Hi, whats the Pro's and Con's fitting the air helper system to the Pajero monocoque chassis on the Gen3 ?4ePajero wrote:
I suggest you have the chassis strengthened if you fit an air helper system.
__________________
♫♪ ٩(•̮̮̃•̃)۶ ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶ ٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶ ٩(-̮̮̃•̃)۶
2001 Pajero 3.2 Di-D LWB Manual (sold)
2001 Pajero 3.2 Di-D LWB Auto (sold)
♫♪ ٩(•̮̮̃•̃)۶ ٩(-̮̮̃-̃)۶ ٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶ ٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶ ٩(-̮̮̃•̃)۶
2001 Pajero 3.2 Di-D LWB Manual (sold)
2001 Pajero 3.2 Di-D LWB Auto (sold)
The Gen 3 does not make use of LEAF springs at the rear, but rather COIL springs. The airbag is placed inside the coil and the load is thus effectively still carried on the same points as with the standard setup, unlike the LEAF suspension systems with bag fitted where the load is transfered to a new stress point as per 4E's explanation.JohanV wrote:Hi, whats the Pro's and Con's fitting the air helper system to the Pajero monocoque chassis on the Gen3 ?4ePajero wrote:
I suggest you have the chassis strengthened if you fit an air helper system.
In my opinion the airbag is absolute PRO on the GEN3 if you intend carrying heavy loads at certain times. It will also assist in saving the rear tyres in such cases from uneven wear due to the 'Volksie Beetle' effect on the Independant rear suspension of the Gen3.
CATS
Gents,
I agree with Cats on the load area of the coil is the same as the airbag, but I do not know if the actual "footprint" is the same, I doubt it. Cats, I think what I'm trying to say is that the coil pushes against a "ring surface" and the airbag against the surface "inside" that ring. I have no idea if this is significant or not, but if I were to consider airbags I would have a long and critical look at that zone of the body.
4E's point of over inflating then becomes even more important.
What me mustn't lose sight of is the fact that the rear suspension on the Gen3 and 4 is adjustable. I didn't realise that until I replaced tyres on a 2000 DiD a million years ago. They did the obligatory 4 wheel allignment and adjusted the the rear and took the "old beetle stance"out of the car. It lifted the rear considerably and firmed up the ride.
Cheers
Roelf
I agree with Cats on the load area of the coil is the same as the airbag, but I do not know if the actual "footprint" is the same, I doubt it. Cats, I think what I'm trying to say is that the coil pushes against a "ring surface" and the airbag against the surface "inside" that ring. I have no idea if this is significant or not, but if I were to consider airbags I would have a long and critical look at that zone of the body.
4E's point of over inflating then becomes even more important.
What me mustn't lose sight of is the fact that the rear suspension on the Gen3 and 4 is adjustable. I didn't realise that until I replaced tyres on a 2000 DiD a million years ago. They did the obligatory 4 wheel allignment and adjusted the the rear and took the "old beetle stance"out of the car. It lifted the rear considerably and firmed up the ride.
Cheers
Roelf
RoelfRoelfleRoux wrote:
What me mustn't lose sight of is the fact that the rear suspension on the Gen3 and 4 is adjustable. I didn't realise that until I replaced tyres on a 2000 DiD a million years ago. They did the obligatory 4 wheel allignment and adjusted the the rear and took the "old beetle stance"out of the car. It lifted the rear considerably and firmed up the ride.
Cheers
Roelf
Yes the rear is adjustable on the IRS(Independent Rear Suspension) Gen3 but it will only set it for a specific load, ie empty. As soon as you load it it will again have a wheels outward stance. This (I Think
I have been running airbags for the last couple of years and must say that to me it made a world of difference to the years before that when hooking up my Xplorer with full load in the back and on top of the Pajero. I have yet to have any Negatives on my particular vehicle but that is not say that it will never happen of course.
CATS
My gen3 on the lift for indicative purposes


