What's new
By:
Filters

Early Bronco Dilemma

Maquet24

Maquet24

Ma Deuce Off-Road
Joined
Dec 24, 2020
Member Number
3176
Messages
80
Loc
Colorado Springs, USA
Well I finally made the move from Pirate.
Owned my 66 bronco for over 11 years and have decided to rebuild it again.

https://www.pirate4x4.com/threads/early-bronco-dilemma.1067075/page-11

Been plugging away at frame and suspension. Got the atlas mounted.

Had to cut up the axle to rotate the pinion. I know I could have done the pinion adjustment a few ways and this probably isn't the preferred method but it's pretty straight and now has 2" quarter wall DOM sleeved inside it. I think it'll hold.

photo38611.jpg


photo38610.jpg


photo38609.jpg


photo38608.jpg


photo38607.jpg
 
Awesome, glad to see you made it over here. Nothing wrong with the way you rotated you knuckles, that is definitely the easier way to do it.
 
I assume that you will be connecting the tube crossmember that the lower links are welded to with the identical-looking tube crossmember behind the transfer case? Also, did you run your geometry through a link calculator? I am curious what your numbers look like with the upper link so much longer than your lower links.

I am curious what everything looks like at full bump and ride height since I will be building a 3 link for my Bronco as well pretty soon and I wasn't sure if I would be able to get the axle side pan-hard mount right next to the "C" as it looks like you have.
 
So I do have a parallel tube support behind the lower link mounts. I'm going to definitely connect with a skid plate. I want to reinforce the forward link mount tube but haven't figured out exactly how to go about it and keep it relatively simple to get to the atlas.

I haven't done the calculator yet, I know I know. What I have done is build where things fit, cycle the suspension a bunch to ensure my caster didn't get crazy (+3° bump, +4° ride, +5° droop). Also I was obviously conscious of the pinion angle. Eventually getting it to -13° bump, 1.5 ° ride, and 14° droop.

Surprisingly the longer upper didn't do as much to change the pinion angle as I thought. The longer length was an effort to keep the uloint alive with the 6" of droop.

Full bump and ride (before I cut the axle)
BB825AB4-3C66-4D87-B3ED-F7F4A967C8E4.jpeg

148C6589-A65F-4010-BD1B-3D4C93BA9BB5.jpeg
 
Reinforced the lower link mounts/crossmember. I don't think it's real pretty but it should be plenty strong especially when I tie it into the rear crossmember with the skid plate.
CAD49A31-B99A-48A1-B8FD-13146343ACA9.jpeg




CAD49A31-B99A-48A1-B8FD-13146343ACA9.jpeg
 
Bump cans went in today too. Still need to build the landing pads on the axle. I'm really debating doing hydraulic bumps in the back. Not sure if it's worth it?

 
Maquet24 said:
Bump cans went in today too. Still need to build the landing pads on the axle. I'm really debating doing hydraulic bumps in the back. Not sure if it's worth it?

Click to expand...

Pics seem to be missing.
 
Maquet24 said:
Bump cans went in today too. Still need to build the landing pads on the axle. I'm really debating doing hydraulic bumps in the back. Not sure if it's worth it?
Click to expand...

As Will Scarlet said, your pictures aren't working, but to answer your bump stop question I would say probably not. If you want to play desert racer then I'd say they would be a good idea, but for your typical crawler/trail rig, they aren't worth the money over a regular rubber/polyurethane bump stop since you probably aren't going to be bottoming out your suspension hard enough to really realize the benefit.
 
So the engine definitely has a bad head gasket. I found a guy local that'll tear it down hone a inspect for $1700. I'm not an engine guy so:
1. Is this a reasonable price
2. What else should I do/replace during the tear down.
3. Is it worth just getting a crate engine?

The engine is out out an 88 cougar, unknown miles. I haven't had any issues with it besides the head gasket since I swapped it in 6ish years ago.

photo41162.jpg
 
Maquet24 said:
Skid plates went in today. 3/8" for the fuel tank, 1/2" for the T-case.
Click to expand...

Damn, you must hit things hard :eek:

A36 I assume?

Maquet24 said:
So the engine definitely has a bad head gasket. I found a guy local that'll tear it down hone a inspect for $1700. I'm not an engine guy so:
1. Is this a reasonable price
2. What else should I do/replace during the tear down.
3. Is it worth just getting a crate engine?

The engine is out out an 88 cougar, unknown miles. I haven't had any issues with it besides the head gasket since I swapped it in 6ish years ago.
Click to expand...

Honestly, replacing a head gasket is pretty easy to do with the engine out and I would encourage you to do it yourself. For $1,700 you could do a basic full stock rebuild yourself with machine work. A stock rebuild is pretty straight forward and doesn't really require any really expensive or fancy tools.

