Passenger Wheel well safety device

[Drewski777]

Was watching a video on you tube, "Casey250" he's having a Demon hemi engine installed. The guys at Epic offroad pointed out this new device on his 2023 that sits behind the passenger side front tire, in the wheel well, its supposed to stop the tire from going into the passenger seating area in the event of a crash. Has anyone heard about this, or know more details?

Sponsored

 

[Jshouse1]

Yeah it's been discussed. Many people are already removing them.

 

[Reinen]

That piece is largely useless in the real world. It's specifically designed to interrupt the standard front offset impact test barrier from riding along the frame causing the Jeep to flip on its side when it reaches the bend in the frame behind the front tire. The chances of duplicating that test crash in the real world (where that piece is actually useful) is miniscule.

As already stated, many people remove it.

 

[Terrymo]

https://www.jlwranglerforums.com/fo...identify-part-and-reason-factory-error.95274/

 

[Terrymo]

 

[kah.mun.rah]

With the FAD on the front axle it becomes the weak link in an accident allowing the axle to snap in half and the passenger wheel to go under the Jeep possibly flipping it. Jeep engineers, instead of a reactive solution why not be proactive and get rid of the root cause, the FAD?

 

[Drewski777]

Thanks! Great vid

 

[Drewski777]

With the FAD on the front axle it becomes the weak link in an accident allowing the axle to snap in half and the passenger wheel to go under the Jeep possibly flipping it. Jeep engineers, instead of a reactive solution why not be proactive and get rid of the root cause, the FAD?

Thats a good point, i guess im gonna have to weld a truss over the FAD to strengthen that weak area

 

[four low]

Ok, you remove this, and the " impossible " happens, the Jeep flips, passengers are injured.
You removed a factory installed collision mitigator, what are your Liability issues ? I can see insurance companies balking at payouts for this " tampering".

 

[Sublime]

Ok, you remove this, and the " impossible " happens, the Jeep flips, passengers are injured.
You removed a factory installed collision mitigator, what are your Liability issues ? I can see insurance companies balking at payouts for this " tampering".

Posts like this where people try to outguess lawsuits, insurance companies, and juries are ridiculous. ANY change you make could be decided to have been detrimental. This piece is no different.

 

[bjm00se]

Now that I've seen it in person, I don't think it's as big a deal as the discussion has made it out to be. If you were going to hang that thing up on a rock, you were probably about to hang up on the control-arm-bracket anyway.

If it becomes a hang up point for me, then I'll think about removing it. Not before. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

[bjm00se]

With the FAD on the front axle it becomes the weak link in an accident allowing the axle to snap in half and the passenger wheel to go under the Jeep possibly flipping it. Jeep engineers, instead of a reactive solution why not be proactive and get rid of the root cause, the FAD?

I'm curious why you think an axle snap was involved in collision rollover testing?

The chance of Jeep going away from FAD and back to 1 manual hubs, 2 vacuum locking hubs, or 3 constantly-spinning front driveshaft is basically zero.

1. Consumer acceptance. No effin' way folks in 2022 are getting out of their warm cars to get dirty turning the hubs.

2. You remember how troublesome and breakage prone those things were? By comparison FAD is a miracle of reliability.

3. Fuel economy standards being what they are, the friction loss wastage, not to mention front driveshaft vibration, ain't gonna happen.

 

[kah.mun.rah]

I'm curious why you think an axle snap was involved in collision rollover testing?

The chance of Jeep going away from FAD and back to 1 manual hubs, 2 vacuum locking hubs, or 3 constantly-spinning front driveshaft is basically zero.

1. Consumer acceptance. No effin' way folks in 2022 are getting out of their warm cars to get dirty turning the hubs.

2. You remember how troublesome and breakage prone those things were? By comparison FAD is a miracle of reliability.

3. Fuel economy standards being what they are, the friction loss wastage, not to mention front driveshaft vibration, ain't gonna happen.

I don’t disagree. My point is that if the axle is breaking at the FAD and causing other safety issues as a result, rather than adding bandaids downstream to deflect the broken axle/wheel/tire, maybe something should be done to strengthen that weak link if it cannot be eliminated. That said, how much mpg is the FAD really saving? I have never had front driveshaft vibration issues with my JK nor heard of anyone that has upgraded their JL front axle with an aftermarket one that didn’t have a FAD and as a result started having front driveshaft vibration issues.

 

[Mocopo]

Now that I've seen it in person, I don't think it's as big a deal as the discussion has made it out to be. If you were going to hang that thing up on a rock, you were probably about to hang up on the control-arm-bracket anyway.

If it becomes a hang up point for me, then I'll think about removing it. Not before. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I just went out and looked at my JLUR-XR, sure enough I have it as well, and after taking a look I agree with your statement. You'd be hard pressed to get hung up or bash this thing on a rock, the control arm mount is right there also. I do agree it's a bit of an eye sore, and even in the DRC video linked above the guy admits he's big into aesthetics. I wonder if he would have bothered removing it if it was more out of sight.

 

[bjm00se]

...if the axle is breaking at the FAD and causing other safety issues as a result...

OK, but I don't think we even know that to be the case. So we're really in the theoreticals here.

FAD seems a little like "Nickleback." You can't be on JLWranglerForums without acknowledging that you hate it.

Sponsored