Trucks! Comanche

[Automan2164]

Rob, boomerang shackles are used for clearance issues on XJ shackle boxes. The dog leg allows more clearance than a straight shackle because of their offset design.

 

Now I get it.

 

Many thanks sir.

Rob

[mvusse]

Definently revolvers.

 

So are we to the conclusion that they don't help suspension travel at all and are unsafe? Ive always have the idea to try em out someday...

 

Agree. I need a better TV.

[87Warrior]

It is bitter sweet to see an MJ getting built on public television (or online asI do not have cable). On one hand, I imagine if small builds like this continue we will see more specialty parts make their way out. On the other hand, these poor trucks will become even more popular sending their values up. Good if you own one, but not good if you need parts or want to buy another, 2nd, 6th, 17th, etc MJ.

 

What is the purpose of those plates in the cab on the wrap around LCA mounts? I noticed they did not notch out the upper frame cap so there was a 1/2" gap on either side of the plate. The mount locations made me cringe :doh:

[Pete M]

Agree. I need a better TV.

 

agreed. even a small cheap 32" lcd will improve on all but the best tubers. :thumbsup: mine is only 720p and pushing a decade in age and I feel no need to get anything bigger or better. :D

[89eliminator]

it didnt even looked totally flexed? i think they did a good job on it. the upper heim is questionable, but i have seen it done in the past and it works fine. the use of Rustys parts was no surprise but I'm glad they built something instead of slapping a y-link on. and maybe the trucks owner told them to keep the revolvers on?

[88MJNC]

Hell I just liked watching a show that had a MJ on it. What amazed me was the price you could buy them new and the price you can buy them today. To me holds it's retail we'll but I wouldnt sell mine.

[Garvin]

Keep in mind that $7k back then is equivalent to like $20 something thousand now.

[skidoo_j]

What's the point of having steering knuckles that turn that far? I only have 31" tires and I had to lengthen my stops so the tires didn't rub. With the tires being 35" I'd guess they'd hit even sooner.

[mvusse]

Depends on the baskspacing of the wheels and what's been done to clearance the wheel wells.

[skidoo_j]

Depends on the baskspacing of the wheels and what's been done to clearance the wheel wells.

 

 

On this particular jeep I saw spidertrax spacers on the rear so I'd guess they're on the front too. The wheels didn't appear to be that shallow of backspacing, my guess is 3".

 

 

I guess my theory is I wouldn't spend the money for the offset parts if my steering was limited to protect my tires. To me i'd rather protect my tires then to turn sharp and let them bind against the control arms and possibly damage truck or tire. I like the knuckle to knuckle design dramatically if not completely eliminating bump steer.

[Garvin]

There's always going to be the possibility of bump steer, no matter the setup you run (this assumes mechanical linkage and not full hydro). Bump steer is based on drag link to track bar angles and positions. The most ideal setup would be the same exact lengths as well as mounting positions on the same plane (so the bolts are right behind eachothers and you can barely see the track bar behind the drag link). I'm currently running the inverted T setup (just like what they converted that MJ to) and I have a little bump steer due to my track bar being set slightly higher than the drag link (which will be taken care of when I get a new track bar bracket).

[skidoo_j]

I went to the episode site and the wheels were Classic II, Aluminum, Matte Black, 16 in.- 8.0 in., 5 x 4.50 in. Bolt Pattern, 4.437 in Backspace. the tires were Baja Claw TTC, LT 315 /75R16, So with the terra flex wheel spacers the effective backspace is 3.18". With a tire that wide and tall I'm still sticking there's going to be a hell of a lot of rubbing before the steering would contact the dif cover.

 

Garvin true regarding the bump steer being caused by the track bar drag link relationship, however the effects of bump steer are dramatically worse with a y-link set up imo. Probably the biggest is that when using y-link if the suspension is stretched you get toe in, and when compressed it toes out. So if you're going down a bumpy road your tires can start an in and out weave/wobble in addition to the bumpsteer.

[Comanche County]

Personally I think that was one damn fine MJ and whoever owns it is a lucky guy. As far as the flex goes, big whoop really. It'll flex good enough. Lockers, tires, armor and safety items are more important anyway. You can spend all night watching videos of super flexing rigs bouncing and rolling over far too easily at Moab. Too much flex in my mind equals loss of control waiting to happen, especially off camber.

