negative to the crawler and possibly too space consuming in general for an off road vehicle. With the center link in vertical it gives some flexibility to the design, and keeps the links up higher. Although I would have to see how far from the frame the top of the diff would end up in a truly lifted truck.

I'm all about simplicity, but sometimes engineered simplicity trumps just doing what everyone else does. Sometimes.

Now I have to consult, and study and probably experiment. Damnit!!

:ranger:
 
As much as I'd love to improve the rear suspension setup on the rear of our vehicles, I couldn't agree more with [MENTION=98153]MStudt[/MENTION]

I wouldn't want to put that kind of time and money into my stock rear axle. That's not to say it can't be done. To each his own.
 
Why not just triangulate it? It's less complicated than a Watt's and doesn't have any horizontal motion so to speak.
 
IBallEngineer said:
OK [MENTION=59951]1998[/MENTION]5taylor1924 I am so upset with you. You made me think now there are a million ideas running through my head. I have to do more and more research on this topic after already spending the last 1/2 hour reading on it.

My original response to this was to say, why? Basic logic dictates it is mostly unnecessary for a rock crawling rig, although I now see some benefit to eliminating the tall axle end bracket on a lifted truck.

The CRC version is what made me see it differently. The traditional Watts linkake has the center link vertical, which seems like it would be negative to the crawler and possibly too space consuming in general for an off road vehicle. With the center link in vertical it gives some flexibility to the design, and keeps the links up higher. Although I would have to see how far from the frame the top of the diff would end up in a truly lifted truck.

I'm all about simplicity, but sometimes engineered simplicity trumps just doing what everyone else does. Sometimes.

Now I have to consult, and study and probably experiment. Damnit!!

:ranger:
Click to expand...

I had the same thought about the diff hitting something under the frame. But I think you would hitting bump stops before that became an issue. And you should definitely experiment with this! I would love to if I had the time and money right now. It would surely take some careful planning to make everything fit just right. But I love the idea of having coil springs combined with an axle that stays true center all the time. Would be an advantage for off and on road driving.

I posted the video with the crc version because I know the biggest aversion here would be the lower bar limiting some off road capability. But even with traditional watts linkage you can move that bar up to the point where it shouldn't affect rock crawling. You just mount the pivot bracket higher on the axle and then angle the lower bar up a bit. That's what I would do. The crc version looks more difficult as you have less space to work with, and the bars need to be able to move in any direction
 
Something like this. The rod on the right side is longer than on the left, but that really doesn't matter over the course of 12" of travel, or whatever our lifted trucks have. The geometry would still work



wattslink.jpg
 

Attachments

  • wattslink.jpg
    wattslink.jpg
    37.8 KB · Views: 870
The thing that's had me thinking Watts for a couple years now is the simplicity. Not that 4link isn't documented and proven and a great setup, but two radius arms and a Watts link is fewer things to break, and less to go wrong alignment-wise.
 
Something that I would be more in favor of would be a CRC Link that [MENTION=102597]IBallEngineer[/MENTION] mentioned. A lot of JK's run that set-up and it works very well. I've ridden in a TJ that had a similar set-up to that, and I liked the way it performed. The idea behind that is getting everything up and out of the way. I'm not sure how close it would be to contacting the shocks or gas tank though.

Here's some good information on it.
 
MStudt said:
Something that I would be more in favor of would be a CRC Link that [MENTION=102597]IBallEngineer[/MENTION] mentioned. A lot of JK's run that set-up and it works very well. I've ridden in a TJ that had a similar set-up to that, and I liked the way it performed. The idea behind that is getting everything up and out of the way. I'm not sure how close it would be to contacting the shocks or gas tank though.

Here's some good information on it.
Click to expand...

That's whats on the truck in the video I posted.

Edit: You can still design traditional watts so that it wont interfere with anything off road though. Like in the drawing I posted. You can google search it and see some good watts set ups for off road.
 
Last edited:
MStudt said:
LOL. I didn't watch the video. This would be the set-up I'd run over a watts system. It's just as functional and everything is up out of the way.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Well, functionally its identical to watts, just oriented differently. Positioned on top of the diff would obviously be ideal for off road. For myself, I don't really do any serious wheeling, so I would be fine with traditional watts. I would just try to locate it high enough so the bottom bar is no lower than the axle. In that case I would never have any issues on trails. Just wouldn't be suited for serious stuff
 
1985taylor1925 said:
Yeah. Well, functionally its identical to watts, just oriented differently. Positioned on top of the diff would obviously be ideal for off road. For myself, I don't really do any serious wheeling, so I would be fine with traditional watts. I would just try to locate it high enough so the bottom bar is no lower than the axle. In that case I would never have any issues on trails. Just wouldn't be suited for serious stuff
Click to expand...

I'd still worry about your departure angle though. Even if you move it higher on the axle the departure is where it'll get hung up. Building a truss for it wouldn't be hard, and you could build a better double shear design.
 
MStudt said:
I'd still worry about your departure angle though. Even if you move it higher on the axle the departure is where it'll get hung up. Building a truss for it wouldn't be hard, and you could build a better double shear design.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Well its all future plans stuff for me right now. Ive put 1500 into my truck over the past summer. But if I can afford it next summer Ill go for it.
 
Can you explain the benefits of a Watt's or similar setup to just triangulating the rear? A simple triangulated setup seems far less complicated and cheaper.
 
snivilous said:
Can you explain the benefits of a Watt's or similar setup to just triangulating the rear? A simple triangulated setup seems far less complicated and cheaper.
Click to expand...

I want to agree with you, I REALLY want to agree with you. But it seems to me the logistics of a simple, yet functional(good articulation), and using tubes and Heim joints are a no go. Boxed arms with 2" bushings maybe, but then you have to question the flex capability. I mean you could copy the rear suspension out of an early A body GM car and it would work, but you'd hang a tire in the air pretty quickly off road. Once you start making those long arms and build a crossmember you start having axle shift and driveshaft clearance issues. The coils have to get smaller, and the driveabilitity goes away. I haven't actually built on from scratch, but what I've seen on Pirate is there is no consensus on this. Everybody has an opinion, and over there, they get pretty nasty flaming so I just stop reading.

If I ever get a few months to plan, I'mm gonna do it!

Here is an example of a 4 link calculator.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-S_bYSfNRhUY/Tc4Qte2IfLI/AAAAAAAAAKw/pcBJPW08aMk/s1600/4link.jpg

Like I said, I REALLY want, to agree with you.

:gossip:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 497 (members: 0, guests: 497)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,316
Messages
3,554,111
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top