[khan_sultan]

Objective:

"To achieve the maximum articulation after the SPoA setup"

Problem:
Most of us know that the front leaf springs of the Gypsy are no good. In stock form they are nearly -ve camber and are a proverbial weal link in the whole setup. They limit articulation and can break easily if pushed hard.

After I had done the SPoA setup, I reinforced the front leafs by adding an extra leaf and that brought the camber to slight +ve at best (I would say neutral). The articulation improved with the SPoA setup and here is an example of the articulation that is possible due to SPoA on stock leafs/shocks. (pic courtesy: Rudra)



In the meantime Dr Nano came up with CFL for front and I accepted to test them. After a false start and breaking 2 sets like this, I said goodbye to front CFL's for the time being until I get more confidence in their front CFL product. (I had thought that the CFL + long travel shocks would be the best combo for maximum articulation but.....)



As I mentioned, getting the maximum articulation was/is the desired objective for me. Towards that objective, I have even replaced the stock shocks by 10" travel bilstien off-road 5125 series shocks. (See pic here)


However, the metal leafs in the front are still limiting the setup and that started me getting into studying, reading on how to address this point. After collecting lots of information, inputs from Zuk owners abroad, I have come up with a plan that will address this through the following modification.

Rear Up Front (RUF) Suspension

This will involve using the rear leaf springs (metal ones) of the Gypsy up front. This requires modifications as the eye to eye length of the rear leaf is 3" longer than the front, the camber is different, the spring rating is different. There are various ways to go about it and the 2 possible ways are:

• Move the axle a bit forward (extending the wheelbase)
• Modify the leaf attachment points

Both have their own +ve/-ve aspects and I have chosen to go go ahead with the 2nd approach.

The fabrication of few required parts has started and this should be ready soon

[Nilesh5417]

I've only started looking for a used gypsy and its mind boggling to see how far you guys have already pushed the envelope! This one is awsome as it is and you already see the need to improve.

I'm no techie but from the very first picture in your post, it looks like the jeep is climbing down a set of stairs, 1 tyre at a time! Like us humans! Great stuff!!!!

From the options you listed and chose, wouldnt (2) be easier to work out? Also, isnt extended wheelbase not a very +ve outcome for offroading?

[fazalaliadil]

Khan Sahib,

Each and every thread on your Gypsy has been avidly followed by me . Just when I think you are done with your Gypsy... there is something major done on it.

Since many years I have experienced it but just renewed my conviction last month... as I have been to jungle safari's in Maharashtra, the compact size and the power to weight ratio of Gypsy makes it by far the best off-roader for me.

In the near future I am going for a Gypsy for myself, your valuable inputs then, are going to be my wikipedia on this 4X4.

Regards,

[Jaggu]

Cant wait to see how this one comes out and yes am glad you went with second option. First one had too many variables which i was not very sure.

[condor]

Khan saab, why not check the market for leaf-springs from other vehicles that will match the length you are looking for ?

[Rossi]

I am getting really exicited with this thread.

But I would still vouch for the CFL's. The amount of on-road stability is mind-blowing on high speeds!

Have been informed by Dr. Pawar that the re-inforced frontones with off-road tolerance are ready & will be shipped to me this week .

[khan_sultan]

Originally Posted by Nilesh5417

....From the options you listed and chose, wouldnt (2) be easier to work out?

Yes, #2 option is easier for LWB Gypsy

Also, isnt extended wheelbase not a very +ve outcome for offroading?

In US, the Gypsy that you get is SWB and invariably all mods that involve height increase do result in increasing the WB of the US Gypsy to get more stability.

Originally Posted by fazalaliadil

...
Each and every thread on your Gypsy has been avidly followed by me . Just when I think you are done with your Gypsy... there is something major done on it.

few more things and then it will be 100% to my satisfaction. Slowly getting there.

In the near future I am going for a Gypsy for myself, your valuable inputs then, are going to be my wikipedia on this 4X4.

Thanks. That serves the purpose of sharing my learnings/experiments

Originally Posted by Jaggu

Cant wait to see how this one comes out and yes am glad you went with second option. First one had too many variables which i was not very sure.

Let's see. Should be soon enough and this is a relatively simple thing, so not much chances of a mess up

Originally Posted by condor

Khan saab, why not check the market for leaf-springs from other vehicles that will match the length you are looking for ?

The rear leafs of Gypsy are the size I want. The mods to the leaf attachment points will be according to this size. The longer size of leafs will give more articulation + a softer ride also.

Originally Posted by Rossi

...But I would still vouch for the CFL's. The amount of on-road stability is mind-blowing on high speeds!

Even I had thought so and would agre that front CFL are great while they last, but after breaking 2 sets I am kind of not comfortable with them for now.

