Wheelbase and Width

[Ghetto Fab]

Looking for feedback or thoughts on wheelbase lengths and axle widths.

Daydreaming up the next buggy build I'm trying to figure out what wheelbase and width would be ideal. Obviously nothing is perfect everywhere, and if I build something it needs to double duty(crawl and some speed) and perform well at multiple places and trails. My wheeling is out west, so JV, Sierra trails, and some Sand Hollow. I'd like to expand to some arizona trails also.

I'm curious what people are running and what they think of it, or would do differently next time.

The current jeep buggy is 104" wheelbase and approximately 65" WMS, its 84" wide overall. It does well in the sierras and JV, but places like sand hollow have me wanting more length. Also, while I like the width, it seems packaging 45deg steering would be problematic. Going wider allows more clearance for steering angle.

Kevin

 

[woody]

My JHF is 112 wheelbase and 85" outside of tire. Much wider and you start to not fit into the cracks, and mine can be too wide in some places already. Length seems about perfect. Belly is 19-20", which is also a critical number for breakover.

Many comp cars are in the 106-108 range, and 80ish outside of tire to dodge cones...but still getting full 45-50 degrees of steering. Triangulate the uppers/lowers and there is room for a narrower track and full steering clearance.

 

[pennsylvaniaboy]

Wider than 84"? To acheive that you are looking at super deep wheels, or custom axles. My dads buggy is '05+ dana 60 with 4.5" BS and its 85". In the east it's as wide as I want....


TO that same end, I am wanting to build a 48" wide chassis, and debating on SHORTENING an 05+ dana 60 down to like 63-65" but concerened about the link clearance on 50* steering.

 

[Ghetto Fab]

Wider than 84"? To acheive that you are looking at super deep wheels, or custom axles. My dads buggy is '05+ dana 60 with 4.5" BS and its 85". In the east it's as wide as I want....


TO that same end, I am wanting to build a 48" wide chassis, and debating on SHORTENING an 05+ dana 60 down to like 63-65" but concerened about the link clearance on 50* steering.

What tires though? Tires are notoriously inconsistent size wize between brands, sometimes within the same brand/model even.

I've been playing with things in solidworks to get an idea of what I can get away with. Unfortunately tires are difficult to model in cad. Also planning on 43 SX stickies just as a worst case scenario. If I want to rule those out and stick with something like a nitto or bfg, or drop down to 40s then fitment gets easier. What I'm kinda hoping to do with next buggy build though is to future proof it a bit. Maybe I start with 40s, but I don't want to be limited to that size for forever.

Honestly the big issues isn't really link clearance so much as a packaging problem in other areas. Keep in mind I'm not building a comp style buggy. Trying to get the tire to turn 45deg in the front means the coilovers, grill, and rad all want to occupy the same space. The tire needs to turn around all that stuff to make it work at full articulation. Going wider helps here obviously, but maybe 72 is too wide? Sticking with the frontend that I have would be ideal since I already own it and it fits on my trailer.

The original plan was to use my low pinion chevy kingpin frontend in the rear, then use the 99-04 outers that I have with a HP60 center that I have to build a driver drop frontend. Then I started thinking that I could probably sell off what I have and buy two 05+ 60s instead since they are wider and beefier. Sounds like I don't really want to go over 85" width which is a good data point to consider.

 

[woody]

Mine was 83" on 40's with 17x9's and 85" on 42's with 20x10's and 5"BS.

Build around 42's, you'll regret it if you don't. Having run both on my JHF, I wouldn't ever go back to 40's again.

My tires rub links and my Radflo air shocks in certain situations. Coilovers only make that worse

 

[whiterhino]

I think this is 89" wide. 14 bolt, 4" bs and 43 TSL stickies

But I gotta measure for sure.

I agree with Woody, once you run a 42/43 you won't want to run 39/40.

 

[pennsylvaniaboy]

What tires though? Tires are notoriously inconsistent size wize between brands, sometimes within the same brand/model even.

I've been playing with things in solidworks to get an idea of what I can get away with. Unfortunately tires are difficult to model in cad. Also planning on 43 SX stickies just as a worst case scenario. If I want to rule those out and stick with something like a nitto or bfg, or drop down to 40s then fitment gets easier. What I'm kinda hoping to do with next buggy build though is to future proof it a bit. Maybe I start with 40s, but I don't want to be limited to that size for forever.

Honestly the big issues isn't really link clearance so much as a packaging problem in other areas. Keep in mind I'm not building a comp style buggy. Trying to get the tire to turn 45deg in the front means the coilovers, grill, and rad all want to occupy the same space. The tire needs to turn around all that stuff to make it work at full articulation. Going wider helps here obviously, but maybe 72 is too wide? Sticking with the frontend that I have would be ideal since I already own it and it fits on my trailer.

The original plan was to use my low pinion chevy kingpin frontend in the rear, then use the 99-04 outers that I have with a HP60 center that I have to build a driver drop frontend. Then I started thinking that I could probably sell off what I have and buy two 05+ 60s instead since they are wider and beefier. Sounds like I don't really want to go over 85" width which is a good data point to consider.

40x13.50x17

 

[whiterhino]

I'm sure I will get flamed here but if you are not doing comp, why do you really need more than OEM steering angle? I've found that with my rear ARB and cutting brakes, and sometimes front dig, I can maneuver pretty decent. And is it going to kill you to have to back up once in a while? YES>>>>> it is nice to have. But if it's becoming a packaging issue for you, less angle isn't the end of the world.

I recently ran a trail with another guy with shorter wheelbase but spooled in the back where I never had to back up, or front dig where he was making 3 point turns all the time.

 

[woody]

I recently ran a trail with another guy with shorter wheelbase but spooled in the back where I never had to back up, or front dig where he was making 3 point turns all the time.

rear spools suck....selectable or open in the rear, always

 

[SteerAndStuff]

Maybe some reverse/negative ackerman in your steering so you can get the outside tire to turn sharper where it typically has more clearance and the inside tire not as sharp where it typically gets into control arms, shocks, frame, etc.

And selectable rear locker always.

 

[Ghetto Fab]

I'm sure I will get flamed here but if you are not doing comp, why do you really need more than OEM steering angle? I've found that with my rear ARB and cutting brakes, and sometimes front dig, I can maneuver pretty decent. And is it going to kill you to have to back up once in a while? YES>>>>> it is nice to have. But if it's becoming a packaging issue for you, less angle isn't the end of the world.

I recently ran a trail with another guy with shorter wheelbase but spooled in the back where I never had to back up, or front dig where he was making 3 point turns all the time.

Not doing comps, but I would like to do some more technical wheeling. I can only imagine that things will progress from there, but I do have to be realistic, I don't have the dollars to have multiple buggies. I need something that can wheel comfortably in sandhollow, but also not be limited to 30mph in the desert. It will be a compromise no matter what as they all are.

Also, just like with the 42s, may as well plan for 45deg steering at each end even if it doesn't happen right away. I'd love to have it all at once, but I may have to settle for less to get things going.

You make a good point though, I really need to figure out how I see myself using this in the future. That's why its good to do research and ask questions. Plenty of time right now to research, plan, and dream.

I'd post up a thread on what I've been playing with on the computer, but as I don't have the time to build it right now I fear the thread would simply die out with no conclusion.

I do appreciate the feedback and ideas though!

 

[chaplinfj60]

i am 116 wheel base and front axle is 91 outside of tire to outside of tire, i am running dually hubs up front, super stable and is wide but not so much an extra 3 point turn cant handle. about 20-21 belly too.