To straight axle swap or not? Let's hear it.

[javajoe79]

So should I swap to a straight axle or do some sort of custom IFS with beefier parts? I would like a decent ride quality but I feel like I can obtain that with good shocks and components in a straight axle swap.

With my upcoming engine swap and addition of the camper to my S10, I am considering a straight axle swap in place of the rather weak differential and IFS. Going with 35" tires and hoping to lift the truck as little as possible so I will be using full width axles to help with turning clearance for the tires. I have a dana 44 form a wagoneer but I also have a front differential from a brand new diesel Titan as well as the CV axles so I could come up with some custom bits to make all that work but I am not sure the gearing would be right and it would be difficult I am sure to obtain alternate ratios for it. I would like to use the typical chevy 6 bolt pattern as it is common and makes for cheaper wheels etc... Either way I would use coil springs, be they coilovers or a conventional spring and shock setup. I have full fabrication capabilities to make anything I need like custom control arms, links, brackets etc... Can also remachine hubs for different bolt patterns etc...

Basically just tossing ideas around at this point. Please weigh in with your opinions, facts, info etc...

 

[javajoe79]

Perfect! I think I saw these pics on some other forum. I like the adjustable spring perch idea

 

[jeep-N-montero]

Here you go https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=s10+solid+axle+swap+pros+cons

 

[Kevin108]

I wouldn't do a SFA without going to coils. If that's within your expertise, definitely go for it! Otherwise, I'd stick with a standard subframe lift.

I had an 85 I loved. Is the ZR2 still on torsion bars?

 

[javajoe79]

Here you go https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=s10+solid+axle+swap+pros+cons

Hahaha.... Did you think of that all on your own?

 

[javajoe79]

I wouldn't do a SFA without going to coils. If that's within your expertise, definitely go for it! Otherwise, I'd stick with a standard subframe lift.

I had an 85 I loved. Is the ZR2 still on torsion bars?

Yeah coils are the plan regardless. Still torsion bars yes.

 

[javajoe79]

I would like to minimize the lift or not lift it at all so an IFS suspension would be best for that. Realistically though I need to do the engine swap first then do the axle so that I know what space constraints I am dealing with. If I can do a straight axle, with a minimal amount of lift over current and still have decent up travel before hitting the frame, I will do that.

 

[XJLI]

If you want straight axles, buy a truck with straight axles.

Unless you're building a rock crawler, then logic really doesn't apply and you wouldn't be asking this question on ExPo anyway.

 

[javajoe79]

If you want straight axles, buy a truck with straight axles.

Unless you're building a rock crawler, then logic really doesn't apply and you wouldn't be asking this question on ExPo anyway.

^^ Completely useless reply but thanks. Reference Shovel and Kevin 108s posts for how to make a helpful post.

Or feel free to elaborate. Do you mean that only a rock crawler could benefit from this? Should I just plop a really heavy diesel on top of an already subpar IFS setup? Have you had a look at my build thread to get an idea of what's going on here?

Maybe this is lost on you but some people apply sentimental value to their vehicles. This vehicle has plenty of that. I have had it since new when I graduated high school. It's not the perfect platform for what I am attempting but I plan to change that. I have the capability to do whatever I want with it. It will be awesome I promise you that because it already is awesome.

 

[v_man]

I've posted this response before because this type of question has been asked a lot lately on Expo...

"Taking a rig from IFS to SAS usually implies you're also going to :

re-gear both diffs
get bigger tires
(sometimes) add a second transfer case (therefore a new front driveline), or lower gear set in existing t-case
add a locker, or lockers
add bumpers, sliders, or other armor

All that adds up to much more than the cost of a SAS , which isn't cheap to begin with"

Just bear in mind all the secondary mods you're likely going to want to do once you have a SAS , I'd budget a minimum of 10k to do it right...

 

[1stDeuce]

You asked, so here's my general thoughts on IFS/SAS for overlanding.

If you want to spend a lot of time building, and you're a good builder with some idea of front suspension geometry and how it affects handling, etc, and "the build" is what you love most about a project, then an SAS might be for you. If you want to run huge tires, SAS. (OP, this is you.) If you intend to be a hard core rock crawler, or beat it and then trailer it home, then going SAS is also a good plan. If you absolutely MUST run a front locker and there isn't one available, then it's SAS time.

