Wrong?

The shackles don't swing in to let the ends of the leaves get closer when the middle of the leaf is drooped?

Only one end of the leaf can move...the one with the shackle.

The shackle is designed to swing to let the ends of the leaf move in/out...that's pretty much their primary function.

If I'm wrong...tell me why.

lol i went out of town for 10 whole days and yall are still arguing about this. haha but my 2 cents...im with tj on this..ive talked with mike (mmniac) and in my mind i just dont see how they can be bad. im a noob but still i just dont see how they can be detrimental. okie dokie, well guys keep on arguing its entertaining

Maybe my math skills are too rusty to fully appreciate either side of this argument, but when I think about the logistics of the function of the revolvers, I can't help but see them as having a decreasing value as they unload - as Porsche outlined - with even the upper range being of questionable / practical value.

Not to say that they aren't highly useful in a controlled environment or on trails that have a higher coefficient for traction - allowing the tires with traction to help pull the weight.

I am looking at this from a dual perspective - which I am sure will get me flamed in almost no time. I am only posting this because I've read all 11 pages with interest and, frankly, wanted to be a revolver supporter.

But, after 11 pages, I find that I am wholly in the other camp, for the following reasons:

1) I watch SpikeTV when I can and TiVo some of the shows on there. With only 1 exception (a cheap jeep build up on Extreme 4x4), I have never seen a show where they filmed a truck using revolvers. Hell, even on the cheap jeep build up, I didn't see the revolvers do more than give some front end function, as the jeep was climbing - with the rear wheels having full traction. So, while the jeep did see some benefit from the extra extension, it was only a few inches and that tire really wasn't doing much to actually move the jeep up hill.

2) TJ: While I am sorry to hear about your personal life and wish you the very best, I found that I was started to take everything you said with a(n increasingly large) grain of salt - especially once you put out there that you spend a great deal of time taking care of your wife and her needs. So, if that's the case, how do you have time to wheel 'every day' and still post up extended replies on this topic?

My belief now is that you (TJ) are a supporter of revolvers and, because you are being called into question for your position, are defending them to the hilt. The problem is that, in defending them as much as you have, you've actually swayed me away from them because I cannot now differentiate the facts from the feelings.

I would much rather have seen a response that ran along the lines of 'I use them and like them, but they're not for everyone.'. Instead, the argument has become personal and has drawn up a degree of math that I haven't seen in years - with examples that I am not sure are wholly accurate.

Flame away.. I didn't post up this reply without knowing that I'm opening the door to comments about my knowledge, character, parentage, sexual preferences, race, religion, etc... I just felt compelled to finally chime in on this topic given that I now have zero desire to consider revolvers in my upgrade path.

You're not wrong in this statement, from this post.

You're wrong in saying a shackle only swings down when the leaf spring droops due to tire weight. That is incorrect. Remove your upper bump stops, and then watch your shackle swing down when you fully stuff. It swings, as needed, by the lengthening and shortening of the leaf pack, regardless of which way the pack is going (up or down).

Since the Nissan leaf packs (especially on the spring-over frontiers) are extremely flat to begin with, it is very easy to get the shackle to swing down on compression, because the leaf pack is STILL shortening, even though the tire is pushing UP, and not drooping down.

This means your whole damn "explanation" on the previous page was based on faulty logic. Ergo, you're wrong. Deal with it.

:p

You WOULD have been correct IF that is what I said...but, you missed the phrase referring to this as - after the RESTING POSITION...IE: AFTER the neutral point.



So, you are arguing with something I didn't say...

I'll stand by my description of the shackle movement, swinging in and out, in response to the leaf end movement...and, as we AGREE on that...

The shackle swings in and out as the leaf moves...and, after the leaf has arched past its resting point (The shape it has if you left it laying on the ground dissconnected, etc....)...it swings in FURTHER as the tire/axle weight pulls the leaf center down, and the amount of leaf arc is increased, etc.

Period.



AND - as this is accepted as true - the MORE the shackle can swing in...the FURTHER the center of the leaf can droop down.

AND - as the Revolver merely LETS the shackle swing further, and the tire droop more, it provides more droop than a convention lift shackle.

AND - as the EXTRA droop occurs AFTER the regular shackle swing was maximized...the extra traction ALSO occurs after this point.

AND - as the LEVERAGE of the live axle is what provides MOST of either type of shackle's down force after the leaf's neutral point...the TRACTION of the Revolver is merely the same as what the regular shackle would have supplied if it were longer.

As for it somehow MATTERING if "I wheel every day"...?

I say I worked my whole life...If I take a vacation or call in sick....I can't say that?

