Torque arm for trucks

[Tig]

Has this been done before?
If so can someone provide any info about it.
Thanks

[steinepstein]

Early 67-68 C10s have a trailing arm setup, not much different in design from a torque arm...dunno if that is what you are looking for.

Jon

[bigtime]

nascar uses what is called truck arm suspension. same as the early chevy trucks.

[street3285]

A lot of truck guys call that a 2-link, and Ektensive in Texas does a lot of them. If the arms are long enough, they a 2-link will work. Are you planning on baggin the truck, or just using coil-overs? How come you want to switch to a torque arm (2-link)? How come not a 4-link?

[Bryce]

Just to clarify, a torque arm is not a truck arm. A torque arm is a variation of a 3-link. Look into TCI and speedtech and BMR, also griggs uses a torque arm.

[Tig]

Thanks for clarifying that Bryce

Street,
After reading quite a few features and other articles about mustang suspensions. I have found that the torque arm rear set up is very successful for both track duty (street/autoX) and everyday streetability.
I had also read a little info in regards to installing them. Not sure if its true or not but went with it. With a 3 or 4-link you need to find IC and such. As far as I know from the research I have found that you dont need to get that much into detail with a torque arm.

Here is a shot of a torque arm set up. Mainly for the front mount location.
After spending a little time under my tahoe I had realized I have the same two mounts, one tranny and one center crossmember. I was thinking of using the center one for the front mount and using my flip kit lowered shackled for my links. That would make for a simple yet effective install.

Please any opinions on this subject would be much appreciated (Bryce )

[Bryce]

The forward torque arm mount defines the IC. I would aim for an IC that returns close to 100% A/S but somewhere about 70%. With a torque arm you are not concerned about brake hop as much as you would be with a 3 or 4 link. Make the shorter outside links horizontal.

I personally like the slider style forward torque arm mount rather than the dogbone.

I see no reason why a truck could not use a torque arm. Weight is an issue and the torque arm would need to be much stonger for a truck, especially since the t/a is longer.

Dont forget, you still need a lateral locating device, panhard or watts. I would prefer watts in this situation so you minimize the side load on the front torque arm mount.

[street3285]

You don't want my opinion, only Bryce's.... jk man.

Thanks for the clarification Bryce. I saw them as being pretty similar in design. But anyhow, thanks for the information. I just saw the 2-link being a little easier to install, but after your explanation, the torque arm may not be that bad. I agree, a 2-link is not ideal for a track setup.

BTW, I dig those 2dr 2wd tahoes. They are sweet.

[Tig]

Originally Posted by Bryce

The forward torque arm mount defines the IC. I would aim for an IC that returns close to 100% A/S but somewhere about 70%. With a torque arm you are not concerned about brake hop as much as you would be with a 3 or 4 link. Make the shorter outside links horizontal.

I personally like the slider style forward torque arm mount rather than the dogbone.

I see no reason why a truck could not use a torque arm. Weight is an issue and the torque arm would need to be much stonger for a truck, especially since the t/a is longer.

Dont forget, you still need a lateral locating device, panhard or watts. I would prefer watts in this situation so you minimize the side load on the front torque arm mount.

Is the longer the TA the better?
I ask because the random center crossmember is roughly the same distance as the one pictured. Thats why I thought it would work out better.
A/S = ackerman steering correct?

Do you have an exampple of a slider style mount? I have never seen one.

The DOM I have is rather stout but, I am ordering some more of different sizes, square and rectangular. All thick wall.

I'm with you, watts all the way.
I'm going to be getting in touch with Fays2 for some components. I dont have much room and am more than likely going to have to make one to fit.

Thanks Bryce, I appreciate it very much.


Street,
I'm sorry I didnt mean to bump you like that. I had spoken with Bryce before and now he's rather talented in this department.
I'm diggin the 2drs too, hah.
Pictures are always nice This is how she's sittin right now. There's about 90lb or air in the bags out back to keep it at that level. I am installing the drop spindles and checking my a/s while I'm doing that. It droves like junk with it aired up. It a nicer ride with no air, just looks silly with the reversed rake going on, hah.


No air

[Bryce]

Originally Posted by Tig

Is the longer the TA the better?
I ask because the random center crossmember is roughly the same distance as the one pictured. Thats why I thought it would work out better.
A/S = ackerman steering correct?

Do you have an exampple of a slider style mount? I have never seen one.

The DOM I have is rather stout but, I am ordering some more of different sizes, square and rectangular. All thick wall.

I'm with you, watts all the way.
I'm going to be getting in touch with Fays2 for some components. I dont have much room and am more than likely going to have to make one to fit.

Thanks Bryce, I appreciate it very much.

A/S is anti-squat. I think TCI has the slider front mount. The longer the T/A the higher it will need to mounted in the truck to get the same A/S numbers. Since you will have a higher CG you will probably have a really low A/S percentage. Therefore, the rear end will squat upon acceleration. With a T/A I see no reason not to get as close to 100% A/S as packaging will allow. Since the T/A has a non migrating IC by design you should be able to have lots of suspension travel without lots of pinion angle change. Also with a longer T/A you will reduce your chances of having brake hop.

Sorry for the lack of organization of info I just spit up on the page. I havent had my coffee yet.

Good luck with your project.