If you're not into the build, and just want to use your vehicle in an overlanding sense, to go and see and discover and explore, then keep the factory suspension. If it has to be reliable for everyday use, or you plan to travel extensively, keep the IFS. If you don't know jack about suspension geometry and how it affects handling, ride, etc, keep the IFS. Most production IFS setups are not "weak" for overlanding use. Can you break it? Yes. Were you doing something you shouldn't... Probably. And remember, parts for the stock IFS are everywhere... And cheap.

So in the end, it's usually the intended use, and the capability of the builder that dictate a SAS, or to stick with the IFS. If you do stick with the IFS, and you plan to use it offroad, I might suggest ditching the front sway bar if your truck handles OK without it. It does improve the ride quite a bit in the rough.

For the OP, this is Expedition Portal, not IHM or Pirate4x4. 35's on an S10 for general overlanding use is a bit extreme, so your case is obviously a bit different. I don't mean to knock your build, which is awesome, but rather to say that my usual statements above may not really apply to your case...
IMO, if you're proposing SAS vs complete custom IFS, and just keeping OE is out, then an SAS is the best choice. (Btw, I don't think using full width axles is going to help clearance that much, since they'll actually articulate farther up into the fenders than a shorter axle would.) Making a custom IFS that works even reasonably well requires a LOT of knowledge about geometry, a lot of design work, and a lot of $$ on custom parts, even if you already have some of the bigger components. And an SAS is cheaper, and works better in the rocks unless you go to a tube frame long arm buggy style suspension, which means even more $$ and design work...

Here's an idea... When I worked at the GM proving grounds in MI, there was an S-10 hanging around the engineering lot that was built up as a chase truck for desert racing. It was 4wd, and had 1500 front suspension under it, and it was SWEET. (For all I know, it was also the inspiration for the ZR2 package...) I looked it over pretty good, and it didn't look like there was too much done to make it all fit... But even that suspension, which shares 90% of the design, only had a few inches more travel than a stock ZR2, and so was still not much of a rock crawling design. I think that truck had 33's on it.

It's your decision to make. Good luck!!
Chris

 

[LR Max]

If going above 35" tire, yes.

If you are staying at 33" or so and lower, no.

For 35"...depends on how hard you wheel.

Typical rule of thumb for solid axle swaps. Yes solid axles are better, but its a pain to do. Except for the example in the 2nd post (or whatever), many are done improperly. So now you have a janky front end that really isn't any better.

I just bought my first 4x4 with IFS. Everyone told me to swap out for a solid axle. Instead, I repaired, did some mild upgrades, and renewed the IFS. Works just fine both on the road and off the road. At the end of the day, its a 3rd vehicle as well. So I do not have any visions of keeping it forever. So keeping it close to stock also makes sense.

 

[Bobzdar]

Why are you going for a really heavy diesel in a fairly small vehicle? I'd look at a smaller engine than a 6bt cummins that would negate needing all of that suspension work...It's not like you are (or even can) tow a large trailer with an s10, all it will do is consume more and break more stuff (or require you to beef everything up for no real benefit I can discern).

 

[jeep-N-montero]

Why are you going for a really heavy diesel in a fairly small vehicle? I'd look at a smaller engine than a 6bt cummins that would negate needing all of that suspension work...It's not like you are (or even can) tow a large trailer with an s10, all it will do is consume more and break more stuff (or require you to beef everything up for no real benefit I can discern).

Because he can I suppose.... it will be interesting to see if it ever comes to fruition though.

 

[javajoe79]

Why are you going for a really heavy diesel in a fairly small vehicle? I'd look at a smaller engine than a 6bt cummins that would negate needing all of that suspension work...It's not like you are (or even can) tow a large trailer with an s10, all it will do is consume more and break more stuff (or require you to beef everything up for no real benefit I can discern).

I am not planning on a 6BT. Maybe "really heavy" was exaggerating in terms of diesel engine weight But.... Even though I don't plan on towing anything except maybe a small storage trailer. It towed pretty well stock. I made several cross country trips with it, trailer in tow with a car, gear, tools and an ATV. Good trailer brakes were important and it was slow going up grades but otherwise it did fine.

You asked, so here's my general thoughts on IFS/SAS for overlanding.

