shaeff

I like the idea of these axles. I gave up on the idea of a SAS on my Pickup because with how few times I get off the beaten path, it's just not logical. Mine is a DD all winter long, and used to haul crap around during the summer.

I've been thinking of ways to cut down my '85 SFA to resemble our front diffs, that way I can retain IFS, go long travel, and keep strength up front. Only reason I'm concerned about strength is 9.2:1 CR 7MGTE swap will be taxing if I lay into it at all. (about 400bhp when all said and done) All that with better ride quality to boot, and most of the stuff I do is way back in the woods where a SFA rig would rattle my teeth out.

If this now pipe-dream becomes reality, And I started breaking CVs, I'd have no problem paying that price for something that's significantly stronger than stock. I plan on running no larger than 35" tires, as skinny as I can get them.

MaK92-4RnR

if you're gonna make the investment of Long travel, why not go with a CV that can handle it? they state these are "unbreakable" and they are warrantied... if you're worried about the ring and pinion not handling it, do their treatment... send it in. Don't bash the new product...

James Woods

iTrader: (1)

Um...that was the quote from their website in quotations.

strykersd

I'm curious how much extra droop travel you can pick up with a set of these...

They're out of my price range. Didn't Downey sell similar ones with the same 930 joint for $600 a set?

Cool product though

xxxtreme22r

None, not without using a bracket lift and/or using low profile bump stops etc etc.

These are not as far as I know these at not long travel axles, so they will not add anything to travel by themselves. What they will do for you however is all but eliminate the chance of beaking a cv at the joint when at full droop/compression when you have bracket lifts etc etc installed.

AxleIke

Yes, they will allow more travel, if your suspension will accomodate more travel. These joints have a larger critical angle than stock.

Better than droop travel would be increasing your uptravel. Stock, the suspension uses almost none of the uptravel potential of the CV's.

And no, Downey never sold axles like these. They sold axles with 930 joints, but the outter joint was stock. They did not sell inner axles either.

xxxtreme22r

I remember starting a thread a while back on droop versus compression travel, I wonder if I can dig it up.

I cannot remember off hand what the consensus was on which one was actually more important. I think it came down to "prerunner" versus crawler on which one was more important.

I would think though you are right on an ifs rig as when the front hits the bump stops on compression it actually starts to affect stability of the truck as it tilts the entire frame thus the center of gravity changes. It also lifts the same side rear causing you to effectively loose "usable" droop of the rear..

I won't go into what I think on SFA/SAS since these are IFS axles.

dropzone

iTrader: (6)

the 930 CV's have been proven time and again in all sort of High and low HP applications.
I remember 25 years ago wanting a set of 930 CV equipped axles for my old Baja bug..they were expensive than too but they have met the test of time and will continue to do so.

the prices for these axles are similar to what you would find for axles built by High Angle Driveline

ScottyC

iTrader: (1)

FWIW, most of the guys that have run IFS in KOH have since gone back to solid axles. Shannon Campbell being one of them. His new rig will be a solid axle buggy again.

IFS has its purpose in the desert for sure.

In a rockcrawling application, the general consensus is still that the solid axle just plain and simple works better.

From a business stand point, I love the price of these axles. Especially since a lot of my business revolves around solid axle parts and kits. The sell is easy to talk someone out these axles in favor of going to a solid axle.

These axles still do not add strength to the rest of the components on the front IFS that need to be addressed anyway. The steering linkage is weak, idler arm, rod ends, control arms, etc. All of that needs to be replaced anyway, and you can plan on getting a new alignment after every single trip out.

Issac wheels his IFS rig pretty hard, and has had to beef up and replace A LOT of the suspension parts. It results in down time, $$$, loss of patience, etc.

With that being said, ask anyone who has gone to a solid axle if they would go back to IFS. I bet you won't find a single person that would go back. And considering the cost of not only these axles, but the cost of the rest of upgrades needed, a full built, locked, Longfield'ed solid axle would be a lot less $$$.

Just my $.02

AxleIke

Very well said.

I too plan to go SAS. I have done what I can, but I'm bumping up HP, and am tired of working on it. I also want to sell my parts while they are all in one piece, and am looking at 37's.

I have never argued that IFS is comperable to a SAS. however, these axles are a new product that could begin to make IFS a functional, strong, and fun trail truck suspension.

Rock Crawling? Who knows? Tim is going to give it a shot. For most, the time, effort, and coin needed to build what Tim is going after is not in the cards.

I'm just against bashing vendors.

I am very surprised to find out that Campbell is not running his IFS again. It seemed to me that he broke almost everything but the front end on that truck, including the rear. Then again, I don't know much about rock racing.

ScottyC

iTrader: (1)

His issue is how much harder it was on the rest of the rig in the rocks(which is why other things broke). He was easily the fastest rig in the desert when the tranny wasn't eating itself in both races, but in the rocks, he broke other things because of the IFS and having to launch the rig into obstacles that could have been finessed easier with a solid axle. In the end, he admitted that while the race could be lost in the desert, its been won in the rocks.

IIRC, an IFS rig hasn't actually finished the race to date.