AnnDee4444
Well-Known Member
Who's Sam?It's been about ten minutes, you should probably go ahead and ask again.
Sponsored
Who's Sam?It's been about ten minutes, you should probably go ahead and ask again.
Got it, that makes sense.@AnnDee4444 , sorry, I realized there are some posts I don't see because the post # skips for me (meaning I must have person on ignore). I didn't realize you were responding to someone.
ETA: not because of the IFS necessarily, the new Bronco has had issues with larger tires (37") and Ford is now offering a "heavy duty" steering gear with upgraded tie rods.
See https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/forum/threads/anyone-think-jeep-will-move-to-ifs-in-2023.77148/Ok, so what about the stock Bronco's IFS excludes it from 37s?
Assuming a JL with 37s is acceptable, both the Bronco and JL are available with the M210 & M220. The curb weight between them overlaps depending on length/options, and I can assume that Ford implemented some sort of torque limit in 4-Low just like Jeep. I would expect the Bronco's differential to actually be under less load since it's not also holding up the suspension, resisting lateral movement, having the axle tubes twisted in opposite directions while flexing, and just generally higher up and out of harms way.
So is it the axles, knuckles, control arms, or something else I'm not thinking about?
Any comparison between bronco and jeep will typically have that. Without a massive derp in the jeep the bronco is so outclassed its a joke in most off road applications.Not sure this video is apples to apples. He had a much less experienced driver in the Jeep for most of the video who didn’t disconnect the sway bar for half of it or air down the tires properly.
I don't understand what you're trying to say, or why you responded 200 days later. I'm also not going to read through the 14 pages of that thread to try to decipher what you point is.
... No vehicle ever has had optional IFS. It either is solid axle or ifs period. You mention wrangler ruggedness and IFS in the same line, IFS diminishes the ruggedness period. Look at the broncos and tie rod failures, CV failures, etc. I think you have the last sentence flip flopped in my experience. IFS gives marginally better on road performance, does nothing for safety, and significantly hinders off-road capability. Not only is suspension travel massively limited, it gets worse when lifted. Short of a true long travel IFS like a raptor or trx, it just doesn’t flex. In order to package that kind of travel in to ifs with arms mounted outside the frame rails you end up with a huge/ wide track width vehicle like the trx or raptor which further hinders off-road performance everywhere but the wide open desert. IFS will always be weaker than a solid axle and have more cost and complexity in lifting/modifying. The bronco is just a 4runner in a different dress. It drives, handles, and wheels exactly like one. The sway bar disco and front locker help, just like every built 4Runner for the last ~35years, but they still don’t flex, they still eat tie rod ends, and they still can’t take the abuse a solid axle can. If you want IFS and want to stick with a Jeep, get a compass, renegade, Cherokee, grand Cherokee, or wagoneer. Still plenty of options if you want a car like ride that can still go off road.
...
As for SFA being better for off road is simply due to articulation and strength under his tension is valid for a particular type of off roading and that's rock crawling and extreme flex.
..
The first false assumption you made is that a solid axle gives you a marginal increase in capability. It gives you a significant increase in capability as even greater potential capability with easy modifications. You can dramatically change your Jeep in a driveway with simple tools.
You can modify IFS, but it is much more complicated and you'd be challenged to match even a stock Jeep's ability to articulate and keep all 4 tires on the ground.
Have you seen any pictures of the new Bronco rebadged as a Scout? Few months back I was scouting for some Scout pics on the internets having thought that the new Bronco looked more like an IH than the old Bronco. Appeared that someone already thought of that. Still a Ford underneath....I’m a Scout guy, I’d still be driving IH’s if they still made them.
And that’s the problem, it’s a Furd... Seriously, looks cool. I really miss the old haybinders. Basic, incredibly tough machines. Slow as mud but went literally everywhere in the two I owned. 198 cu in 4cyl. Loved ‘emHave you seen any pictures of the new Bronco rebadged as a Scout? Few months back I was scouting for some Scout pics on the internets having thought that the new Bronco looked more like an IH than the old Bronco. Appeared that someone already thought of that. Still a Ford underneath.
That's a look I really like, I've driven around in Scouts many years ago, and liked them. I'm not the only one that think the 2 door has International styling cues.Have you seen any pictures of the new Bronco rebadged as a Scout? Few months back I was scouting for some Scout pics on the internets having thought that the new Bronco looked more like an IH than the old Bronco. Appeared that someone already thought of that. Still a Ford underneath.
I see soooooo many people say the Bronco looks more like an old Scout. I look at both the old Broncos and Scouts and can barely tell the difference....That's a look I really like, I've driven around in Scouts many years ago, and liked them. I'm not the only one that think the 2 door has International styling cues.