Anyone building their own 3 or 4 link suspensions?

I asked a similar question in the questions and answers secttion, didn't get much of a response, so I figured I would ask the street rodding guys.

I am building a rear wishboned 3 link suspension for my 600hp, big block dakota with a Dana 60 rear. What are you guys using for link material, DOM tubing or HREW tubing/square stock? All links are going to be straight/no bends. It is going to be a primarily street driven truck, maybe hit a track once a year, no slicks. What do you guys recommend? I was thinking of square 2.5" HREW, 1/4" wall? Will this work or should I just man up and use DOM? I was reading that DOM is lighter and stronger, but I am not concerned with weight and I can run thicker walls. The problem I have is, my local iron shop does not and will not get DOM tubing. All opinions welcome.
Thanks everyone.

I'm going to be buiding one for my 49 dodge, and C-notch the frame. I got some 2" sqaure stock, thick wall, bungs fit right in. Theres alot of stuff on 4 link on the HAMB. DOM tubing is nice, used some for motor mounts for the engine and trans mount with bushings made for it.

Had one car with an OEM 4 link, not impressed with it. Squirelly handling.

Even after I replaced all the oversized squishy bushings with poly, still not impressed, better but not good, imo.

My old parallel leaf Cuda would hand it it's butt all the time in handling.

I have a brand new set of E-Body SS springs I was thinking about installing, I just figured that a 3 or 4 link would be better overall.
I was looking at some factory 4 links and they are pretty cheesey looking, made from stamped sheet metal. So I figure that square stock has to be stronger and less flexible than factory. A lot of factory performance cars run a 4 link, so it can't be that bad, otherwise you would see a lot of performnce cars with leafs, wouldn't you?

Quote:

---

I have a brand new set of E-Body SS springs I was thinking about installing, I just figured that a 3 or 4 link would be better overall.
I was looking at some factory 4 links and they are pretty cheesey looking, made from stamped sheet metal. So I figure that square stock has to be stronger and less flexible than factory. A lot of factory performance cars run a 4 link, so it can't be that bad, otherwise you would see a lot of performnce cars with leafs, wouldn't you?

---

Yep, every muscle Mopar made had leafs.

A 4 link has it's place, but not in a car made to handle, imo. For a straight line, maybe, handling, no.

IRS cars don't have what most of us call a 4 link. By design they control lateral forces better than a solid axle 4 link. If you look at a GOOD 4 link setup it has a lot more stuff added to control lateral forces. A great example of how NOT to do it is the Mustang. Stock it's not a good handler, again, imo. You can add a bunch of stuff and make it a better handler though.

To me a 4 link setup feels like a leaf setup with a flat tire, all wiggly in the back. Where 4 links outshine a leaf setup is ride quality. It's easier to get a softer ride out of a 4 link than a leaf setup for equal handling, but it's cheaper to get a leaf to handle than a 4 link. As for adjustability, a 4 link can be more adjustable, if you need that much adjustment. But leafs are by no means unadustable either.

It depends on what you want and how much you want to spend and how much being able to brag about having a 4 link matters. I want a handler, don;t care to spend a fortune getting it and could care less about a 4 link or bragging about one, but that's me. I prefer the KISS principle.