 

On mounting the track bar, you really can't mount it anywhere else. Go forward and your getting into the steering linkage, go to the back of the axle and you're putting the frame side bracket into the coil and the shock, then you've got the bar flexing into the UCAs, exhaust down pipe and oil pan. The stock location is good, the stock bracket and tie rod end not so much.

[mvusse]

Comanches are a lot wider in the back than they are in the front. Especially will larger tires the rear tires will contact the inside of the wheel well when you flex the suspension. To combat this you would run wheel spacers on the rear axle, but not on the front. On a stock Comanche I know some people (myself included) who do the same thing so the wheels will look the same front and back instead of sitting way back in under the rear fenders.

[Dadinator]

I watched it today. It was a nice off road rig.

[motodh1983]

Wow, just started a general conversation post and look what I started!

[skidoo_j]

I'd like to see more detailed pictures of those plates they used for the lower arms installed. I know the owner of this MJ is on here, hopefully they post tons of pictures of the completed "trucks renovations". Also looking forward to his comments on handling and flex. I'm curious if they made him buy all the parts or if they were "gifts".

[rstrucks]

Hey guys, Ryan from TRUCKS! here. Ya know, the "so full of crap guy" :) Just wanted to jump on here and say that I'm glad some of you guys like the MJ and the show. I have been into MJs for a looong time. I've owned two of them and an '89 was my first vehicle so I've got a soft spot for the cool little trucks.

 

I wanted to address some of the comments about the build and try to clear a few thing up - or at least continue some conversation about differing ideas.

 

There is really nothing wrong with the way we installed the 3rd link heim, In fact, my 3rd link joint on my Gen Right kit equipped TJ is mounted in a similar fashion. It doesn't limit suspension travel at all. It is installed in a neutral position allowing for plenty of up and down travel.

 

Speaking of suspension travel. There is more flex than first appears. Keep in mind the flex pic from the end of the show has tires at opposing corners sitting on the old tires and wheels and the body is nearly level. If we only flexed out the front it would be about twice as much as what shows. Also, look at the angle of the front axle in comparison to the bumper. Then take a look at other flexed out Jeeps and you'll see that the articulation is comperable to many other similar rigs. And it's only a "mid arm" design and flex isn't the end all be all of off-road performance.

 

We have covered track bar/drag link aligment a few times on the show. I'm quite familiar with how it should be but we don't have time in every show to address every issue. It ended up being a little off from "perfect" but for a trail cruiser you'd never know it from behind the wheel.

 

The steering was needed to clear the diff cover. We placed the lower links slightly inboard to allow for greater steering angle. It may not be needed in every case but it solved a problem for us. I've had to deal with tie rod/diff cover interferance issues before and I thought it was a pretty slick solution.

 

The revolver shackles we're on the truck when it rolled into the shop and it's not up to us to make changes on the entire vehicle. The rear suspension is limilted to not allow the shackle to unload much and certainly not enough to hyper-extend them.

 

Lastly, keep in mind we only have about 18 minutes in the half hour show to talk about a lot of stuff. Things get skipped, glossed over and edited out. Unfotunately, that's just the way it is. Hopefully we can squeeze enough good stuff in there to keep people watching.

 

Out of the shop and out on the trail the MJ does really well in real world situations. It was a big improvement over the short arm kit and worth the effort.

[billyzj]

really liked the

Hey guys, Ryan from TRUCKS! here. Ya know, the "so full of crap guy" :) Just wanted to jump on here and say that I'm glad some of you guys like the MJ and the show. I have been into MJs for a looong time. I've owned two of them and an '89 was my first vehicle so I've got a soft spot for the cool little trucks.

 

I wanted to address some of the comments about the build and try to clear a few thing up - or at least continue some conversation about differing ideas.

 

There is really nothing wrong with the way we installed the 3rd link heim, In fact, my 3rd link joint on my Gen Right kit equipped TJ is mounted in a similar fashion. It doesn't limit suspension travel at all. It is installed in a neutral position allowing for plenty of up and down travel.

 

Speaking of suspension travel. There is more flex than first appears. Keep in mind the flex pic from the end of the show has tires at opposing corners sitting on the old tires and wheels and the body is nearly level. If we only flexed out the front it would be about twice as much as what shows. Also, look at the angle of the front axle in comparison to the bumper. Then take a look at other flexed out Jeeps and you'll see that the articulation is comperable to many other similar rigs. And it's only a "mid arm" design and flex isn't the end all be all of off-road performance.

