Are the Ryker tie rods weak?

[Markubis]

Just saw this video and got me wondering. From what I saw the tie rods on the Ryker are hollow tubes, which make me think they might be flexing under load.

https://youtu.be/EIsmhDLAv3Q

https://www.trex-fab.com/products/heavy-ryker-tie-rods

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Just saw this video and got me wondering. From what I saw the tie rods on the Ryker are hollow tubes, which make me think they might be flexing under load.

https://youtu.be/EIsmhDLAv3Q

https://www.trex-fab.com/products/heavy-ryker-tie-rods

Actually ( imho ) what the tubes are made of means more. When you consider what they do and how they function, thay are not stressed much , un-like the " A " arms which I believe are hollow also ..... Mike :thumbup:

 

[BajaRon]

Tubes can be stronger than solid stock. It all depends on the engineering and materials used. I don't think the Ryker is going to have a problem in this area.

 

[Peter Aawen]

Just saw this video and got me wondering. From what I saw the tie rods on the Ryker are hollow tubes, which make me think they might be flexing under load.

.......

From the looks of that comment, I think you'd be very surprised if not absofreakin'lutely mind blown to find out exactly how many 'hollow tube tie rods' there are out there, and on the toughest vehicles around at that; and how many hollow 'A' arms, trailing arms, & other suspension arms there are as well!! :lecturef_smilie:

So like others have already said, just cos they're hollow tubes doesn't necessarily mean the Ryker tie rods really are all that likely to be an issue &/or flex measurably during use.... Besides, it's not as if the Spyder/Ryker suspension design is all that tight &/or sophisticated enough as to warrant over-compensation to minimise tie rod flex &/or require really ultra-heavy duty tie rods, and that's not really what 6061 aluminium does anyway!! . In fact, most likely the only thing those upgraded tie rods will have added to the equation on most Rykers is a tiny amount of extra weight with increased flexibility and potentially marginally degraded performance as a result :dontknow:

So unless you spend a lot of time operating at extreme limits on the rough stuff/not formed roads where any number of immovable obstacles might solidly impact the tie rods &/or if you ever want to jack up the entire weight of the Ryker using them as jacking points, then maybe you're wasting your money....

Just Sayin'

 

[Markubis]

No, I don't doubt what you are saying. But, my question is, since we know they went on the minimum side for strength on the sway bar and end links ( can we agree on that?), then could these tie rods also be on the minimal side? If they are aluminum then I say yes because my experience with aluminum tubing is that it's not very strong and can flex.
The person did seem to notice significant gains by changing them. Could it be in their head? Possible...and that's why I'm curious.

 

[ziggy]

:chat: Please continue.... Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[BajaRon]

OK, checked out the video. Without actually trying these rods, it's impossible to say on that front. But I do have some issues with the conclusions.

First, he not only changed out the tie rods. But he altered the alignment at the same time. That means he has to be hard pressed to know what did what. How much was from the tie rod change. And how much was from the alignment change? I have a problem with that. The correct way to do this is to make sure the alignment is correct. Ride with the OEM tie rods. Do the tie rod change and bring the alignment back to the same, identical settings. Then test. It's the only way to know what the tie rod upgrade is actually doing. Going over bumps in the road with a bad alignment can give you the same issues he attributes to the tie rods.

Second. There is no way, in my opinion, that you can do an accurate alignment on a Spyder or Ryker with a tape rule at the tire. It is simply nowhere near accurate enough. If you get it right that way, I'd say it is pure luck. The entire format behind the tried and true ROLO laser system is based on the fact that they measure from a fixed, machined surface. Very accurate. Then move the measurement out 8 feet or so to hugely exaggerate the readings, greatly increasing accuracy. The laser is just icing on the cake. This gives the extremely precise adjustment needed to get a Spyder or Ryker done right.

In rough numbers. 1/16" at your tire would be 1/2" with the ROLO system. Bringing this dimension to zero misalignment at the tire is not easy to do. However, even if you left the ROLO alignment off by 1/16" (which they are not going to do). That would be 1/128" at the tire. This is the way to do it.

I do not recommend the tape rule method suggest in this video. Which means you can add a ROLO alignment to this install if you want it done right.

I am not disparaging the product. Who knows? It might be the wonder fix claimed in the video. I'm just not convinced he makes his case for the reasons above.

 

[EdMat]

I hope nobody tries to get an accurate toe in setting using the method in the vid.

 

[Markubis]

I know. I cringed at that also.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

No, I don't doubt what you are saying. But, my question is, since we know they went on the minimum side for strength on the sway bar and end links ( can we agree on that?), then could these tie rods also be on the minimal side? If they are aluminum then I say yes because my experience with aluminum tubing is that it's not very strong and can flex.
The person did seem to notice significant gains by changing them. Could it be in their head? Possible...and that's why I'm curious.

Aluminum " not very strong & can flex " ..... I suppose, but I live in Vt. and have a " snow rake " for the roof .... it has a 24 in. x 8in. flat piece ( that pulls the snow down ) and it can be extended in 5 ft sections to 20ft long . The pipes / tubes are 1 1/4 in. in diameter. I've been using it for 40 + years now. it still hasn't bent. .... there is some flex ( because of the four joints ) but it's darn sturdy. There are many. many types of aluminum, to satisfy many different applications. I'm sure the engineers figured out what they needed ..... JMHO .... Mike :thumbup:

 

[BajaRon]

No, I don't doubt what you are saying. But, my question is, since we know they went on the minimum side for strength on the sway bar and end links ( can we agree on that?), then could these tie rods also be on the minimal side? If they are aluminum then I say yes because my experience with aluminum tubing is that it's not very strong and can flex.
The person did seem to notice significant gains by changing them. Could it be in their head? Possible...and that's why I'm curious.

I don't know that they 'Went to minimum strength' for the sway bar and end links. There are a number of parameters to consider. At least one being what they were aiming for with the end product. My personal feeling (because they aren't going to tell us why) is that they thought the sway bar stiffness (or lack thereof) provided a nicer and safer ride. I may disagree with that. But I can just about guarantee you they didn't save any money there. As for the plastic end links. Yes, that is a money savings over a metal part. But mostly, they seem adequate, though inefficient.

In short. If money is no object. You can improve just about every component of everything made today. It's always a trade-off, and the customer usually decides were the balance is. Did BRP cut some corners? Of course they did! This is true of everything. Whether or not it is justified. Well, that depends on your perspective.