I've been wheeling since the '70's...I wheel for work, plus, more lately in my life, recreationally...I've been working nights and weekends to make up for the days at the doctors and hospitals...we have other trucks at work...I just prefer mine, but I use what's in the lot.

If I can't be with the one I love, I wheel the one I'm with.

Some how this changes what I said?

What if I had documentation that I wheeled 27 hrs a day, 8 days a week, for a 1,000 yrs...and I said that tires are made of baby seals?

I'd suddenly be an expert?

No - I mentioned it in direct response to another post that implied they wheeled more so they must know everything, etc....it was dismissive, not a boast.

The ONLY reason this has turned into a constant thread...is that it really bothers me when people who DON'T have them, go on about things they THINK are true, but, simply are not.

People read a thread with a stream of overwhelming info....and can't process it all...so they skip to the end to see what others said/thought...as they did with the Plane on the Tread Mill thread.



This Revolver Myth is like the Plane on the Tread Mill....the one's who don't get it...are SO sure they DO get it, that they go on trying to convince people that they are right.

In this case...I have a plane on a tread mill....it takes off.

I am arguing with those who do NOT have a plane on a tread mill...who are telling me it WON'T take off.

Surely, this can be understood as frustrating at least?

A plane on a treadmill won't take off - unless it's a VTOL or the treadmill itself is moving along the ground at a speed that provides the lift that the wings of the plane need to allow it to leave the ground.

Yes. I'm sure it is very frustrating. The mentally ill patient usually will become very frustrated upon realizing they can't convince their doctors that they are truly Joan of Arc reincarnated.

I have no doubt you're frustrated. Because you're still thinking of this as a "plane on the treadmill" type of question, without ever considering the option that the plane shouldn't ever be on the treadmill in the first place...it just doesn't make sense how it could have gotten there... Some things just don't make sense. Planes on treadmills, reincarnated mental patients, and revolver shackles.

You can justify them until you're blue in the face, but at the end of the day, it's either craziness, or math that proves you wrong every time. I have no emotional involvement in Revolvers, because I didn't drop $200 on them. I don't have to legitimize their use because I spent money on them. I've been looking at them from purely a physics standpoint, and even proved some of my own thoughts/theories about them wrong once I did the math. But the point is, I did the math. And I showed you why they CAN'T work like you're saying they "do".

Yes, you have a plane on a treadmill. Of that we will both agree. The difference is, I believe the plane had no business on the treadmill in the first place, because there's a much more rational, proven method of taking off than putting a gimmick on and seeing what'll happen.

(Say hello to God for me next time he speaks to you, btw. He (or she) aren't on speaking terms right at the moment. Dude owes me $5 on a bet he lost. Dumbarse said the plane couldn't take off, and once I proved it to him, the bastage just picked it up by it's tail, dropped it to the ground, and said, "See, I told you so.". I haven't talked to him since.)

Fine, I'm taking my Unicorn and going for a ride.

Seriously...there was a video showing that the regular shackle lost traction first...and your explanation was that its because there was too much traction....

So you SAW the two suspensions going up the ramp...and you SAW the regular shackle slip first...

And you SAW the Revolver shackle go ALOT further before it too slipped.

You SAW it, but refused to believe it...after all, in your mind, that would be seeing a Unicorn or something.

...so you said it was because there was too much traction, and that's why the regular shackle slipped first...

I replied that both suspensions were on the SAME surface...if one lost traction first...it will lose traction first on other surfaces as well, as traction is a straight forward variable (A coefficient).

I think YOU are in denial, not me.

I saw no video comparing the two things I was comparing. That's because it wasn't made.

Careful around unicorns. I hear they have problems knowing where to stick their noses.

We\'ve had this argument, for the love of God, let it lie

wow...
yeah.. time to let these things die.

Unless there's video proof

There was video proof.

He can't explain why the tire that he predicted "would slip AS SOON AS THE REVOLVER UNFOLDED"...didn't slip as soon as the revolver unfolded.

He very carefully explained WHY the tire would slip AS SOON AS THE REVOLVER UNFOLDED...as, he explained, from that point on....the tire was "Unweighted".

The video SHOWED a regular shackled suspension go up, and the tire slipped on the regular shackle when the droop resulted in too little weight to have traction...a very normal occurance on droop, no surprise.

Then, The Video SHOWED the Revolver shackled suspension on the SAME ramp...and the revolver unfolded, no slip...the truck contnued up the ramp...STILL NO SLIPPING< EVEN THOUGH THE REVOLVER WAS UNFOLDED...It went a few feet FURTHER up the ramp than the regular shackled version made it...then, when ITS limit of droop was reached...the tire hung and slipped exactly like the shorter shackled version did...

...but it went A Lot FURTHER before slipping...and did NOT slip when it was predicted to, it slipped when I SAID it would, and when OTHER PEOPLE who HAVE Revolvers said it would.

