Hey Axle,

My definition of Ground Clearance is: The total open area between My drivetrain machinery and the ground.

Would You agree with that?

Is this going to be a flame job?

Thanks Kiwi

 

Reading kiwi's posts makes me want to
All his talk about "fixed variables" (is there such a thing as a fixed variable....if it was fixed how could it be variable??)"divetrain machinery"(who includes the word machinery when talking about the drivetrain?), I don't have the energy to post anymore. Going to go drink a Budweiser, anybody else want one?

 

Hey Chad,

Your post was not constuctive. It was a Shot.

If I talk different then what Your used to, I do not apoligize for it.

Are You from France?

Thanks Kiwi

 

Deep breath, everyone. It's just a truck, after all.

 

while IFS can do most of the things that a SFA can with the right setup, SFA's are just more fun to play in. For instance, when you have your truck tangled around those big rocks or in deep ditches and your drivetrain is flexing like crazy, it just gives you that cozy warm feeling inside.

 

again, I love argueing over opinions, somebody ALWAYS wins.

 

Not in the slightest.

I have attempted rock crawling ONCE, and failed, miserably, though at the time I only had one locker.

I can't speak for anyone else, but my replies were 100% about trail running. Not rock crawling. Skid plate slides are on the more difficult trails, but nowhere NEAR rock crawling. In fact, the time I MOST maxed out my suspension was on a 1 rated trail (out of 10) that had a slight wash in it. I don't know how far in the air my tire was, but I almost crapped my pants.

I agree with you that the one place where a SAS makes 100% sense is in rock crawling, which is why I say that for all but the most extreme, IFS is fine.

 

That clears it up, and I'd be REALLY interested to see which one ends up having the most average ground clearance.

The way to figure it out would be two toyotas, both with the same tires, and a stock IFS suspension, as in no TBar cranks, just for posterity.

Then, every inch, from knuckle to knuckle, take measurements on flat pavement. Take the average, and see what we get.

I'm going to try this, but I need someone on 33's with a Solid Axle.

 

Hey Axle,

Sounds Interesting.

Thanks Kiwi

 

Well, perhaps another issue of why more people don't have a vehicle SAS'd is not what you know, but who. It must be nice to have a buddy with an awesome garage who has every tool necessary for the job and willing to do free labor. Or an offroad shop that is willing to help you out for free. I myself am in the process of an SAS on a 1990 pickup. I'm battling the elements out in the mud and cold. Point is, some people can't just go down to a garage or a perfect home garage and let their projects sit for months. Some people have to work for the things they own, and some get handed everything.

 

Even though I have a SAS, I don't bash IFS. I have wheeled with plenty of rigs modified in many different ways to have a bias to one style of suspension being better than another. I went SAS for many reasons of my own, and those reasons wouldn't really add anything to the discussion in this thread.

All things equal (tires size, lockers, armor, model) both IFS and SAS can handle the same obstacles, but I think IFS tends to lift a wheel more often. I also think the difference between torsion IFS and coil IFS is a big one as far as performance goes.

That said, what does it matter if IFS or SAS has more front axle clearance... when both have the same rear axle clearance?

Of course you can redirect or steer around obstacles, but that holds true for the front end as well. Even if IFS gains an inch or more, the rear axle is ultimately going to equalize the ground clearance of both suspension designs... no?

Just throwing out numbers here, but if I have a point that's 13" with my IFS, and I use that point to clear a boulder... my rear axle with a high point of say 12" is going to get me hung up, no matter what line I take.

Since a SAS is going to have very similiar clearances to the rear axle, why would I need any more possible clearance that IFS could offer? How would I benefit?

Ike... if you like, I can measure my SAS and subtract an 1" (for the 35" tires). Or you can add 1" to your findings. That's if no straight axle rigs with 33's volunteer for the experiment.

After all this thinking out loud, I am not even sure how much ground clearance ultimately matters in regards to trail capability. As others have mentioned above, many are riding their skid plates already and have been very successful with that approach.

 

now that is an intelligent response. I've been waiting on a response like this for a while. Thanks!

 

There's been a handful of intelligent thoughts in this thread.
It is interesting how the guys with IFS and a guy with a SFA are saying essentially the same thing.

The original contention was that IFS was completely inferior to SFA. I think the point's been well proven that it isn't. Once again, we are forced to the conclusion that both have certain advantages and both have certain disadvantages.

