# JIMENEZ BROS CUSTOMS 2 LINK REAR SUSPENSIONS , these can get you where you want to be



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

bag your car with less modifications as a 4 link needs by usinga 2 link kit.
www.jimenezbroscustoms.com
[email protected]


----------



## MR 59 (Feb 8, 2011)




----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

Bttt


----------



## pancho pistolas (Jun 13, 2011)

JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS said:


> bag your car with less modifications as a 4 link needs by usinga 2 link kit.
> www.jimenezbroscustoms.com
> [email protected]


 whats the ticket on that setup ? {48 fleetline} :thumbsup:


----------



## crenshaw magraw (Apr 10, 2002)

will that set up work on a 48 german helmet? do u guys offer a kit for a 48 german helmet? if so how much? im gonna be baggin my car next, once i get all my motor back and its wired n running


----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

The set up easy to install, and it's price is cheap. With this kit your not cutting up your back seat,and if you put a two piece drive shaft it's even better. It comes with bags, shocks pan hard bar , bracket for bags an shocks, the 2links and a step notch kit that looks better the the normal square using notch that u normally see....915.00 plus tax. Email for more pic or check WWW.JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS.COM


----------



## NFA Fabrication (May 30, 2012)

You should probably mention that 2 link kits are not good for cars with good power. Big power, and they become borderline dangerous. A cheap alternative for a budget ride, but they are not commonly used for a reason.


----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

actually 2links have great hook up, less noise,better ride quality than 4 links systems. but if your looking for 1/4 mile times yes we would suggest the 4 link. i have been in c10s pushing 500+ that drove great not to mention nascar has used the system since i believe the 80s. though this system is intended for a lowered profile car we have swaped bags for coilovers on some of our trifive customers cars who want more performance out of their car. in jan 2013 we will be introducing the "jbc flying V" 2 link wich is priced a bit higher but can do a lot more.


----------



## DJLATIN (Jul 22, 2003)

sharp!


JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS said:


> bag your car with less modifications as a 4 link needs by usinga 2 link kit.
> www.jimenezbroscustoms.com
> [email protected]


----------



## NFA Fabrication (May 30, 2012)

JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS said:


> actually 2links have great hook up, less noise,better ride quality than 4 links systems. but if your looking for 1/4 mile times yes we would suggest the 4 link. i have been in c10s pushing 500+ that drove great not to mention nascar has used the system since i believe the 80s. though this system is intended for a lowered profile car we have swaped bags for coilovers on some of our trifive customers cars who want more performance out of their car. in jan 2013 we will be introducing the "jbc flying V" 2 link wich is priced a bit higher but can do a lot more.


Agree to disagree. If it were really that great, many more people would opt for a simple 2 link over a four link. It is suitable for some applications (Never on one of my personal cars), but after hearing what you think is OK to install this on, I am a bit concerned. I build custom cars for a living, went to school for suspension design, and this is always a money saving last alternative. To be honest, with all the fabrication talent on these forums, I am a bit curious why I am the first to mention this. I am not dogging that you are offering this as an option, it is always good to have a range of options to fit budget/build level, but most people don't fully understand suspension design, and they should fully understand the pro's and con's of each design before choosing an option because it's "Inexpensive". This being a lowrider forum, many of these cars with be driven at drastically different ride heights (Be it Hydraulics, or Airbags), and that is where a 2 link system suffers most, as its characteristics vary greatly with control arm angle compared to 4-links and other designs.


----------



## IFABSTUFF (Apr 15, 2012)

WHAAAT!!! 2 links better than 4 links? YEAH RIGHT LMAO!! No articulation, fucks pinion angle, and it definately does not help you "hook up".
Watch this video and it might make more sence especially at 1:25


----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

That is a cute display of your 4 link ,but really whos car needs to articulate that much. An air bag and shock only has 5-9 inches of travel depending on what you use. The pinion angle is set at ride height on a fixed angle 2 link. Which means mean you should drive at your ride height for best results.Couple things to keep in mind: Whereas you always want to avoid a rear suspension set up that forces radical pinion angle excursions...like links that are too short or configured in such a manner (not parallel with each other, not parallel to the ground at ride height)...

...pinion angle should always be established/set at vehicle ride height, since it IS a static measurement, right? The rear axle is on a different plane than the transmission, so ANY time there is suspension deflection, there is at least a minute angular variation of the established pinion angle.

Therefore, it is set at ride height, and the goal is to use a link system that doesnt make for radical changes during suspension travel. And when I say suspension travel, I mean "average" suspension travel, not when it's laid out or hiked up. Suspension geometries need to be established in an "as driven" environment...it's great to lay it out, but at that point, not only have you "exceeded" the limits of the geometry...who cares?









So, solve for ride height.