 

We have covered track bar/drag link aligment a few times on the show. I'm quite familiar with how it should be but we don't have time in every show to address every issue. It ended up being a little off from "perfect" but for a trail cruiser you'd never know it from behind the wheel.

 

The steering was needed to clear the diff cover. We placed the lower links slightly inboard to allow for greater steering angle. It may not be needed in every case but it solved a problem for us. I've had to deal with tie rod/diff cover interferance issues before and I thought it was a pretty slick solution.

 

The revolver shackles we're on the truck when it rolled into the shop and it's not up to us to make changes on the entire vehicle. The rear suspension is limilted to not allow the shackle to unload much and certainly not enough to hyper-extend them.

 

Lastly, keep in mind we only have about 18 minutes in the half hour show to talk about a lot of stuff. Things get skipped, glossed over and edited out. Unfotunately, that's just the way it is. Hopefully we can squeeze enough good stuff in there to keep people watching.

 

Out of the shop and out on the trail the MJ does really well in real world situations. It was a big improvement over the short arm kit and worth the effort.

i really liked the build I'm hoping to see more of the mj on the show,also liked how the rustys setup was bolted threw the floor,looking foward too see more,great show :thumbsup:

[xjrev10]

I also enjoyed the show. Keep up the good work!

[Dadinator]

Hey guys, Ryan from TRUCKS! here.

 

Hey Ryan,

Good to hear you on this site.

 

Keep coming back.

 

Are you going to do any more comanche's on the show? I'm sure we all hope so.

 

I'm a big fan of powerblock. Xtreme and Trucks are my obvious favorites, but I do watch the others as well.

 

Thanks for stopping by.

[Blue88Comanche]

Anybody catch the comanche on trucks today on spike tv?

 

I have it on the DVR, haven't watched it yet

[Garvin]

Hey guys, Ryan from TRUCKS! here. Ya know, the "so full of crap guy" :) Just wanted to jump on here and say that I'm glad some of you guys like the MJ and the show. I have been into MJs for a looong time. I've owned two of them and an '89 was my first vehicle so I've got a soft spot for the cool little trucks.

 

I wanted to address some of the comments about the build and try to clear a few thing up - or at least continue some conversation about differing ideas.

 

Welcome to the site. I know you can't mention every little detail but it's just the way you worded things that will make a lot of people do things the wrong way. For instance when you said at flex the axle will hit the track bar so you are moving it up. You should atleast put a few second blurb in there or reword that to say that the drag link and track bar have to be parallel to eachothers. Whether this is done on a trail rig or not, that's still important for them to be parallel as then you'll have flex steer.

 

There is really nothing wrong with the way we installed the 3rd link heim, In fact, my 3rd link joint on my Gen Right kit equipped TJ is mounted in a similar fashion. It doesn't limit suspension travel at all. It is installed in a neutral position allowing for plenty of up and down travel.

 

Speaking of suspension travel. There is more flex than first appears. Keep in mind the flex pic from the end of the show has tires at opposing corners sitting on the old tires and wheels and the body is nearly level. If we only flexed out the front it would be about twice as much as what shows. Also, look at the angle of the front axle in comparison to the bumper. Then take a look at other flexed out Jeeps and you'll see that the articulation is comperable to many other similar rigs. And it's only a "mid arm" design and flex isn't the end all be all of off-road performance.

 

The flex part comes down to wording also. Even with the front and rear flexed like that, it really isn't all that impressive flex. I do agree that flex isn't the end all but it is still important to keep traction. As long as you have vehicle weight on the tire then the more the flex, the better. In the setup on my Jeep, even with ~34 3/8" long lowers, I could easily max out that heim with longer shocks. Then again, my suspension is setup for mainly down travel. The heim is also not meant to take loads in a vertically mounted fashion. To give a better explanation, look at how the heim is created. You have the most amount of material on two sides and limited amounts on the other two. If set up vertically then the forces go straight into the thinner part of the heim trying to pull the ball out opposed to if set up horizontally, the loads go straight into the body. Yes, they will work set up that way for a while but it is far from ideal.

