GoFastBroncos.com

Ah I see.

The drive shaft moves just as much as the radius arm. Should not create a clearance problem.

The crossmember on a E4OD truck is pretty far back. You will end up with very long radius arms.

The center-mounted radius arm thing can make for a super-strong, light radius arm. I got about 75% done with an D44 TTB center-mount set up on my first Explorer before I scrapped it due to a move. Everything cleared just fine. I'm pretty sure a Bronco would be no problem, too. The drawback is things like trans services. If done right, though, the arms can be removed or swung out of the way quickly.

philofab wrote:The drive shaft moves just as much as the radius arm. Should not create a clearance problem.

The crossmember on a E4OD truck is pretty far back. You will end up with very long radius arms.

True. I was imagining it all with a C6 truck.

I was just looking for a pic of something & cam across this, it might explain a little as to why people don't run the longer arms.

See where the frame kick up starts here? It's right at about the point of the radius arm pivots.
Moving that pivot back 6-8" (maybe more?) and the radius arm MIGHT start to come in contact with the bottom of the frame at full bump???? Not sure though - never tried it.

But what Steve mentions is another thing - the having to remove the radius arm cross member to remove the trans. As I said before though guys do it all the time on rangers & 70's trucks, so my guess is this may not be the issue.

SteveG wrote:The center-mounted radius arm thing can make for a super-strong, light radius arm. I got about 75% done with an D44 TTB center-mount set up on my first Explorer before I scrapped it due to a move. Everything cleared just fine. I'm pretty sure a Bronco would be no problem, too. The drawback is things like trans services. If done right, though, the arms can be removed or swung out of the way quickly.

This is very good to know Steve. Give me more hope for whenever I get to trying this later.

Can't see the pic.

me either for some reason. Don't get it. Trying again

I see it now. To run a inboard radius arm would either require a large bend to clear the frame for max bump travel or it would need a lower pivot point. I really like how Otter's pivot boxes served as a trans crossmember support. I think in order to do a proper inboard set upt you would need crossmember with a opening at the transfer case. I think there is a class three bronco with a 3-link that has one set up for the rear. Incorporating the inboard pivots with that would probably make it work and be simple to design for easy removal for trans and transfer case servicing. But I still think to have the lowest part of the heim slightly above or level with the frame would require a large "kick" in the radius arm.

Anyone running a 3.0 bypass with a 2.5 Coilover in the front and do you still have the heater box?

I've seen lots of trucks with both and a heater box.

Thanks, just making sure before I pull the trigger on a set of 3.0 bypasses. Was originally going to go with 2.5s

Regardless of your shock selection you will need to trim the box and adjust your bumps to save it from destruction. Or move the front a inch or so forward.
On very hard hits mine touches the plastic fender liner and has wear to testify that it is close.
PW

Hello All,
So I am now about to get started on my front coilover mounts and have a couple things that I was wondering about. So I have seen variations on how Jim & Paige and CHO have mounting configurations and I like this style a lot. The issue is they are both tying the front mounts into the cage. So while I want a cage for my F150 at some point I am not at that point or anywhere close. It appears that Jim and CHO both have designs that go thru the firewall in roughly the same general place. Since I am not tying into the cage if I attach the engine cage to the frame in multiple places like normal and also at the furthest point out into the place (picture in the attachment) and bolted it to the body is that going to grenade my body. One of the things I like about how CHO made the coilover mounts, core support mounts and fender mounts are all in one basically-- if you take off the fender you can get all up into the engine bay to do whatever and not have the over the fender back killing routine on a lifted truck and putting stress on a fiberglass fender as well. If bolting to the body as the frame is a horrible ideal I will just probably go a completely different route.

Thanks,
Matt

Tying the frame, towers to the body without a cage is a recipe for tearing the body apart. You can tie the towers together for support like has been done by Spirit, Autofab, swp and many others then tie the towers into the cage later on.

The point they go through the firewall is going to depend on where the a-pillar and windshield tubes are located. You want tubes ending in other tubes.

I've seen people build the engine cage leaving the tube ends open to sleeve into later. I personally would rather do a basic hoop till your ready to do the whole cage/engine cage as it will be a cleaner finished product.

I'd stay away from attaching anything that's frame mounted to the body. A body that is not tied into the cage/frame extensively will move ALOT. Any attachment point is gonna tear itself up.

Yea that's kind of what I thought would be said. I'll keep thinking about how to build my front c/o mounts. Thx

Why not take some inspiration from Michael Cox? His coilover hoops were buit to have cage tie ins done.

Matt, Keep looking at more builds that are proven and complete. Towers not tied to the cage will result in failure in short order. Relatively minor items like the stock hood attach not attached to the cage should be obvious. In fact a stock hood vs a glass hood is another item to save the hood attach. Regarding body movement. The Fords of this vintage have very flexy frames and the body is all welded at the stress points. The result if the two are not unitized the body will self destruct. The purpose of the cage is not just for safety but is also for tieing everything together to control all the movement. Regarding fenders, it is not really an issue, fenders come on and off as needed. Fender liners keep out debris and can be made to easily removable for access with fenders on. We all have the step stools and tire steps for service on these tall vehicles and we get along just fine. I sit on my core support for many hours while dealing with such things as radiators pr water pumps. Just join the crowd. Do not change your design for such trivial items.
Don't forget removable cage tube over the engine to allow maintenance or removing the lump. Or make provision to cut out the tubes and then add the removable ones when needed. An engine cage divorced from a full vehicle cage is a joke. You see solutions to all these items on a professional build by an experienced fab guy. Like I said keep studying other builds. PW

When I first bought my bronco I drove it around the block and you could clearly see the front end twisting. The hood core support in relation to the cab. The next day it went to Richer Racing and CHO did his magic. I finally drove mine on the freeway yesterday and the body is all tied together no more dancing core support. If you cage definitely go through the fire wall and tie to hoops and core support if you can and remember no dead tubes. Wherever you tie into let that determine where your windshield A will fall. Here is how CHO did mine. When we did the new motor we painted everything so I pulled the core support off and this is the tube structure that supports it.

Here are a few pics of my engine cage. I had a big issue with the core support shaking and moving quite a bit. Once I tied the cab cage into the engine cage it went away completely.