Forum Discussion
116 Replies
mich800 wrote:
ShinerBock wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
For our off road and daily driver needs a IFS could be the ticket, but will need to test drive to confirm. I would like a soft long travel suspension which it appears how the Bronco is setup.
We came close to pulling the trigger on a Jeep Wrangler but with a few things we didn't like about it, and knowing the Bronco was coming we decided to hold off. Based on what I've seen we made the right decision.
The Bronco doesn't even have a mid-travel suspension let alone a long travel suspension. Heck, even the Raptor doesn't have a mid-travel suspension, but it is very close. If you are gonna use this vehicle as a daily/mall crawler that is not going to do any heavy rock crawling then IFS is the way to go. It will be noticeably smoother than a solid axle Jeep that you would have to throw a grand or so into for the same smoothness. If you do decide to take it on some serious trails, then make sure you bring along spare parts and/or upgrade to stronger materials if they have a lot of miles on them.
Not everyone does rock crawling for their off road adventures. The trade off is pretty high between that ability and on road manners. I drive Wranglers/Renegades probably 1000 miles per week for work and they suck on the highway. For the trails I travel the IFS is a much better compromise. But I have not been able to test the Bronco yet to do a direct comparison.
I understand that. Not downing the Bronco. It is just not ideal for the way I off road. No doubt an IFS is more comfortable for those that need that, but it is just not as capable or as strong. Another thing I hate about IFS's off road is that they teeter totter on a lot of obstacles which is an uneasy feeling.
It is like the GM HDs. No doubt they give their trucks a more comfortable ride stock, but it is not as strong/reliable as solid axles of the Ford and Ram HDs when you start adding bigger tires and heavy off roading. They also cannot take the abuse that a solid axle can which is why it is common for the GM HD front ends to snap on the track or at truck pulls.ShinerBock wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
For our off road and daily driver needs a IFS could be the ticket, but will need to test drive to confirm. I would like a soft long travel suspension which it appears how the Bronco is setup.
We came close to pulling the trigger on a Jeep Wrangler but with a few things we didn't like about it, and knowing the Bronco was coming we decided to hold off. Based on what I've seen we made the right decision.
The Bronco doesn't even have a mid-travel suspension let alone a long travel suspension. Heck, even the Raptor doesn't have a mid-travel suspension, but it is very close. If you are gonna use this vehicle as a daily/mall crawler that is not going to do any heavy rock crawling then IFS is the way to go. It will be noticeably smoother than a solid axle Jeep that you would have to throw a grand or so into for the same smoothness. If you do decide to take it on some serious trails, then make sure you bring along spare parts and/or upgrade to stronger materials if they have a lot of miles on them.
Not everyone does rock crawling for their off road adventures. The trade off is pretty high between that ability and on road manners. I drive Wranglers/Renegades probably 1000 miles per week for work and they suck on the highway. For the trails I travel the IFS is a much better compromise. But I have not been able to test the Bronco yet to do a direct comparison.FishOnOne wrote:
For our off road and daily driver needs a IFS could be the ticket, but will need to test drive to confirm. I would like a soft long travel suspension which it appears how the Bronco is setup.
We came close to pulling the trigger on a Jeep Wrangler but with a few things we didn't like about it, and knowing the Bronco was coming we decided to hold off. Based on what I've seen we made the right decision.
The Bronco doesn't even have a mid-travel suspension let alone a long travel suspension. Heck, even the Raptor doesn't have a mid-travel suspension, but it is very close. If you are gonna use this vehicle as a daily/mall crawler that is not going to do any heavy rock crawling then IFS is the way to go. It will be noticeably smoother than a solid axle Jeep that you would have to throw a grand or so into for the same smoothness. If you do decide to take it on some serious trails, then make sure you bring along spare parts and/or upgrade to stronger materials if they have a lot of miles on them.ShinerBock wrote:
alexleblanc wrote:
ShinerBock wrote:
The Hummer H3 was another IFS with front lockers and it was even worse than the FJ.