If you want to spend a lot of time building, and you're a good builder with some idea of front suspension geometry and how it affects handling, etc, and "the build" is what you love most about a project, then an SAS might be for you. If you want to run huge tires, SAS. (OP, this is you.) If you intend to be a hard core rock crawler, or beat it and then trailer it home, then going SAS is also a good plan. If you absolutely MUST run a front locker and there isn't one available, then it's SAS time.

If you're not into the build, and just want to use your vehicle in an overlanding sense, to go and see and discover and explore, then keep the factory suspension. If it has to be reliable for everyday use, or you plan to travel extensively, keep the IFS. If you don't know jack about suspension geometry and how it affects handling, ride, etc, keep the IFS. Most production IFS setups are not "weak" for overlanding use. Can you break it? Yes. Were you doing something you shouldn't... Probably. And remember, parts for the stock IFS are everywhere... And cheap.

So in the end, it's usually the intended use, and the capability of the builder that dictate a SAS, or to stick with the IFS. If you do stick with the IFS, and you plan to use it offroad, I might suggest ditching the front sway bar if your truck handles OK without it. It does improve the ride quite a bit in the rough.

For the OP, this is Expedition Portal, not IHM or Pirate4x4. 35's on an S10 for general overlanding use is a bit extreme, so your case is obviously a bit different. I don't mean to knock your build, which is awesome, but rather to say that my usual statements above may not really apply to your case...
IMO, if you're proposing SAS vs complete custom IFS, and just keeping OE is out, then an SAS is the best choice. (Btw, I don't think using full width axles is going to help clearance that much, since they'll actually articulate farther up into the fenders than a shorter axle would.) Making a custom IFS that works even reasonably well requires a LOT of knowledge about geometry, a lot of design work, and a lot of $$ on custom parts, even if you already have some of the bigger components. And an SAS is cheaper, and works better in the rocks unless you go to a tube frame long arm buggy style suspension, which means even more $$ and design work...

Here's an idea... When I worked at the GM proving grounds in MI, there was an S-10 hanging around the engineering lot that was built up as a chase truck for desert racing. It was 4wd, and had 1500 front suspension under it, and it was SWEET. (For all I know, it was also the inspiration for the ZR2 package...) I looked it over pretty good, and it didn't look like there was too much done to make it all fit... But even that suspension, which shares 90% of the design, only had a few inches more travel than a stock ZR2, and so was still not much of a rock crawling design. I think that truck had 33's on it.

It's your decision to make. Good luck!!
Chris

Good points and thank you. My main reason for this thread is to have outside input to help me realize some things or remind me. Here is more about where my head is on this. The engine I want to use is the Isuzu 4BD2T or Cummins 4BT. Both heavier then the stock 4.3 V6. So that added weight and the added weight of the camper means that the suspension will take a pounding. Rear suspension too but that is a different discussion and much easier to beef up then what I have up front. The stock IFS is already prone to accelerated ball joint wear and wheel bearing failure so adding even more weight and tire size will make that even worse. I am all about the build aspect so I don't mind doing it the hard way if the end result appeals to me. I own and run a fabrication shop so I can make just about anything I want for this project.
I am assuming that when you say general overlanding, you mean something a bit less extreme then what I want from this rig. I want a camper on a truck that is fairly off road capable. I want to be able to hit some trails that you wouldn't ordinarily find a camper on but I am not out to wheel for the hell of it or for the challenge of a specific obstacle. I will take the easier route if it's an option. The truck as it sits has 31" tires and does pretty damn well with a rear locker and stock front suspension. I want to improve clearance a bit by upping my tire size but I want to avoid too much lift so as to keep my CG lower. I have bigger flares for up front and the camper has wheel wells built into it. The main purpose of the wider stance is stability and moving the tires away from the frame in the front so they don't touch the frame at full steering lock. Normally this isn't an issue because you would lift a truck to fit 35s and you would no longer have that issue but with the flares I have, I am hoping to have more room to allow the 35s with minimal lift. I also have no issues with abandoning traditional fenders in exchange for tube flares. Ultimately I want the tires covered
I have experience building suspension from scratch and adapting parts from a 1500 or stronger is what I was considering. I could use the differential, axles, and knuckles and easily build custom control arms and coilover mounts. This would give me more width, improve travel and strength.