GoFastBroncos.com

As always, we welcome your questions, comments and input!

Obviously, there is no ONE way to build a go-fast Bronco. There are some common tricks used to make them work, though. This post will go over some of the basics. Basically, we'll start with the mild. You add the wild!

Basic foundation:

Front
Modified axle-housings
Extended radius arms
Lift coils
Extended brake hoses
Longer shocks


Recommended items to add to your basic foundation:
Limit straps (to prevent the over extending of shocks and the coil spring from unseating)
Relocate bump stops (as needed to prevent over-compressing of the shocks and coils)

The modifications above will give you a good, basic foundation for a go-fast build. It retains many stock parts, keeps the truck very easy to work on and reliable (assuming good install). You will have gained wheel travel, clearance and of course some good looks! The biggest limiting factor at this point will be shocks. If you push the truck hard for extended periods they will heat up, fade and your truck will turn into a pogo-stick.

Reserved.

Reserved.

Reserved.

Just finished the front beams for my race Bronco, you will notice a few differences from your stock beams.

The other side

A few more

I assume from the pics that you are getting camber correction from the kick in the beam instead of from pulling out the lower ball joint. Does this give you more up travel? Also, how does this affect the center slip yoke in the driveshaft? Looks like it might cause it to slide too much from full bump to full droop. Not being critical, just asking questions

We have gone this way for several reasons: better angle of the center joint, better steering geometry and more up travel and less change in camber between full droop and full bump compared to C&T. Both of the pivot points have been relocated as well.

It is not the way everyone elso has been doing it but we feel that we have made the best compromises to achieve the maximum performance within the confines of the class 3 rules.

Wow Dave, those are pretty trick looking. Please post pics of you guys cycling it.

WOW!!

That's all I have to say.

gunit wrote:We have gone this way for several reasons: better angle of the center joint, better steering geometry and more up travel and less change in camber between full droop and full bump compared to C&T. Both of the pivot points have been relocated as well.

It is not the way everyone elso has been doing it but we feel that we have made the best compromises to achieve the maximum performance within the confines of the class 3 rules.

Can you elaborate on the relocation of the pivot points. Is the track width widened, and if so, where does the extra width come from. I'll bet you get about 2" more up travel without the extra ride height.

X2 on the pics of cycling the suspension.

gunit wrote:We have gone this way for several reasons: better angle of the center joint, better steering geometry and more up travel and less change in camber between full droop and full bump compared to C&T. Both of the pivot points have been relocated as well.

It is not the way everyone elso has been doing it but we feel that we have made the best compromises to achieve the maximum performance within the confines of the class 3 rules.

=========
Super you can be proud of what you have done. You have beams that are stronger the Chris' old C8 truck. Workmanship is excellent as well as the plating.
PW

I will post more pics showing the swing when the radius arms are complete.

Paul, thank you. We spent some time studying that truck as well as several other successful TTB racers.

looks awsome. i am wondering how much ground clearance is effected.i was contracted to build a front end for a friend of mine,and he wants the beams to be set at stock hieght and 4"wider per side. we were talking about how the bump travel will be affected so he was goint to notch the frame. but i never really thought of relocating the pivot. i will be watching your build,and learning something new!
fab work looks top notch great job! and i like your truss.......

Those look sweet

gunit wrote:We have gone this way for several reasons: better angle of the center joint, better steering geometry and more up travel and less change in camber between full droop and full bump compared to C&T. Both of the pivot points have been relocated as well.

It is not the way everyone elso has been doing it but we feel that we have made the best compromises to achieve the maximum performance within the confines of the class 3 rules.

Two thumbs up!! So awesome to see people being innovative and looking at different ways to get the suspension to work. What are your anticipated bump and droop numbers?

gunit wrote:We have gone this way for several reasons: better angle of the center joint, better steering geometry and more up travel and less change in camber between full droop and full bump compared to C&T. Both of the pivot points have been relocated as well.

It is not the way everyone elso has been doing it but we feel that we have made the best compromises to achieve the maximum performance within the confines of the class 3 rules.

Looks good ! It looks like you are using older 78/79 style uprights and spindle combo on there? The ttb pieces look a little small after working with the 79 stuff so long. I was planning the same for my project.

Ken

MOSS2 wrote: Looks good ! It looks like you are using older 78/79 style uprights and spindle combo on there? The ttb pieces look a little small after working with the 79 stuff so long. I was planning the same for my project.
Ken

Ken,

I am using these uprights:

When Extending lower Ball Joints for a C&T Beam set up. How far is the lower Ball Joints moved on the D44 Ends?