clubstylus

I have been thinking about my rear end, which is worrying!

It seems the stylus is one of few cars to run the rear upper arms from the rear (unless someone knows different)

Most 4/5 linked live axles run both trailing arms from in front of the axle. I assume there is a reason for this. its better?

With 2 upper arms coming from the rear and 2 from in front, the axle moves up and down in a nice vertical movement and doesnt arc forwards towards the 12oclock position like the other method...... but,

when going around a corner and the suspension moves 3-4 inches up on the outside wheel the arms are getting shorter and trying to lift the nose of the diff, which isnt a problem but the otherside that hasnt rasied has kept the arms the same length and is trying to prevent the axle twisting and lifting the diff nose. SO...... there is a lot of stress on the arms during heavy cornering.

I would imagine that this isnt a problem on a road car but on a track car the different forces on the axle must be tremendous.

I am considering relocating my upper arms to a point forward of the chassis! Has anyone else tried this?

Where are they mounted on the fisher models that the stylus is derived from?

Having had a quick look tonight it would be difficult to mount them above the lower arms, as the fibreglass is in the was and also the springs, but what about using a single upper arm in the middle locating in the gearbox tunnel. There is a racing series that runs a 3 linked system.

I think there would be enough room to clear everything even with my rather large diff.

Any thoughts??

Think 3 point system is as worse, as it will try to pivot the outside of the axle under acceleration as it's only braced at the bottom, and yours accelerates seriously.

But i'm not a car designer, so I would try and talk to Jeremy Phillips of Sylva, he has a lot of knowledge about this.

My answer to you would be , if you want to try -- do it However , only the Striker has it's rear links ALL trailing . The Stylus that JP tested very successfully by racing it AND every FURY ever sold since has the same two forward / two trailing link system . Hundreds of races in the 750 club have proved the design. The only difference in the Stylus and Fury rear link system is in it's location . Fury's shocks are mounted closer to the axle and foul the chassis on the top mount so JP obviously recognised that feature when penning the Stylus chassis
Regarding your description of what's actually going on in a cornering mode ---- YES , that's exactly what's happening and JP designed it that way ---- the axle becomes a huge antirollbar which is why JP wanted all links to be metalastic . The polybush grade supplied by ssc were correct for the application and will only cause trouble potentially if you use you own chioce of bushes ----- mine have been in there since 1999 without any axle cracks appearing and two thirds of it's mileage has been on track/competition

i'm learning, having done a lot of reading and thinking

I can see how it works as an ARB.

What does a Lotus 7 or locost run? or caterhams and westfields with live axles.

This will be why rose joints dont survive on the stylus.

When you say metalistic bushes? what do you mean? and also what grade bushes should be used?

Antnicuk wrote:i'm learning, having done a lot of reading and thinking

I can see how it works as an ARB.

What does a Lotus 7 or locost run? or caterhams and westfields with live axles. never looked to see .

This will be why rose joints dont survive on the stylus. NO , this isn't the case . I've explained this point many times on this forum --- rose joints on the axle end of a trailing arm wont survive if the shock/spring are such that the piston runs out of travel ie. it becomes a solid connecting rod --- so something has to give ---- ARM or ROSE JOINT whichever is weakest . A ROSE JOINT/RODEND will flex much more than a polybush or metalastic bush so it's absolutely nowt to do with the axle forming an ARB.

When you say metalistic bushes? what do you mean? and also what grade bushes should be used?

Metalastic's consist of a metal liner , the size of the bolt going through , then rubber welded between that and the outer metal liner which is the size of the ' ARM ' pivot.
Personally , I don't like metalastics because they're more tricky to fit properly so's no pretensioning happens (people probably don't think about it and simply fit them) plus they're a pain in the arse to remove and replace .
Don't know the poly grade off my head but it will be marked on them. I've replaced mine from WISBICH ENGINEERING online which are as SSC sent me day one

Sounds to me like you're planning to cut up bits from 4 kits and bolt together Tony