A little bit, but the key questions have yet to be answered. Is the
current tubular design Dodge uses actually better than the previous
solid ones? I don't have any problem with the idea that a hollow tube
can be stronger/stiffer than a solid rod, but that's still dependent
upon the materials used, the diameter of the rod, and the ID and OD of
the tube.
I know that the Hotchkis sway bar set is tubular, but there's no way I'm
shelling out $500 for them.
Gary Pinkley wrote:
> This link is to a technical document I wrote about hollow stabilizer bar
> design. It discusses why suspension designers are using hollow stabilizer
> bars on today's vehicles. Hopefully it will clear up some misinformation.
> https://www.hotchkis.net/pdf_files/HollowSwayTech-D.pdf
>
> -Gary Pinkley
>
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 23:59:10 -0400
> From: andy levy <andy-dml@levyclan.us>
> Subject: Re: Late model sway bars WAS: Re: DML: Design flaws or just things
> I am noticing since this is my first
>
> Well, I'm thoroughly confused now.
>
> Do we really think these sway bars are the "good alloy steel" Bob
> mentions below, or are they more likely whatevery Dodge could scrape up
> and shape?
>
> Are *both* my front and rear sway bars ('03 QC 4x4, tire & handling
> package) hollow? If so, will I see a real benefit from swapping these
> swaybars with the solid ones? If I had to pick one to swap, which would
> be better? Is it a direct fit to bolt a '99 front or rear swaybar onto
> this truck? While I have it all apart, does anyone make a polyurethane
> bushing kit for these bars so I can solidify things once and for all?
>
> If it's worth it, this sounds like a great mod to do in an afternoon
> along with a shock replacement.
>
> Bernd D. Ratsch wrote:
>
>
>>One thing to mention...the AFTERMARKET (hollow) bars also use a much
>>different material than the solid bars.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
>>[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of Bernd D.
>>Ratsch
>>Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 2:47 PM
>>To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
>>Subject: RE: Late model sway bars WAS: Re: DML: Design flaws or just
>>things I am noticing since this is my first
>>
>>
>>
>>Hollow tubes flex more and are not quite as "reactive" as solid bars.
>>Look at most of the aftermarket bars...they're not hollow. If you want
>>to compare factory to factory (solid vs. hollow)...i'll stick with the
>>solid bars. (We already tested the hollow vs. solid bar theory on a '01
>>R/T - the solid one works MUCH better.)
>>
>>- Bernd
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
>>[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of DAKSY
>>Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 2:41 PM
>>To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
>>Subject: Re: Late model sway bars WAS: Re: DML: Design flaws or just
>>things I am noticing since this is my first
>>
>>
>>
>>Hey, DML!
>>
>><snip> Woah...back the truck up. You're telling me the sway bars on my
>>'03 QC Sport+ are *hollow*?<snip>
>>
>>I really hate to make a statement, then hafta duck & run for cover, but
>>I disagree with the Status Quo... Tubing (hollow rod, if you will) is
>>actually stronger than solid bar. I know it sounds absurd, but think
>>about it....A solid bar has one surface - the outside diameter (OD).
>>With enough strain, this surface will bend or torque, & if it's pushed
>>past its elastic limit, it will deform and may or may not be able to be
>>cold-press straightened. If it can be straightened, it will not be as
>>strong as the original material. Tubing, on the other hand, has TWO
>>surfaces to strengthen it..An OD AND an Inside Diameter (ID). It is
>>inherently stronger than a solid bar OF THE SAME MATERIAL...Granted,
>>with enough strain, it WILL deform, but it'll take more to do it than
>>the to deform the solid bar, & small deformations CAN be cold-pressed
>>back, as long as the deformation doesn't cause the tubing to "kink."
>>So... if you're talking about a good alloy steel (Cold-forged or Hot
>>Drawn 4340, 4140, 4130, 8620 etc,) go for the tubing. Now if the tubing
>>used on the Gen III DAKs is really thin-walled, say under 1/8" wall, it
>>IS doo-doo, but if I hadda replace it, I would not hesitate to use
>>tubing... I'm done...
>>
>>Bob Smith (DAKSY2K on AIM)
>>
>
>
>
-- -andyhttp://home.twcny.rr.com/andylevy/dakota - andy-dml@levyclan.us -------------------------------------------- "Whatever Adam does, do the opposite and you'll be fine" -Bob Tom --------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 06 2004 - 11:46:40 EST