I was excited about it until I learned it was IFS which is not ideal for the kind of off roading I do. I will stick with my JK.
Folks seem to love the Toyota 4Runner, FJ and Tacomas just fine, not reason this can't be a performer offroad. Its less of a compromise to live with than a Solid front axle rig.
Not all of those had front lockers. The only one of those that had a front locker with IFS was the FJ and they were known for busting axle shafts which even the FJ guys will tell you (LINK).
In the kind of rock crawling off roading I do, you see broken IFS front end parts all over the trails especially ones with front lockers. These parts(which are much smaller and weaker than SFA) will wear a lot quicker and are not as reliable off road as the solid axles. The problem gets worse when you start adding larger and heavier tires. I can't tell you how many times our group has had to go around an obstacle because an IFS with lockers grenaded trying to go up.
Then there is the fact of less traction on technical obstacles. IFS's will generally have one tire off the ground to where a solid axle will have both on the ground aiding traction. This is also one of the reason why they grenade. Since only one wheel has traction, the driver has to apply more throttle and starts to hop because the components are in a bind. This hopping and acceleration is not good for axle shafts since only one tire has all the weight and traction on the front end. IFS's without lockers do not tend to grenade as often, but cannot go up the really technical obstacles that lockers can.
Not saying it can't do it, it is just not ideal and is better suited for fast off roading where IFS shines over solid axles.
For our off road and daily driver needs a IFS could be the ticket, but will need to test drive to confirm. I would like a soft long travel suspension which it appears how the Bronco is setup.
We came close to pulling the trigger on a Jeep Wrangler but with a few things we didn't like about it, and knowing the Bronco was coming we decided to hold off. Based on what I've seen we made the right decision.- I had to look it up but IFS is Independent Front Suspension. You're welcome.
alexleblanc wrote:
ShinerBock wrote:
The Hummer H3 was another IFS with front lockers and it was even worse than the FJ.
I was excited about it until I learned it was IFS which is not ideal for the kind of off roading I do. I will stick with my JK.
Folks seem to love the Toyota 4Runner, FJ and Tacomas just fine, not reason this can't be a performer offroad. Its less of a compromise to live with than a Solid front axle rig.
Not all of those had front lockers. The only one of those that had a front locker with IFS was the FJ and they were known for busting axle shafts which even the FJ guys will tell you (LINK).
In the kind of rock crawling off roading I do, you see broken IFS front end parts all over the trails especially ones with front lockers. These parts(which are much smaller and weaker than SFA) will wear a lot quicker and are not as reliable off road as the solid axles. The problem gets worse when you start adding larger and heavier tires. I can't tell you how many times our group has had to go around an obstacle because an IFS with lockers grenaded trying to go up.
Then there is the fact of less traction on technical obstacles. IFS's will generally have one tire off the ground to where a solid axle will have both on the ground aiding traction. This is also one of the reason why they grenade. Since only one wheel has traction, the driver has to apply more throttle and starts to hop because the components are in a bind. This hopping and acceleration is not good for axle shafts since only one tire has all the weight and traction on the front end. IFS's without lockers do not tend to grenade as often, but cannot go up the really technical obstacles that lockers can.
Not saying it can't do it, it is just not ideal and is better suited for fast off roading where IFS shines over solid axles.- I hope it gets better fuel mileage than my 302cid '76 did.
A1ARealtorRick wrote:
Get you some FlexSeal to patch up those door holes, and read your owner's manual to find out what those goofy things are on the top leading edge of the front fenders, and you're good to go!!
All kidding aside, a nice effort by Ford.
Those goofy things are tie-downs for attaching large things to the roof, plus they give you a good visual exactly where the front corners are. Love to have one!ShinerBock wrote:
I was excited about it until I learned it was IFS which is not ideal for the kind of off roading I do. I will stick with my JK.
Folks seem to love the Toyota 4Runner, FJ and Tacomas just fine, not reason this can't be a performer offroad. Its less of a compromise to live with than a Solid front axle rig.