If you are completely opposed to opening the engine up yourself, I would encourage you to find a running '96-'01 Explorer and just swap that engine in. It has all the best factory Windsor parts with the exception of the cam and manifolds (GT40/GT40P heads, GT40 intake, roller block, distributorless ignition, OBDII/EEC-V). It is a super popular swap over on ClassicBroncos.com, and the factory Explorer harness is pretty easy to cut down for EB use. If you want, it is no problem to convert them to a distributor EEC-IV setup since you already have the parts on your old motor.

If that doesn't appeal to you, I would much rather put your money towards a basic crate engine than pay $1,700 for a guy to re-gasket and hone your engine. In my opinion, just honing the cylinders doesn't make sense unless you are installing new rings.
 
You need to fix the frame by the bump cans. You have totally removed the flange. You need to stick some piece of metal with a flange either inboard or outboard or go up and over somehow (like what they do on low riders with notched frames) so that it can take the bending load instead. I would do it on the outside just because that seems easier but it doesn't matter what side. As it stands you will almost certainly bend something the first time you use those bump stops. You can't just remove the parts of the frame that handle the tension and compression like that.
 
arse_sidewards said:
You need to fix the frame by the bump cans. You have totally removed the flange. You need to stick some piece of metal with a flange either inboard or outboard or go up and over somehow (like what they do on low riders with notched frames) so that it can take the bending load instead. I would do it on the outside just because that seems easier but it doesn't matter what side. As it stands you will almost certainly bend something the first time you use those bump stops. You can't just remove the parts of the frame that handle the tension and compression like that.
Click to expand...

I disagree, the metal from the cans is thicker than what was removed from the frame. Also I centered the cans between the shock hoop which should carry some of the load from the front of the frame to the rear.
 
Maquet24 said:
I disagree, the metal from the cans is thicker than what was removed from the frame. Also I centered the cans between the shock hoop which should carry some of the load from the front of the frame to the rear.
Click to expand...

The thickness of the cans is basically irrelevant until you get into something stupid thick like 5/8 or whatever. It's 1/4" flat stock standing on edge. It just happens to be standing on edge in a circle. You can knock a section of 1/4" wall 2" pipe out of round with a hammer and a solid surface to hit it on. Now imagine all the force of a bumper, winch and front clip and a couple feet of leverage will subject that pipe to when you bottom out hard. That can is gonna want to rup

You might be able to get away with it because the shock hoop will act like a truss and convert force that would otherwise tension and compress the top and bottom flange independently (i.e. bending force) into force that compresses or tensions both the top and bottom simultaneously but that's putting a hell of a lot of faith in a tube that's already bent into nearly a 180 and will not require much more force in order to move the chassis ends closer together.

But none of that matters because when I wrote that I didn't realize that you're running a can with a welded in top. :homer:

You'll probably be fine unless you drop the front bumper onto something hard enough to tear the bottom of the can.
 
arse_sidewards said:
The thickness of the cans is basically irrelevant until you get into something stupid thick like 5/8 or whatever. It's 1/4" flat stock standing on edge. It just happens to be standing on edge in a circle. You can knock a section of 1/4" wall 2" pipe out of round with a hammer and a solid surface to hit it on. Now imagine all the force of a bumper, winch and front clip and a couple feet of leverage will subject that pipe to when you bottom out hard. That can is gonna want to rup

You might be able to get away with it because the shock hoop will act like a truss and convert force that would otherwise tension and compress the top and bottom flange independently (i.e. bending force) into force that compresses or tensions both the top and bottom simultaneously but that's putting a hell of a lot of faith in a tube that's already bent into nearly a 180 and will not require much more force in order to move the chassis ends closer together.

But none of that matters because when I wrote that I didn't realize that you're running a can with a welded in top. :homer:

You'll probably be fine unless you drop the front bumper onto something hard enough to tear the bottom of the can.
Click to expand...

I definitely see what you're saying. It's really no big deal for me to throw a fish plate across the outside there so I might as well. Ounce of prevention you know.
 
Alright alright, 3/8" and 1/2" may have been overkill.
Those were the scrap cuts they had at the metal place and I figured the lower link mounts could benefit from the extra beef.
 
Maquet24 said:
Alright alright, 3/8" and 1/2" may have been overkill.
Those were the scrap cuts they had at the metal place and I figured the lower link mounts could benefit from the extra beef.
Click to expand...

I figured your reasoning was something like that. :laughing:
 
Reinforced the frame over the bump cans, gusseteted the shock hoops, and put a strap over the fuel tank. Almost ready for paint on the frame.

photo41389.jpg


photo41390.jpg


photo41391.jpg


photo41392.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh