↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home > For Sale & Wanted > [Wanted] Puma 110 Std Front Radius Arms and Rear Trailing Ar
Post Reply  Down to end
Page 1 of 1
Print this entire topic · 
alastaid



Member Since: 03 Dec 2013
Location: York
Posts: 78

United Kingdom 
[Wanted] Puma 110 Std Front Radius Arms and Rear Trailing Ar
Hi, am taking the 2" lift kit off my Puma 110, and need some original trailing arms and radius arms, anyone got some in a shed somewhere that they want to get rid of, ideally in Yorkshire ish area?

Thanks
Post #926648 21st Oct 2021 9:57am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Shroppy



Member Since: 25 Feb 2016
Location: Shropshire
Posts: 866

United Kingdom 1986 Defender 130 V8 Petrol HCPU Aintree Green
I have a pair of trailing arms, may have some radius arms... 1985 127 V8 Build Thread
Series 2 109"
Series 1 80"
Post #926745 22nd Oct 2021 6:44am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
jimbo55



Member Since: 15 Jul 2020
Location: Midlands
Posts: 399

United Kingdom 
Why are you wanting to remove the arms? Nothing wrong with running cranked arms (front and rear) on standard height.

Cranked rears on standard height end up having the arm in the mid point of the bush travel which will decrease bush wear

On the fronts in increases they castor angle so gives you much nicer turn in and steering feel

My 90 is running 1/2-1” lowered for normal driving and have cranked and castor corrected arms front and rear and it works well, and it saves money in having to buy more arms 👍
Post #926746 22nd Oct 2021 7:32am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
alastaid



Member Since: 03 Dec 2013
Location: York
Posts: 78

United Kingdom 
Jimbo,

I only thought I had to replace to original for the same reason you have to put on the cranked ones when you raise it 2". If I don't have to replace them fantastic news, but it doesn't seem logical, or infers that the angle on the originals were wrong. Got to admit I don't know much about this, may have to spend some time researching now.

Thanks

Alastair
Post #926750 22nd Oct 2021 8:44am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
jimbo55



Member Since: 15 Jul 2020
Location: Midlands
Posts: 399

United Kingdom 
Alastair,

Not so much as they were wrong to start with, just not as optimised technically as they could be, remembering that the suspension was effectively designed in the 70’s/80’s for Range Rover classics,

I’ll grab some pictures tomorrow to show what I mean 👍
Post #926841 23rd Oct 2021 7:46am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
jimbo55



Member Since: 15 Jul 2020
Location: Midlands
Posts: 399

United Kingdom 
Alastair, sorry for the rubbish sketch, didn’t get my truck back together to show proper pictures. Hopefully this gives a better idea 👍


Click image to enlarge


The bushes (front and rear) are square not angled, when at standard height with standard arms there is constant pressure applied to the bush as the arms run downhill.

With a 2” lift on standard arms, that pressure is exaggerated and can max the travel of the bush out causing excess wear, adding cranked arms to a 2” lift takes it back to somewhere near where a. Standard arm and standard heigh bush would sit normally

Standard height with a cranked arm ends up with the arm going through the bush horizontally, and leaves the bush in its free position 👍
Post #927028 25th Oct 2021 7:17am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Post Reply
Post Reply  Back to top
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT

Jump to  
Previous Topic | Next Topic >
Posting Rules
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
DEFENDER2.NET RSS Feed - All Forums