front Long Arm upgrade - Rock Krawler or Clayton? - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > ZJ Grand Cherokee Forum > front Long Arm upgrade - Rock Krawler or Clayton?

Building a Bumper?Ruffstuff Axle Simple Swap Kit!~Artec JK 1 TON SWAP~

View Poll Results: which one
Clayton 19 73.08%
Rock Krawler 3 11.54%
functionality? what's that? go back to IRO! 4 15.38%
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Unread 08-18-2009, 09:19 PM   #1
QuadraTokn
Registered User
1930 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,047
front Long Arm upgrade - Rock Krawler or Clayton?

I just sold my IRO LA's and I am trying to decide which kit is more functional - Rock Krawler or Clayton?


Both of them are about $1000 for the front ONLY kit.

But RK uses 4 separate arms as opposed to Clayton's whatever-you-call-it. So which is better?


I know most of you like Clayton's, but if RK arms are more functional, I would rather have them.

http://claytonoffroad.com/product_in...roducts_id=178

http://www.rockkrawler.com/index.php?r_intro=no

QuadraTokn is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 09:38 PM   #2
crazydude2500
Registered User
1993 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: pa
Posts: 646
i would say claytons because they are made out of 1/4 inch square tube...and the 4 arms would seem to me limit flex rather then just one arm back to the cross member...
__________________
pat

green lifted 4.5 w/32's custom front bumper 5.2L
97 xj stock blue tow hooks F&R 4.0L
2004 dodge neon SRT-4
crazydude2500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 09:45 PM   #3
StrokedWJ
Web Wheeler
 
StrokedWJ's Avatar
2000 WJ 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 2,995
I haven't run the numbers on the RK stuff in a suspension calculator, but I will say that a properly designed 3 or 4 link front (RK) is a better design than the radius arms (claytons). You can go over to pirate and read all the *****ing back and forth about the design flaws and inherent binding associated with a radius arm setup.
__________________
2000 WJ 4.5L - Stroked, Locked, & Long-Armed

Click this -->Think you can beat me?
StrokedWJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 10:19 PM   #4
Jones
Consider the following...
 
Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 10,794
Why didn't you keep the long arms you had?


I couldn't be happier with my Clayton front long arms. It's the only thing on my jeep that I never have to worry about. Once you get the rear you will have a very solid suspension because everything is tied together.
__________________
Put your bacon where your mouth is!
Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 10:30 PM   #5
mr4x4
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: nevada
Posts: 862
the rock krawler kit with the four arms is an option you may run it as a 3 link or four link the 4link is mostly so you can run high speed desert take the passinger upper link out and you will have a rock crawling flexing beast
the rock krawler arms are stronger then claytons
and having the radius design you put all your axle stress on the frame bracket (or in this case a unibody side bracket)
where the rock krawler kit gives you seprate control arm mounting points on the frame (unibody) thus less stress on the brackets

and as far as which kit has stronger arms I had the older arms in 04 they were 2" thick cold rolled steel
now they are 2” solid alloy steel and feature a high clearance design to maximize ground clearance
__________________
94 stock zj and a 95 zj with a 5.5" lift with 35" bfg km2 a rear currie 9in with 4.56 gears an arb and 35spine axle shafts and 4.56 gears in the front Hp30 super30 kit arb 4.1 low range transfercase
mr4x4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 10:30 PM   #6
gatorayde
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 3,335
Guess which one I voted for
gatorayde is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-18-2009, 10:39 PM   #7
mr4x4
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: nevada
Posts: 862
I havent ran claytons kit but I have ran rock krawlers on a comanche and a friend has been running rock krawlers kit since at least 04
I was happy with rock krawlers kit but they have improved there kit since I have ran there kit

either kit you get you will most likely be happy with it

heres a pic from early 05 of a frined running the rock krawler kit and he is still running the same kit
__________________
94 stock zj and a 95 zj with a 5.5" lift with 35" bfg km2 a rear currie 9in with 4.56 gears an arb and 35spine axle shafts and 4.56 gears in the front Hp30 super30 kit arb 4.1 low range transfercase
mr4x4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 02:31 PM   #8
QuadraTokn
Registered User
1930 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,047
Thanks for the feedback.

Quote:
Originally Posted by YHC2000WJ View Post
I haven't run the numbers on the RK stuff in a suspension calculator, but I will say that a properly designed 3 or 4 link front (RK) is a better design than the radius arms (claytons). You can go over to pirate and read all the *****ing back and forth about the design flaws and inherent binding associated with a radius arm setup.
What is better for flex? RK 3 or 4 link or claytons?

What is better for DD?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZJones View Post
Why didn't you keep the long arms you had?


I couldn't be happier with my Clayton front long arms. It's the only thing on my jeep that I never have to worry about. Once you get the rear you will have a very solid suspension because everything is tied together.
Because I want to be able to adjust my control arms. For alignment and other reasons.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mr4x4 View Post
the rock krawler kit with the four arms is an option you may run it as a 3 link or four link the 4link is mostly so you can run high speed desert take the passinger upper link out and you will have a rock crawling flexing beast
the rock krawler arms are stronger then claytons
and having the radius design you put all your axle stress on the frame bracket (or in this case a unibody side bracket)
where the rock krawler kit gives you seprate control arm mounting points on the frame (unibody) thus less stress on the brackets

and as far as which kit has stronger arms I had the older arms in 04 they were 2" thick cold rolled steel
now they are 2” solid alloy steel and feature a high clearance design to maximize ground clearance
So I want to get the 3 link? Can others confirm this?

That would be good for my wallet, its a little cheaper.

Can I do some more welding with the Claytons to properly disperse the stress?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gatorayde View Post
Guess which one I voted for
I don't care ya dummy.
QuadraTokn is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 02:45 PM   #9
Jones
Consider the following...
 
Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 10,794
The way I look at it is if you're flexing enough to bind up the Clayton long arms to the point that they're limiting flex you're either in a buggy or you don't have fenders anymore. Bryant from KOR is getting plenty of flex. He doesn't have the Clayton arms but it's the exact same radius arm design.



__________________
Put your bacon where your mouth is!
Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 03:11 PM   #10
QuadraTokn
Registered User
1930 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,047
In a couple years my WJ won't me my DD so I want to make the best choice here.

Price is too close to compare for me, but if anyone is interested,

the RK X-Factor kit (front only) is $800, and the Triple Threat kit is $1000. Clayton's is $950.
QuadraTokn is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 03:39 PM   #11
ArloGuthroJeep
Mr. Hyde!
 
ArloGuthroJeep's Avatar
2004 WJ 
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 23,079
Claytons kit gives you a subframe...RK doesn't.

What do you mean by "more functional"?

mr4x4 your experience with RK on vehicles aside from the WJ doesn't apply to this at all. RK has had a history in the past making some shoddy components for the WJ (ie: trackbars crushing oil pans when flexing).

A radius arm will bind more - on the WJ the UCA axle side bushing takes the bulk of the abuse so that is what you'll find wearing out from the binding. I have had mine for a bit over 2 years now and replacing my bushings once in that time frame. So they have lasted a ton longer then when I was on short arms and replacing them every 6-9 months

The advantage to the radius arm or 4-link is that if one of the upper control arms fails, you still have one keeping you positioned properly. Otherwise there is nothing to prevent the axle from rotating. That is where a 3-link comes up short. Some people with claytons disconnect the passenger side UCA making it a 3-link radius setup to prevent binding.
__________________
'04 WJ, 6" Clayton LA's, 242 SYE, 35" BFG MT KM2's, 4.56 gears, & D44a locked
'14 WK2 Limited w/5.7L, ORAI, & Tow Package
ArloGuthroJeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 03:54 PM   #12
gcjeeping
Registered User
2001 WJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: -----Sacramento-----, USAF RETIRED 462X0
Posts: 3,463
I've had my RK 6" lift on for almost 5 years now. Have plenty of Flex, but its a 3 link and was 1100 bucks. My third link is not on the lower control arm, but on the new trany cross member bracket.







gcjeeping is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-19-2009, 05:15 PM   #13
skain8
Under Construction
 
skain8's Avatar
2002 WJ 
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading, PA
Posts: 3,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArloGuthroJeep View Post
Claytons kit gives you a subframe...RK doesn't.

What do you mean by "more functional"?

mr4x4 your experience with RK on vehicles aside from the WJ doesn't apply to this at all. RK has had a history in the past making some shoddy components for the WJ (ie: trackbars crushing oil pans when flexing).

A radius arm will bind more - on the WJ the UCA axle side bushing takes the bulk of the abuse so that is what you'll find wearing out from the binding. I have had mine for a bit over 2 years now and replacing my bushings once in that time frame. So they have lasted a ton longer then when I was on short arms and replacing them every 6-9 months

The advantage to the radius arm or 4-link is that if one of the upper control arms fails, you still have one keeping you positioned properly. Otherwise there is nothing to prevent the axle from rotating. That is where a 3-link comes up short. Some people with claytons disconnect the passenger side UCA making it a 3-link radius setup to prevent binding.
Very good info, Arlo.

And as I've written before, IMO, Clayton's subframe is the single best feature over any other long arm kit out there for the unibody Grands.

QuadraTokn -- if you weld the replacement crossmember properly, there is no added "stress" on the unibody, or the need to weld "more" to lessen it. Strength is never in doubt with Clayton's. Think about it, have you ever heard of anyone having issues with Clayton's?
__________________
Tom

'02 WJ: 4.7L, 5", HP44/9", 231HD, tall & skinny KM2's
'99 XJ: stock
'99 XJ: stolen
'06 XK: sold
231HD build guide
skain8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-23-2009, 09:43 PM   #14
QuadraTokn
Registered User
1930 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,047
I ordered the Clayton's along with the unibody frame rails.
QuadraTokn is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09-23-2009, 09:57 PM   #15
BigDaveZJ
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Centennial, CO
Posts: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuadraTokn View Post
I ordered the Clayton's along with the unibody frame rails.
Well done. RK is a step down from IRO in my opinion, Clayton's is a step up. Been running Clayton's on my rig for 4 years and it's been as good for my ZJ as ditching the 249 and 35.
__________________
95 ZJ with lots of stuff
14 WK2
BigDaveZJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.