We KNEW when it would slip...they were "Calculating" when it would slip...

It slipped when WE said, NOT when they "calculated".

Call me Joan of Arc riding a Unicorn...but, if I'm right about what was SHOWN...and the "calculations" were wrong about what was shown....

I must be crazy like a fox.

holy shit 11 pages over this?

Protractor sword fight anyone?

TJ:

Get your damn truck fixed. I'll get mine fixed. And I'll SHOW you in side-by-side comparison of a real leaf pack upgrade verses a revolver. That's what I've been arguing the whole time; you keep going back to a video that doesn't prove or disprove my arguement, because IT WASN'T COMPARING WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT!!!

So seriously. Let's get our rigs fixed, and then we'll "see" once and for all... You up for it?

Funny, you SAID it was going to show what you were talking about...until you saw it.

Some excerpts of examples of what you were explaining about the physics....





So - As soon as I can get more vacation time, I'd love to come over and help you kill some brews.

Really. (You know I love you man)



And can we still do the Jeff Experiments?

PS- I didn't actually disprove any of Newtons laws, its just that Newton didn't have a problem with this issue, as there were OTHER FORCES, such as the tire being pushed down by the LEVERAGE of the stuffed side tire (Fulcrum) and the FORCE of the weight of the truck on the upside leaf pack, pushing the drooped tire down....using the axle as the lever.

Your calculations left out this lever arm force, which in fact provides MOST of the down force on a drooped tire, regardless of what kind of shackle you have.



As a tire droops, the weight is taken off that corner AT THAT LEAF PACK...but...the truck weighs the same, and the weight is transfered to the OTHER pack...which PUSHES DOWN THE AXLE on the drooped side.



Newton still loves me.

Come on Porsche...admit Newton is OK with this.

Are you OK with Archimedes?



I'll buy the beer since I didn't actually disprove any of Newton's laws, or Archimedes, merely applied them.

"As a tire droops, the weight is taken off that corner AT THAT LEAF PACK...but...the truck weighs the same, and the weight is transfered to the OTHER pack...which PUSHES DOWN THE AXLE on the drooped side.

[Big Grin]

Newton still loves me.

Come on Porsche...admit Newton is OK with this."

Yep. It does.

And with an open differential, it doesn't matter. Soon as one side loses enough traction to spin, it's end-game. Doesn't matter if the full weight of the truck is on the opposite tire; it still won't move.

Thank GOD!!!!!





Seriously Dude - We need to get plastered now.

No problems. NOAS is going to Uwharrie in North Carolina in September (I think that's it; might be October). It's a 9 hour drive for me to get there, but I think I'll try to make it if I can get the truck going again. Ever since the divorce petition got filed, the truck's been put on hold; I'm not doing anything until all's finalized. I don't want it to look like there's any equity in the dyam thing.

But here's a sneak peak (with plenty of work left to go on it). It's "free-standing", but that's about it at the moment. Needs front axle moved forward 2 inches, new front wheel bearings, front driveshaft, install new rear springs, brake lines all-around, steering arms, shocks, and then it's "good to go"... I've got all the parts, save the shocks & brake line fittings. Just need to get things finalized so I can get back on it. Should take me about a week to a week and a half to finish it up, give or take.

Soooo, what did we conclude????

LOL... just messing I dont even want to get you guys started again... but i did love the pleasant dialogue!!

keep up the fights guys that is what makes this country great...

Mine was just finalized last Monday so I know what you are thinking here. Frigging great now to do what you want when you want. Hope all goes well for you and she does not get greedy.

Ok now you guys can start fighting again

The truck looks good for a "no equity position".



I like it.

And to the spectators...its not a fight...it was a search for the truth...a debate if you will.

Damn, dudes!

I thought you were gonna let this crap die weeks ago...

I guess you missed this:



This graph show that the neutral point on a regular shackle corresponds to a "neutral range" on the revolver.

TJ claims that the revolvers give great grip.

Since grip is determined by the friction:

u * N = F(f)

N is caused by weight pushing the wheel down (the ground opposes equally to wheel weight). The downward force of the wheel can cause grip, but is the same force that causes unloading on steep hills and off-camber.

TJ claims that the revolvers have great grip and don't unload. That's not possible. Either they have great grip and do unload, or they don't have great grip and a lesser tendency to unload.

Let this crap die already......

Why do we need units? The units on this graph are dependent on the k-factor of the spring. The k-factor of the spring WON'T affect the unloading of the revolvers. That will happen regardless.

Then stop posting, Jeff, you said you were done with this over a page ago...funny really, that you have such a hard on for proving TJ wrong on any point. Are you a member of The Flat Earth society too?