 

We have covered track bar/drag link aligment a few times on the show. I'm quite familiar with how it should be but we don't have time in every show to address every issue. It ended up being a little off from "perfect" but for a trail cruiser you'd never know it from behind the wheel.

 

I understand this part but again it comes to the wording. You have to remember that not everyone catches every show (I'm a prime example of this, only seen that one). It only takes a few seconds to say "As mentioned on other shows, the drag link and track bar need to be parallel."

 

The steering was needed to clear the diff cover. We placed the lower links slightly inboard to allow for greater steering angle. It may not be needed in every case but it solved a problem for us. I've had to deal with tie rod/diff cover interferance issues before and I thought it was a pretty slick solution.

 

I do agree with this, that setup is pretty cool.

 

The revolver shackles we're on the truck when it rolled into the shop and it's not up to us to make changes on the entire vehicle. The rear suspension is limilted to not allow the shackle to unload much and certainly not enough to hyper-extend them..

 

It's the nature of revolver shackles to unload, even when limited. The ideal solution here would be to just trash them. Mainly putting that out for others as I understand where you are coming from there.

[Goose]

Hey guys, Ryan from TRUCKS! here. Ya know, the "so full of crap guy" :) Just wanted to jump on here and say that I'm glad some of you guys like the MJ and the show. I have been into MJs for a looong time. I've owned two of them and an '89 was my first vehicle so I've got a soft spot for the cool little trucks.

 

I wanted to address some of the comments about the build and try to clear a few thing up - or at least continue some conversation about differing ideas.

 

There is really nothing wrong with the way we installed the 3rd link heim, In fact, my 3rd link joint on my Gen Right kit equipped TJ is mounted in a similar fashion. It doesn't limit suspension travel at all. It is installed in a neutral position allowing for plenty of up and down travel.

 

Speaking of suspension travel. There is more flex than first appears. Keep in mind the flex pic from the end of the show has tires at opposing corners sitting on the old tires and wheels and the body is nearly level. If we only flexed out the front it would be about twice as much as what shows. Also, look at the angle of the front axle in comparison to the bumper. Then take a look at other flexed out Jeeps and you'll see that the articulation is comperable to many other similar rigs. And it's only a "mid arm" design and flex isn't the end all be all of off-road performance.

 

We have covered track bar/drag link aligment a few times on the show. I'm quite familiar with how it should be but we don't have time in every show to address every issue. It ended up being a little off from "perfect" but for a trail cruiser you'd never know it from behind the wheel.

 

The steering was needed to clear the diff cover. We placed the lower links slightly inboard to allow for greater steering angle. It may not be needed in every case but it solved a problem for us. I've had to deal with tie rod/diff cover interferance issues before and I thought it was a pretty slick solution.

 

The revolver shackles we're on the truck when it rolled into the shop and it's not up to us to make changes on the entire vehicle. The rear suspension is limilted to not allow the shackle to unload much and certainly not enough to hyper-extend them.

 

Lastly, keep in mind we only have about 18 minutes in the half hour show to talk about a lot of stuff. Things get skipped, glossed over and edited out. Unfotunately, that's just the way it is. Hopefully we can squeeze enough good stuff in there to keep people watching.

 

Out of the shop and out on the trail the MJ does really well in real world situations. It was a big improvement over the short arm kit and worth the effort.

 

Love the show man, keep the comanche's coming!

[Darren]

Hey guys, Ryan from TRUCKS! here. Ya know, the "so full of crap guy" :) Just wanted to jump on here and say that I'm glad some of you guys like the MJ and the show. I have been into MJs for a looong time. I've owned two of them and an '89 was my first vehicle so I've got a soft spot for the cool little trucks.

....

 

I would just ignore their criticism Ryan. They're a bunch of grumpy old men with POS unfinished MJ projects, hornbrod excluded. They get off correcting people and showing how much more they know than everyone else makes them feel better about themselves. Since they have no job, they have the time to be hyper-critical on the Internet. These same web wheelers always talk about flex too, because anyone with any real wheeling experience knows "crazy-mad flex" isn't important, at all.

 

I think the upgrades you did to the truck make a lot of sense for a mostly trail only truck, and probably really increased ride quality and durability of the front end. I'm always glad to see a Jeep on the show, and was especially excited to see an MJ.

 

Lastly, I enjoy the show and watch it every week. Thank you for the entertainment, and for taking the time to post here.