Says the guy with 3 posts...

Obiously someone has some reading to do.

 

No.. that is opinion.

100% Incorrect. You forget that when a leaf spring extends, it puts a negative force on the tire. An IFS system NEVER puts a negative force on the tires - EVER.

No one has brought up a high $$ linked system here.

Opinion. Pure opinion.

Agreed.

You are once again incorrect, but your attitude has you coming off like a demi-god, which, my friend, is incorrect.

By you. You've got such a hard-on for YOUR SAS that you fail to see anything beyond that. You've posted incorrect information but come down on others for what you think is incorrect info. Lose the attitude or stop posting; it's really that simple.

 

You are correct. I have a friend who took his Rancho 3" lifted, dual locked, 33" tire clad pickup more places than people w/ solid axles... and done so with relative ease. And I'm talking trails of the BlackHills. IFS can be wheeled just fine with some knowledge of how the truck will act/react and an awareness of the limitations of the current suspension design. And... there are limitations to EVERY suspension design.

 

And that reduce weight will, due to physics, allow the truck to jump higher/farther for the same velocity.

 

The suspension choice for the OP should be derived from current and anticipated needs.

My personal recommendation from owning 23+ toyotas of ALL configurations, including 3 lifted IFS trucks, 3 SAS trucks, many stock trucks is run what you have until you get to a point where it isn't servicing your needs anymore. At that point, research the alternatives and go from there. Learn the limitations of each setup, learn the advatages. Figure out a budget and your long term goals... then start shopping. But the bottom line is that only YOU can determine what the best setup is for your needs. The rest of the crap posted is opinions tainted by personal agendas.

 

lol... rock you post whore

 

Sorry - haven't read the thread in a long time and wanted to respond to as much as I could.

 

As an officially named expert, thanks rockota, I have to ask why it is you have turned to calling me out as a member of this community that used to give a damn?

The personal agenda note is irrelevant, I revert to my first post. You have foolishly decided to play sheriff in a place where I was unaware you had any clout.

A self legislating member of a kingdom of ends? Perhaps one who wanted to ride a high horse with me.

 

All you have done is chased me around noting my attitude and agenda. What answers of merit have you injected?

I am done posting, you have done your good deed and saved this place from a person who used to care.

 

so sue me..


damn, i was kinda hoping this thread was dead already

 

Unfortunetly this is incorrect from a physics standpoint. Force is equal to mass times accelleration. for purposes in this world, mass cannot be negative, but acceleration can, depending on where i define my positive and negative direction. Technically, anywhere you say you have a positive force, you can reverse the positive direction, and call it negative force. It is unclear which direction you are saying is negative, but it seems you are refering to the down direction. This would mean the spring is putting force down to the ground, and this is better for traction no? But then my torsion bar does the same thing to a point.

My IFS does completely unload the drooped tire, which then gets zero traction.

What would be great is if we could quit ripping on people so that we could get some actual information. we were about to discuss the technical differences in flex direction, unloading, etc...until more bashing occured...please cut the crap out, and just leave technical stuff...for example, I know that when looked at from a side view, different set ups arc up and down in a different direction, making one easier to go over rocks with etc...can some one explain which does what?

 

You are correct - any completely unloaded tire will get zero traction. But your above statements about leafs are incorrect AFTER the spring extends past it's resting arch. At a certain point during the cycle of the leaf spring in the droop direction, the spring will pull back on the axle. And IFS suspention is not as affected by this because it creates a downward forced until the arms hit the bump stop. The point being, at some point during the downward travel, the spring will extend past it's resting arch and begin to pull upward on the axle. Does that make sense?

Both IFS and Leafs with a rear mounted shackle will move upward and backward. But this is much, much less noticeable on the IFS equipped rig and is therefore essentially irrelevant.

 

You've given a lot of misinformation and attacked anyone who believes in IFS, 22re's and a way of doing things other than your own. Read the rest of my posts for "merit" that has been injected. And yes, I've called you out for your attitude because someone needed to.