That being said, I would be interested to see what Isaac finds if he tests his theory...

 

The real debate in my opinion IFS vs. Solid is reliability, Flex, and the ease of not haveing to go full throttle on trails, and body damage. Lets say your locked F/R, and geared. The IFS being wheeled on the weekends, then drove to work/ around town is going to break. A straight axle locked F/R, geared wheeled on the weekends and then drove to work is alot less apt to break for the simple reason that the IFS has much less wear points.

With Ifs you are more apt to be limited on flex thus having to bomb the trail to have enough momentum to make it over the obstical and risk rolling. Also Sas you have flex which is more traction, With SAS your alignment doesnt get out of wack after a weekend of fun.

In the Snow IFS is garbage. The effect is one of a snow plow. The IFs just builds a wall that you continually have to stop and back up and try to break through it. Also in deep snow the IFS will get you stuck and not be able to back up. Straight axle the snow glides over the axle housing. And when it comes to getting stuck you have to dig the little axle, not the huge block of IFS.

Just my opinion based upon experience, this is a never ending subject that will always be debated.

 

not every location in the country receives two feet of snowfall at a time.

 

I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. Not trying to be a jerk, just discussing, but ones work space, to me, has very little to do with anything except the time it takes to get things done. Up until 2 months ago, I was in your EXACT situation, trying to do mods while in the parking lot of an apartment building. It took a while, but I still got things done.

Actually, that would be perfect. Give me a couple days to get it done, as I'm down with some sort of cold right now. In addition to measuring your housing every inch, to compensate as accurately as possible, also measure out side from the ground to the center of the hub, as best you can. That way we'll know exactly how much to subtract/add.

I agree with you that a SAS can be BUILT stronger than IFS. However, many don't. The one constant is the steering. When doing a SAS, you always get stronger steering.

However, stock axles are just as likely to break as CV's. And I guarantee you that I can change a broken CV axle in a fraction of the time you can change out a stock birfield.

I agree that a properly built SAS truck is MUCH less likely to break than IFS.

I disagree entirely about the gunning, going fast thing. TC has 2 ARB's, 207:1 crawl ratio, and 33's on STOCK IFS. I have watched his truck climb a 2.5 foot tall ledge, off camber, AT IDLE. As in not putting his foot on the gas at all. I have an identical set up, except a 90:1 crawl ratio. The only time my truck goes to fast is in boulder fields, where the entire trail is covered in bowling ball sized rocks. I don't go very fast, but I do end up bouncing more than I like.

Suspension has VERY little to do with how fast or slow you take things. Gears and lockers have everything to do with it.

As for snow, your experience has been the exact opposite of mine. with a belly pan, my IFS actually will "sled" over the snow, which can actually be a bad thing, as you get your front wheels off the ground. The SA trucks just plow up huge mounds.

 

This thread is too funny...

My junk was freakin' awesome with 32"s and BJ spacers


But 36"s and SAS make it so much better



Build a truck however you want, just build it. (Oh, and wheel it.)

 

My experience has been almost EXACTLY opposite to every one of these points.
- lockers = traction and the ability to take obstacles slowly
- IFS does BETTER in snow than SFA with the same size tires due to the more ground clearance talked about above and the skidplate "ramp"

Isaac - why don't you come over here and we'll use Tippy as the SFA mule. We can even switch wheels/tires so that is EXACTLY the same.

 

Which points? The alignment? The toughness of the stock C.V. axles? All of these i have wrecked on my IFS.

haha, whats the deepest amunt of snow you've wheeled in? When the snow is soo deep clearance doesnt matter, what matters is the huge pile of snow you push skidplate or not. Im not trying to bash you, but come up north where we get 10 feet plus snow and take ur IFS out, we'll see how she does vs a SAS'd rig.

No matter how much arguing you guys have about the topic a Straight axle is stonger, more flex, more dependable. A SAS'd rig w/lockers gears vs. a IFS rig w/Lockers gears, same driver, the SAS will go many more places in the Snow or Rocks. This is the stupidest debate.

 

its just like apples and oranges.i totaly believe and know that sas is stronger. i own both.identical rigs 85 straight axle efi 4runner and 86 ifs efi 4runner.im junking out my 86 because it doesnt wheel worth a compared to the 85 and it always leaves me stranded.but if someone says there orange taste exactly like an apple than ok but they just hav'nt tried a good apple yet.