Why no SAS on "expo" type trucks???

[summerprophet]

SAS vehicles are great for difficult, challenging terrain, but if I have lots of highway to get where I am going, I will take ifs any day. Stock (or near stock means comfort), and if I have 18 hours of driving to get to moab, comfort is key.

I think the expo crowd is more about doing the longer moderate trails, often with camper or trailers, as comfortable as possible. SAS is big expensive overkill for most expo trails.

 

[lugueto]

It's all about pros and cons. When modifying a vehicle, you need to know exactly what it'll be used for in order for the mods to make sense. For example, my vehicle usually gets driven on dirt, gravel roads and double tracks at speeds of 40-50mph. To get there, I usually drive long distances on blacktop roads at speeds of 70mph.

An IFS vehicle makes total sense in these situations, the advantage over a solid front axle are clear. It wouldn't make sense to drive a vehicle that has 6" of lift and 37" tires, it would actually make it more difficult and dangerous, even if it would help during certain situations. As with everything, its all about compromises.

If your travels include driving over rocks or mud bogs where you'll need really big tires, a solid front axle and a lift to accomodate these, well then do it! If not, it will most likely bring more trouble than it would do good.

 

[volkinator]

I also agree that an IFS can handle most 'expo' trails that people are looking for, while providing a more comfortable ride on gravel, forest service roads, logging roads, and the highways that people travel to get to these places.

Also, I think the IFS has an advantage (at least in my 4runner) that most parts are interchangeable from each side. The CV's are the same length, so instead of 2 separate axle shafts, I only need to carry one extra CV. Then I can always rebuild the split boot for my new spare when I have time. And it's not too bad of a process to do either.

Also, as lots have mentioned, the cost of going to SAS is pretty high. And also I like to follow the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality.

 

[Martinjmpr]

I would also add that from my experience, SFA really sucks on washboard roads. Wife has a YJ and I hate driving washboards in that vehicle.
.
It may be that an aftermarket SAS setup, with nice shocks and spring rates, would do better, but every stock SFA vehicle I've owned or driven has been terrible on washboard roads. That includes everything from my very first truck, a 1957 International Travelall 4x4, to military CUCVs (mid-80's Blazer and pickup) to the wife's YJ.

 

[Clutch]

I would also add that from my experience, SFA really sucks on washboard roads. Wife has a YJ and I hate driving washboards in that vehicle.
.

I would like full independent suspension all the way around, my setp-dad's Highlander does better on washboards than my modded Tacoma. Since washboards are what my truck sees the most of...anything harder than that I rather be on a motorcycle. Cages are mind numbingly boring.

The new Honda Ridgeline is peaking my interest.

 

[brianjwilson]

I would also add that from my experience, SFA really sucks on washboard roads. Wife has a YJ and I hate driving washboards in that vehicle.
.
It may be that an aftermarket SAS setup, with nice shocks and spring rates, would do better, but every stock SFA vehicle I've owned or driven has been terrible on washboard roads. That includes everything from my very first truck, a 1957 International Travelall 4x4, to military CUCVs (mid-80's Blazer and pickup) to the wife's YJ.

Driving on washboard with SFA doesn't have to suck, but it usually isn't cheap or low maintenance. See my jeep thread. Lol
Lots of expensive parts and plan to change joints frequently.

Truly though after I had my jeep setup, I could haul *** on rough washboard and rough roads in comfort. It did also requiring airing down (duh) and disconnecting the front sway bar. And while the bilstein shocks even held up to it, some of them did spill all of their oil in the driveway later (replaced for free).

But a decent pair of extended travel coilovers and shocks on a Tacoma will put it to shame for a lot less work. And you won't have to get out your string and adjust your alignment after every trip.

 

[Martinjmpr]

I would like full independent suspension all the way around, my setp-dad's Highlander does better on washboards than my modded Tacoma.

.
Best (most fun) vehicle I ever drove on dirt or washboard was my '99 Subaru Outback. AWD and 4 wheel independent suspension made for a fast, fun ride.

 

[Martinjmpr]

The Ridgeline does look interesting. I'm surprised (and a little disappointed) that they didn't think to appropriate a version of GM's disappearing mid-gate concept from the late Avalanche. I always thought that was a brilliant idea and if I'd have been able to find a low mileage Avalanche in my price range, I would have bought that instead of the Suburban I eventually wound up with.

