Single vs. Double ladder bars.

No need for petulance, my good man.

I don't mind your misquote if you don't mind my correction.

On full-size pickup trucks, "ladder bars" are simply an inferior design to "traction bars" for a host of reasons.

BTW - it isn't a question of intelligence, merely one of application... :Cheer:
 
Oh, no contemptuous speach here. Thanks google. I was actually trying to give you some credit as I've seen you argue tons of things way over my head over on DTR.

Would you care to enlighten us on why they are inferior for our application? And FYI, unless someone else starts building bars that are proven to be better than yours, I'm buying yours.
 
I B-CUMNZ said:
I've been wondering this real hard for about 2 months now. I really like mattyboy72's triangulated bars. But, to play devils advocate, if you go read what lazar smith say's about traction bars, he says that the most crucial thing is for the bars to have the same angle as the driveline. So, I'm confused. Does angle only matter on a 2 solid point style traction bar? or does it matter on ladder bars with the pivot front too?
Click to expand...


I seem to recall a quote more on the lines of the bars connection point to the frame -- somewhere near the output shaft on the transfer case. This would normally put your bars at a slightly flatter angle than that of your driveline.

-JP
 
I B-CUMNZ said:
We all can't be as smart as you Lazar.
Click to expand...

I B-CUMNZ said:
Oh, no contemptuous speach here. Thanks google. I was actually trying to give you some credit as I've seen you argue tons of things way over my head over on DTR.

Would you care to enlighten us on why they are inferior for our application? And FYI, unless someone else starts building bars that are proven to be better than yours, I'm buying yours.
Click to expand...

One can hardly be faulted for taking your response to my correction as snubbish... internet forums, of course, are primarily a medium of the written word, but in the event of word failure, smilies can be of assistance.

For instance, you probably meant to say:

"We all can't be as smart as you Lazar.:bow:"

Then, even I could've recognized the compliment.
So.... Thanks! :)

Also, please feel free to use my given name, just like the rest of my friends do.

Inferiority issues include articulation, strength, load capacity, handling, adjustment, ride quality, durability, aesthetics, etc.
No doubt all the folks who are using them could provide many anecdotal recommendations for them.

Interestingly, I don't remember 4-link suspensions brought up yet, as the topic title of this thread hints.
They are the among the best of solutions, but the leaf packs must be binned.
My personal favorite is a 3-link with a Watts linkage... that's what we'll be putting in the rear of the trailer queen (oh my, that sounds risque! :hehe:).

jlibert said:
I seem to recall a quote more on the lines of the bars connection point to the frame -- somewhere near the output shaft on the transfer case. This would normally put your bars at a slightly flatter angle than that of your driveline.
-JP
Click to expand...

That location is popular with the pullers (mostly due to the inertia of convention), since it lifts the front end more than short bars (which lift the rear frame over the axle), so the rear tires have greater initial traction to get the sled rolling towards higher wheel speeds before the pan hits hard.

Our '05 full-pulled with extra-short bars (just to prove a point), but lighter trucks can certainly benefit from long bars, as long as the beam length & cross-sectional strength doesn't allow Young's modulus to propagate buckling under full power.
 
It's Mike Smith right?

Sure a 3 or 4 link would be best, but I don't think it's legal in the lower levels of TTTPA and DHRA. Big Bad Dodge's 4 link is awsome. If that could be bought in a weld on kit the pulling world would be a better place.

I gotta' get me one of dem "Young's modulus" contraptions you're talking about too???
 
SSpeeDEMONSS said:
lift_bars_v_traction_bars.jpg


Garrett
Click to expand...

The bottom one is correct but not on a dodge or a ford set up when there is a 6" block between the spring and the axle the movment goes forward and then up.It is not just trying to lift but pushing and some lifting.

Dale
 
XLR8R said:
One can hardly be faulted for taking your response to my correction as snubbish... internet forums, of course, are primarily a medium of the written word, but in the event of word failure, smilies can be of assistance.

For instance, you probably meant to say:

"We all can't be as smart as you Lazar.:bow:"

Then, even I could've recognized the compliment.
So.... Thanks! :)

Also, please feel free to use my given name, just like the rest of my friends do.

Inferiority issues include articulation, strength, load capacity, handling, adjustment, ride quality, durability, aesthetics, etc.
No doubt all the folks who are using them could provide many anecdotal recommendations for them.

Interestingly, I don't remember 4-link suspensions brought up yet, as the topic title of this thread hints.
They are the among the best of solutions, but the leaf packs must be binned.
My personal favorite is a 3-link with a Watts linkage... that's what we'll be putting in the rear of the trailer queen (oh my, that sounds risque! :hehe:).



