inked33 said:
this is an argument that will always go on just like ifs vs. sfa. however one thing to think about......if wheel spacers are so dangerous then why are they legal to run, and dot approved?
I contend that IFS is better for some things and a solid front axle is better for others...
Don't buy into the "DOT Approved" stamp. I've seen it on aftermarket clear lens assemblies on the rear of vehicles for brake and turn signal lights (years before manufacturers began making vehicles with clear lenses). The lens was completely clear and made no provision to make the light a legal color (red, yellow or amber).
For what it's worth, Pennsylvania State Law
175.80, spacers over 1/4" are illegal. Oh, and they appear to be illegal in Australia.
I've been taking accident reports for 20 years here in Nevada. The current state accident form has the federally mandated reporting fields (you may know the story -- report the data or lose federal highway funds). There is no field on these reports to notate alterations to vehicles (lifts, etc.). If there's a notation to be made, it must be made by the investigating officer in the narrative portion of the report.
I'm not an accident re-constructionist, nor do I want to be however, as an investigator, I've never been to court nor have I been deposed regarding an accident involving a modified vehicle. I have made a notation in several reports regarding lifted/lowered/modified vehicles and noted how the modifications caused or contributed to the crash. In my experience, the insurance companies' lawyers argue about their clients conformity to state and local laws that were in effect at the time of the accident (right of way, speed, lights at night, etc.). In other words, the fellow that lost the rear dual into his fifth wheel may have been able to successfully sue his insurance company -- unless what he was doing was illegal.