 

See, you are not the only person with info, and the way you desseminate that information alienates anyone who disagrees with you or has correct info. It's unnessessary.

HUH?

 

yes, it now makes sense, thanks.



I need to point something out here that is directed to all the people here ripping up on Flygtenstein. First, you are entitled to your personal opinion, but please take the dirty laundry to PMs, and not here.

That being said, he DOES know what he is talking about, and he is in no way saying that IFS is bad or whatever. In fact, he generally says that unless you've pushed your IFS to the max, you don't need a SAS, which is what this thread is asking about. He also HAS run the stock IFS to the ground, in fact, i watched it as it fell apart on him going up a small rock on a trail. He left his IFS because he could no longer wheel, and barely drive on road. He's explored stock to beyond it's limit breaking the same parts over a dozen times, before giving up.

Not only that, but he is a great guy, and is always willing to help a person, no matter what the question or problem.

Another thing to consider is when talking on the internet, it is difficult to get out all the information on the page at one time...if he left something out, add to it, don't bash down what he's already put up.

 

Since we can all take jokes, the 22RE remark was mentioned in part in jest.

I am short on here in an attempt to be concise, it often fails miserably.

Someone needed to? How about from now on we all answer exclusive of personal experience and dire hatred of failure. We all must answer in a bubble disregarding a possible conflict of answers.

Thank you for making a personal effort to clean things up here.

 

Well stated. My apologies.

 

Here is a thought. Now I am not being exact with numbers but having a little exercise.

It appears it will run someone 3000 minimum either way to start in on the LT or SAS. At that point really what is accomplished is increasing reliability in extreme situations ie rocks/jumps, you dont have to fix the junk as often vs. stock. and you get a measure of increased performance in those situations.

For 3k you could get a beater rig, bash it off a freeway divider while delivering pizzas, pound it senseless on the trail, whatever. yes you will have to fix it as stuff breaks but we do that anyway. this is an option where appropriate. Yes the beater may not go as far as a SAS or hadle the hits a LT can, but there is the assessment you have to make, "have I been in those situations, and do I plan to be?"

I am still on the fence, I don't get out enough anymore to justify chopping the truck up, on the other hand 5 trips and 3 idler arms, funny noises from the steering, that is an issue. My NV experience was long trails with a few moderate obstacles, fuel, reliability were main issues. Arizona is much different, short, technical trails needing reliability and STRENGTH. The Irony is I built a FJ40 and it was the worst NV vehicle, limited cargo room, poor milage=limited range it would have been great here though, deep gears, solid axle, locked etc... Now I have the runner and it is ok for AZ but a solid axle would subdue some of my fears, the runner would have been way better in NV, the IFS would have been a lot more comfy on those 30 mile high speed burns between mountain ranges.
Only you know what is good for you. What concerns me here is people putting a huge descision like this in the hands of others. but it is good to get input from others it will bring lots of stuff to the table that you may not be thinking of, take all the good info given and plug it in to your equasion an go from there.

A stock, open diff vehicle can make it pretty far, I have proven that. What blows me away is when I go wheeling and hear people constantly say "oh, I need blah, blah blah now" They are saying this because they did not make it over something or got stuck. What they are failing to do is refine driving/spotting skills. Good skills in the seat will get you really far, poor skills will break or get ANY vehicle stuck.

 

Absolutely 100% correct. Thank you for posting that. So many people are mesmerized by the bling bling, or blinded by the internet. Figure out how to drive first, and any stock 4x4 will do for that.

A 3 year old kid could drive a fully built rock truck up all the moderate, and the mildly difficult trails in the nation (because this may cause debate, i am telling you now that it was purposefully exaggerated). That built becomes point and go, until you get onto some seriously hard trails.

There is no substitute for driving skills. Once those are top notch, serious mods should start. I have seen on the same trip a person with opens and only a mild lift drive farther and up more stuff than a second person with a locked rear. Same trail same day. skill level vastly different.

I am still like a 15 year old kid with a permit compared to a few people on here.

The key is to push yourself and your junk, and wheel with people you trust, who will help you if you happen to break.

 

This, I can agree with...