That location is popular with the pullers (mostly due to the inertia of convention), since it lifts the front end more than short bars (which lift the rear frame over the axle), so the rear tires have greater initial traction to get the sled rolling towards higher wheel speeds before the pan hits hard.

Our '05 full-pulled with extra-short bars (just to prove a point), but lighter trucks can certainly benefit from long bars, as long as the beam length & cross-sectional strength doesn't allow Young's modulus to propagate buckling under full power.
Click to expand...

I would like to see the FBD that shows it lifts the front more when using a longer bar. Yes there is a longer "lever" arm, but the angle is decreasing so the force that is lifting the front is decreasing also.

Not saying your wrong, just would like to see the FBD to prove what your saying.
 
lift_bars_v_traction_bars.jpg


Tell me if I am rite or wrong on my theory on that it pushes like the single bar.
Dale
 
A longer bar will lift more , I just added 3ft bars to mine and the front mayb raised a hair and thats with no hangin weight , b4 that it would lift with 1000lbs on the front usen 6ft bars
 
ether style be it long or short will control axle wrap.

Now to understand if the truck will lift the front or the back you need to run a line down the side of your truck going from the center of gravities height in front to the center of the rear tires contact patch this line would be called the neutral line. now that you figured out were this line is on your truck you need to figure the instant center of the back suspension this is the point in witch the rear suspension rotates around and is also the lifting point of the rear suspension. so when you figure out were the instant center is on the truck if its below the neutral line it will cause the front of the truck to rise and the back if not blocked out to squat. this is accomplished by having long bars that are at flatter angles. now if the instant center is above the neutral line it will cause the back to rise and drive the back tires into the ground. this is accomplished by running shorter bars that and or at more of an angle.
 
Good post black4x4

Cummins724 did u use blocks and does yr truck set level ???
 
Rods said:
Cool , were u at 0 preload when pulling?
Click to expand...

Yep, zero preload & it makes no noise on the street. I made the heim joint set tight into the brackets so that they wouldn't rattle around. I had to tap them into the brackets they fit so tight. My brackets were built from 1/2" plate & I ground the steel into points before welding. Then laid 4 heavy beads down each side. I like overkill.:rockwoot:
 
Rods said:
A longer bar will lift more , I just added 3ft bars to mine and the front mayb raised a hair and thats with no hangin weight , b4 that it would lift with 1000lbs on the front usen 6ft bars
Click to expand...

That is fine and dandy but does that help? Newton says "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" That means the harder your rear bites the more the front lifts. Like on loose tracks your front does not lift as much as it does on tight tracks. Because of traction and the force involved. On loose tracks guys will move weight back to help get more rear bite. I guess it comes down to which end do you want doing the work. The rearend is far beefer and far simpler with less parts involved. It all comes down to balance IMHO. I like the long bar because it lifts more which plants the rear harder. That means I can tune the bite and lift with front weight vs rear weight and or hitch height.

XLR8R said:
That location is popular with the pullers (mostly due to the inertia of convention)
Click to expand...
Really? Just monkey see monkey do? Or maybe years ago someone modeled this up. Nobody could have done that.:doh: We all just went to the scrap pile grabbed the welder and beer and got er done!:rolleyes: No thought to length, angle, and mounting postion.:Cheer:
 
JOHNBOY said:
Really? Just monkey see monkey do? Or maybe years ago someone modeled this up. Nobody could have done that.:doh: We all just went to the scrap pile grabbed the welder and beer and got er done!:rolleyes: No thought to length, angle, and mounting postion.:Cheer:
Click to expand...

Yes - really, amigo.... garbage in = garbage out, y'know.
The vast majority of guys I've discussed this with use convention as the main reason for going long.

Only you can speak for yourself, but I'm sure most folks didn't run out to the scrap pile with a welder in tow hollering "hold my beer and watch this!". :hehe:
 
XLR8R said:
Yes - really, amigo.... garbage in = garbage out, y'know.
The vast majority of guys I've discussed this with use convention as the main reason for going long.

Only you can speak for yourself, but I'm sure most folks didn't run out to the scrap pile with a welder in tow hollering "hold my beer and watch this!". :hehe:
Click to expand...

I can assure you that mine where designed on Pro E. That the travel was modeled. That a lot of thought was put in to the actions and reactions of forces involved. They are long for a reason. They are mount where they are for a reason. No scrap, beer, or "inertia of convention". The modulus did get the better of me on the first try. I then went back to work on the design to improve the statics. Been dandy ever sense.

There are good reasons to go long. I am far from the only one that did research into it. I could explain further but I have said enough.:woohoo:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top