Anyway...a 4 bar is a parallelogram (assuming equal length bars mounted parallel). Therefore, the pinion angle would remain relatively constant. Great design, not always that easy to package, and requires a Panhard bar (or equivalent).

A triangulate 4 link is a trapezoid. The upper links are (usually) shorter than the bottom links, so this design displays more pinion angle excursion then would a 4 bar. This design doesn't require a lateral axle locator.

The GM-style trailing arm/P&J ladder bar design is...a triangulated trailing arm design with relatively long arms. Since the rear axle is mounted solidly to the rear of the trailing arms/ladder bar, the pinion angle always remains perpendicular to the longitudnal centerline of the trailing arm.

Basically, the pinion angle changes as the suspension deflects, but the longer the trailing arm, the less angular change you have...and trailing arms/ladder bars are typically longer than triangulated 4 links, and in my opinion easier to package, which is why I prefer them.

A Panhard rod is required with trailing arms/ladder bars.

i copied this from another car builder....


----------



## IFABSTUFF (Apr 15, 2012)

The video shows exact movement WE use on our vehicles! 2links will make you tear through U-Joints and potentially pull your drive shaft or break at the joint. Also keep in mind the axle angle changes and so does your bag angle...
Best space saver is a Parallel 4 link with a watts link, Panhards pull your axle to the side and are useless. Which is why I am ditching my cars stock 3 link with panhard for a Tri 4 link.
Best of luck with your product, always good to see people building something from scratch. However anyone in their right mind cannot argue how a 2 link even comes close to performing to a 4 link.


----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

*OUR SHOP TRUCK*

Here is a few pics of our shop truck..


----------



## NFA Fabrication (May 30, 2012)

IFABSTUFF said:


> The video shows exact movement WE use on our vehicles! 2links will make you tear through U-Joints and potentially pull your drive shaft or break at the joint. Also keep in mind the axle angle changes and so does your bag angle...
> Best space saver is a Parallel 4 link with a watts link, Panhards pull your axle to the side and are useless. Which is why I am ditching my cars stock 3 link with panhard for a Tri 4 link.
> Best of luck with your product, always good to see people building something from scratch. However anyone in their right mind cannot argue how a 2 link even comes close to performing to a 4 link.


Agreed. I did a 2 link about 16 years ago when I was a teenager on a minitruck (Oh the 90's!), and didn't really know any better. Under braking, the truck would dive in the rear, and lift under acceleration, it was easy to install, and was appropriate for my skill level at the time. It got the job done, but I had to drive raised up more than I wanted because of braking dipping the rear. But I was 17 and my car was low, so I was happy


----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

That happens on parallel 2 links


----------



## NFA Fabrication (May 30, 2012)

JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS said:


> That happens on parallel 2 links


I'd say the bigger concern is that it is a bigger issue on 2 link systems with shorter links. I will give you that your 2 link kits appear to be fairly lengthy, reducing the ill effects of many 2 link systems. You didn't re-invent the wheel here, 2 links have been around a long time, and are an affordable option for someone on a budget. But like I said earlier, there is a reason people usually go the extra labor/money to go 4 link or another option. But an uneducated person might not understand the pro's and con's of each system possibly leading them to invest in a system that is not right for them. This doesn't just go for 2 links, I have seen people opt to go 4 link in a car that simply didn't have the room to do it, and end up making a system that had worse geometry than a 2 link. It's about choosing what's right for your car/your expectations/your budget.


----------



## sucio138 (Oct 19, 2005)

ill add my 2 cents, ive had cars wit 4 links and now i drive a car wit the trailing arm set up that i took of a c10 with a 2 piece driveshaft, i can say this much the trailiar arm set up might not give me as much travel up or down with out changing the pinion angle, but by running a 2 piece drive shaft im able to drive the car 2 inches of the ground and take it to the track and still run 10's on a 1/8 mile wit a 400 pontiac putting out almost 400horses and 400 fp torque, here is a video 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg_hYLlWTDE&feature=related

and here is a picture of when i was building the frame









and nascar still runs this set up on the race cars


----------



## NFA Fabrication (May 30, 2012)

Nascar doesn't usually entail crazy suspension travel either. The general suspension nature of a lowrider with adjustable height suspension does not lend itself well to a 2-Link design in my opinion. Suggesting the Nascar theory seems like an odd choice to back a 2-Link in our cars.


----------



## sucio138 (Oct 19, 2005)

my nascar comment was more towards the "2 link kits are not good for cars with good power", as far as travel if ur bagged all u need is a good 7-9"


----------



## JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS (Feb 24, 2011)

We now have a new upgrade with our 2 link kits , the kits now come with Jonny Joints instead of the urethane rod ends. The kit are used on 39- 54 chevy cars and and 39 - 59 chevy trucks as well as a universal kit we have . 951-781-1268 www.JIMENEZBROSCUSTOMS.com


----------

