this is cool getting to see my old jeep getting built up how i wanted.
I've gotten rid of the steering stabilizer,sway bar, and centered the axle under the jeep since that pic. Looking to relocate the battery to the back and then get the suspension situated next.
I think using the rock krawler skid would be more trouble than its worth as you will need to chop it up to fit with the clayton brackets... It will probably be just as easy to fab your own...or even easier to buy claytons... Just be aware that adding a bit of steel to claytons will be helpful as I bent mine first time out....
I was going to try to make a flat skid, but looking at how far the brackets hang down I don't know if I want to do that or not. I want to get a measurement on how far down the rock krawler belly pan hangs and possibly go that route.
Although getting the belly up is super important, I think you would benefit more from having a smoother sliding surface. Not bashing their products because I really like Clayton but I have seen their brackets anchor Jeeps a few times.
As Turtle said, the Clayton skid is a good option. Ian's is bent as well but it's still well built for a production skid.
Here is a pic of my current set-up to show the transition from skid to bracket:
[img width=800 height=478]http://i916.photobucket.com/al…d2/knoxrents/a6654476.jpg[/img]
Here is a Clayton web shot for comparison: 
Mine have definitely taken a beating but I don't remember ever getting hung specifically on the brackets. One thing to keep in mind is that the center skid is a stressed member of the frame...I don't give a $%@ what clayton says about it being ok to notch that center skid, you CAN bend the frame w/o that being there (mine was pinched 1"). His crossmember and skid gives that rigidity back...without something similar I'd be hesitant to run for too long/hard w/o a cage with tieins to stiffen things up and prevent issues.
As far as his skid itself it's decently beefy, mates nicely with the mounts, is mid-way between a stock shovel and a true belly-up, and fits well presuming your frame's straighter than mine was before it was fixed. Like turtle said it can really benefit from a couple reinforcement ribs (flipped 3/4x3/4 angle works well) as mine's bent pretty noticeably along the leading edge where it would mate to the engine/trans skid.
--Ian
One of the reasons the brackets are low is the 4 link geometry. I did a lot of calculation on my custom set up and all the numbers say to lower the frame brackets under the frame for the rolling center of gravity. My 2 cents is go with the Clayton stuff unless you are building a custom 4 link.
Aaron
nice looking man, you got any side shots?
Although getting the belly up is super important, I think you would benefit more from having a smoother sliding surface. Not bashing their products because I really like Clayton but I have seen their brackets anchor Jeeps a few times.
As Turtle said, the Clayton skid is a good option. Ian's is bent as well but it's still well built for a production skid.
Here is a pic of my current set-up to show the transition from skid to bracket:
[img width=800 height=478]http://i916.photobucket.com/al…d2/knoxrents/a6654476.jpg[/img]
I like how seamless that is. It looks like it would slide over stuff a lot better.
I have another question. I know separating the link mounts at the diff side gives will raise the roll center giving you better stability but what is gained by vertical separation at the frame side? That looks to be the main drawback of that RK kit it looks as though the upper and lowers are almost in the same plain on the rear.
For what I have done with mine, I like the radius arms.. I had the RK 3 link before the clayton kit and just prefer the radius arms.. I know Ian had a bunch of issues blowing joints with his radius arms and just made either a 3 or 4 link.. but I am sure he will chime in.....
That looks to be the main drawback of that RK kit it looks as though the upper and lowers are almost in the same plain on the rear.
Rockkrawler uses a high clearance lower control arm design that looks different but IIRC, the geometry is essentially the same. The bends in the arm probably only give the illusion that the uppers and lowers are on the same plane.
Since you aren't going to be using this Jeep on the street, you should really think about running a double triangulated set-up in the back. Clayton makes a good kit. It will have virtually zero rear steer and have better clearance than their standard kit. Combined with their new three link set-up in the front, you'd have a killer suspension. Just my .02. 
Rockkrawler uses a high clearance lower control arm design that looks different but IIRC, the geometry is essentially the same. The bends in the arm probably only give the illusion that the uppers and lowers are on the same plane.
Since you aren't going to be using this Jeep on the street, you should really think about running a double triangulated set-up in the back. Clayton makes a good kit. It will have virtually zero rear steer and have better clearance than their standard kit. Combined with their new three link set-up in the front, you'd have a killer suspension. Just my .02.
I was going to ask Aaron about that as it says you have to fab something to secure the crossmember and my welding skills suck.
Imho the clayton kit is the best on the market but it is also one of the most expensive. I would not get a lift that doesn't have at least one end with a johny joint or heim. Bushing arms wear out quick when you 4 wheel a lot just ask Jeff Stafford. Not a huge fan of rk products they don't seem to hold up and if they still use that single joint for the rear uca it definitely will not hold up. If you get the clayton skid you don't really have to fab anything but you will need exhaust work and I recommend a t-case shifter bracket kit.
Aaron
If its not a street rig though, you don't have to fab really anything for exhaust, just dump it at the skid plate right?
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