[offroad_maniac]

Khan Sir.. great going. but why Rollcage given last preference? Now one nice snorkel & sturdy Roll Cage will make it the Best in India.

[khan_sultan]

Forgot to update this for quite some time. Here's the update:

myself & swastikviji got the parts fabricated for this and this has been nearly done on his SPoA Gypsy.

The parts that were fabricated are:

#1: A set of mounting plates, that will bolt on to the perches, for the rear side of the front leaf. This is the template we used, got from internet.

The top two holes for mounting on perch, the bottom left (existing OE mount location), bottom middle (new leaf mounting location, when using Gypsy rear leaf), bottom right (when using CJ's rear leaf in Gypsy front)



This will sit on the existing perches. 2 holes are drilled on the existing perch and these 2 + the existing perch hole are bolted to provide strength for the new leaf setup. The hole in the fabricated plate is used for mounting the leaf.

This moves the mounting point ~1.5".

The beauty of this setup is that you can go back to stock leafs whenever you want. Just remove the plate and put back the leaf on the OE perch

This completes the front-rear perch and addresses the 1.5" of the 3" extended length of the new leafs. For the front-front shackle mount, this is what we did:

Fabricated a 1.5" (eye to eye) plates that will fit in the existing shackle mount location & sit horizontally (and extend the frame by 1.5") to the frame/chassis. Then the OE shackles will get mounted to these plates.

Beauty: Both the plates/shackles can move and aid in articulation.

One aspect to have to make sure is that the front shackle plate doesn't go -ve :-)

Here are some pictures ( From swastikviji's Gypsy) (Don't have pictures of the front part). will post soon.

Originally Posted by offroad_maniac

Khan Sir.. great going. but why Rollcage given last preference? Now one nice snorkel & sturdy Roll Cage will make it the Best in India.

That also will happen soon..

[DirtyDan]

Mr. Khan, I doff my cap to thee. You are a serious fellow.

More articulation, especially on the right side, gives a greater angles of incidence of the front drive shaft connection to the front diff. Are you doing anything to bolster the rigidity of the transfer case mounts? Are you able to stay with stock universals?

Since you are going with the 2nd option, "Modify the leaf attachment points", does this mean you do not have to change the steering connections?

[ladak.imran]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

Since you are going with the 2nd option, "Modify the leaf attachment points", does this mean you do not have to change the steering connections?

Fairly simple mod - atleast that's what it looks like from over here

Once the rear LS's are bolted on, how will the dynamics of the vehicle change (apart from the more articulation and softer ride bit)?

And just to re-confirm, you have only fabricated the mounting plates, and done nothing else to make this mod successful?

[khan_sultan]

Originally Posted by DirtyDan

... Are you doing anything to bolster the rigidity of the transfer case mounts? Are you able to stay with stock universals?

Not as yet. Once I replaced the 3 mounts with a new (stock) set, things have been fine. Also, I keep 3 spare mounts with me always and 2 sets at the house for emergency usage.

Since you are going with the 2nd option, "Modify the leaf attachment points", does this mean you do not have to change the steering connections?

Yes, it does impact the steering drag link. It touches the leafs on the passenger side. This means that either one has to go for a Z-Link setup or a cross over setup.

Originally Posted by ladak.imran

Fairly simple mod - atleast that's what it looks like from over here

I wish. Alas, nothing is as simple in reality as it looks.

Once the rear LS's are bolted on, how will the dynamics of the vehicle change (apart from the more articulation and softer ride bit)?

Will find out and update.

And just to re-confirm, you have only fabricated the mounting plates, and done nothing else to make this mod successful?

Apart from few mounting plates, it needs rear leafs + front leafs to be modified, + steering drag link to be modified. That's it -- simple

[SPIKE ARRESTOR]

Khan bhai, from the drawing attached by you, it can be seen that the thickness of the fabrication has not been mentioned. How did you go about this? 1. Did you choose the thickness according to the ones in chassis section or 2. Did you interpolate it from the 1:1 scale drawing found from the net?

Spike

[khan_sultan]

Originally Posted by SPIKE ARRESTOR

Khan bhai, from the drawing attached by you, it can be seen that the thickness of the fabrication has not been mentioned. How did you go about this? 1. Did you choose the thickness according to the ones in chassis section or 2. Did you interpolate it from the 1:1 scale drawing found from the net?

Yes, the thickness is not mentioned in the drawing. The chassis mounts are 2 mm, so we went in for 3 mm plates. That's the best we could do without the thickness info :-)

[ladak.imran]

Thank you for the reply!

I think i shall read a bit about the way a steering system works - then I'll know what a drag link is!