 

[Clutch]

The Ridgeline does look interesting. I'm surprised (and a little disappointed) that they didn't think to appropriate a version of GM's disappearing mid-gate concept from the late Avalanche. I always thought that was a brilliant idea and if I'd have been able to find a low mileage Avalanche in my price range, I would have bought that instead of the Suburban I eventually wound up with.

That was cool, the Toyota A-Bat concept had that too, IIRC.

The Ridgeling as some cool features, 1600 lbs payload (more than a DCSB 4WD Tacoma), flip up rear seats...plenty of storage. A trunk that can fit a 64 qt. cooler, bed is wide enough for a 4X8 sheet of plywood.

If they price it right, and it gets more than 25 mpg hwy...might have a winner in the light weight truck category. Won't be super off-roady, but probably be ok for running washboards...which is mostly what I do anyways.

 

[WillBeck]

Expo drivers tend to spend a lot of time on roads, driving at highway speeds. Then light wheeling to a camp site. Ifs has more precise steering, and is generally less fatiguing to drive.

 

[bkg]

Expo drivers tend to spend a lot of time on roads, driving at highway speeds. Then light wheeling to a camp site. Ifs has more precise steering, and is generally less fatiguing to drive.

I'll add one thing to this... as a guy who has done (3?) SAS' and owns 2 SAS'd trucks... Most Expo folks don't actually "wheel" their vehicle in a situation that requires true articulation. Frankly - and I'm sure I'll upset a lot of folks with this - 99% of those who install a snorkel are "posers" who have done nothing to actually waterproof the components that are well below the snorkel inlet. Again - I've owned a vehicle with a snorkel, so I'm just as guilty.

From my experience, "overlanders" are more interested in the long-distant, mild-wheeling scenario... and less interested in the "hard to access" areas.

Is a SAS good for Expedition? Hell yes. Is it better than IFS... that all depends, IMHO, on parts availability. Is an SAS more expensive? Hell - there are folks here spending upwards of $5K on a 3" IFS lift... So.....

 

[cam-shaft]

I'll add one thing to this... as a guy who has done (3?) SAS' and owns 2 SAS'd trucks... Most Expo folks don't actually "wheel" there vehicle in a situation that requires true articulation. Frankly - and I'm sure I'll upset a lot of folks with this - 99% of those who install a snorkel are "posers" who have done nothing to actually waterproof the components that are well below the snorkel inlet. Again - I've owned a vehicle with a snorkel, so I'm just as guilty.

From my experience, "overlanders" are more interested in the long-distant, mild-wheeling scenario... and less interested in the "hard to access" areas.

Is a SAS good for Expedition? Hell yes. Is it better than IFS... that all depends, IMHO, on parts availability. Is an SAS more expensive? Hell - there are folks here spending upwards of $5K on a 3" IFS lift... So.....

I hit the like button for this post

Cameron

 

[forty2]

If they price it right, and it gets more than 25 mpg hwy...might have a winner in the light weight truck category. Won't be super off-roady, but probably be ok for running washboards...which is mostly what I do anyways.

I'd love to find out if Honda's AWD system is worth a damn these days, it sure as hell wasn't in '04 when they built my old Element. Thing defaulted to 2WD all too often when I needed traction the most. Ridgeline looks really good to me on the surface though. Basic utility, style, size, Honda. No manual trans though, real shame too, nobody does a manual as well as Honda IMO.

From my experience, "overlanders" are more interested in the long-distant, mild-wheeling scenario... and less interested in the "hard to access" areas.

This certainly describes me. In my 20's I rolled in small groups to difficult locations where breakage and failure was commonplace. Now I just want to get remote, away from everyone for a while to decompress and see some cool stuff along the way. I go where many people won't still, but I don't exactly need the rig I have (even in current stock form) to do it.

 

[calicamper]

The smarty pants types take dirt / trail machines in from the end of the dirt road camp sites. See hauling Dirt bike thread...

98% of getting to the trail is pavement anyway ;-)
For really remote world travel most stick with stock parts for reliability and ease of getting parts when needed. Custom stuff, brakes too, and requires custom fab work to fix too.. All depends what your into, traveling or fabbing up custom stuff.

 

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

No SAS on expo rigs...? Who says?

I think if they're properly built, a solid axle rig can do everything and more.