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

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

BKG and offroadohio have both put made some very strong points about IFS. Offroadohio pointed out that there are many more IFS racing rigs these days, which implies that it is at least as good as solid axle. But Brian's point about IFS cost is spot on.

Do you know what those KOH guys pay for a good (not race winning, just good) IFS setup? $50K plus. Just for the IFS.

I'll hold my ground that dollar for dollar, pound for pound, solid axle is still extremely relevant to any kind of offroading. It may not be right for you, but that's an apples to oranges comparison.

 

[donaldcon]

I agree completely with your statement. I mentioned cost aswell. Though I do think as our hobby progresses and more and more racers go ifs, that the cost will come down, and the cost of a good solid front will go up simply becuase of supply. There are companies making aftermarket housings now but the junkyard axles are getting hard to come by.

Used to be a d60 could be had for $500. Now guys want 1500.

Becuase of the cost my dedicated offroad rigs will always be solid axle atleast based on current market.


The kia I have will be staying ifs and it will be getting custom control arms to shove the knuckle forward to allow for larger tire without much lift.

Or that's the plan atleast

 

[leelikesbikes]

im sure this has already been mentioned, but its hard with most of the ifs trucks to sas them and still have decent up travel without them being super tall. the ifs frame rails dont have an arc in them to accomodate a solid axle like the older trucks do. i sas'd a tacoma and it was too tall imo with about 3.5" of uptravel. i do agree the toyota rack and pinion is lacking and torn cv boots suck, but so does road tripping a monster truck.

 

[donaldcon]

That is the exact problem I had with my Isuzu Rodeo I had it on 40 inch super swampers in one ton axles it had about 1 inch between the frame rail in the axles which equals zero up travel and it was as tall as a Chevy pickup on 54 inch tires.

Even if I was to cut the frame rails out and move them up there was only about 5 inches from the axle to the oil pan so you make a very valid point.

But you could modify the frame rails and shove the axle forward so that it is in front of the engine.

There are a lot of ways to do the same thing it really all just depends on your preferences the vehicle's intended use and how much time and money you want to spend.

Someone in a really early post mentioned a lot of people don't do solid axle swaps because it makes the vehicle impractical to drive that is the case if you hack it together but if you do it correctly you can make it just as streetable as any factory solid axle vehicle.

I have a buddy that took an 89 2 wheel drive Toyota pickup conversion to 4 wheel drive with 4 link front and rear and 35 inch tires and it gets about 30000 miles a year put on it on the street and it's be pretty hard on the weekends as well. Truck actually hit slower than a stock solid axle Toyota pickup

 

[calicamper]

im sure this has already been mentioned, but its hard with most of the ifs trucks to sas them and still have decent up travel without them being super tall. the ifs frame rails dont have an arc in them to accomodate a solid axle like the older trucks do. i sas'd a tacoma and it was too tall imo with about 3.5" of uptravel. i do agree the toyota rack and pinion is lacking and torn cv boots suck, but so does road tripping a monster truck.

Xellent point. I've passed guys like that on the highway while in my Subaru. And think that would suck. In one case i saw the same truck a day later parked in the same dirt lot I was in. LOL

Modding trucks can be fun but not all mods are practical for lots of long pavement miles before you reach the dirt.

 

[bkg]

im sure this has already been mentioned, but its hard with most of the ifs trucks to sas them and still have decent up travel without them being super tall. the ifs frame rails dont have an arc in them to accomodate a solid axle like the older trucks do. i sas'd a tacoma and it was too tall imo with about 3.5" of uptravel. i do agree the toyota rack and pinion is lacking and torn cv boots suck, but so does road tripping a monster truck.

Low lift SAS can be done and has been done numerous times. Takes more planning, but can still get 4+" up travel. Some tweaking and 6+ is doable. IFS doesn't get much more.

 

[ExplorerTom]

One thing I've noticed SAS vs IFS is that my speed on the trail is much quicker. When I was IFS, the other rigs in the group were always right behind me. Going faster seemed like it was too brutal on the truck- and it was rough on me. Now that I'm SASd, I find myself waiting for those behind me. I'm going faster without even realizing.

Here in CO, the trails are pretty rocky. That John Denver was onto something. If I was going 5 mph before, now I'm doing 8 or 9. While not a huge difference, it does mean that I can get more dirt miles under my belt.

And as far as washboard roads, again, my SAS soaks it up way better than my old IFS. Maybe this and the above were a function of torsion bar IFS and not coilover IFS.

One thing I'm not super happy with the SAS is the height. Loading stuff onto the roof is not only a royal PITA, but the raised CG is rarely what you're after.

 

[brianjwilson]

One thing I've noticed SAS vs IFS is that my speed on the trail is much quicker. When I was IFS, the other rigs in the group were always right behind me. Going faster seemed like it was too brutal on the truck- and it was rough on me. Now that I'm SASd, I find myself waiting for those behind me. I'm going faster without even realizing.

Here in CO, the trails are pretty rocky. That John Denver was onto something. If I was going 5 mph before, now I'm doing 8 or 9. While not a huge difference, it does mean that I can get more dirt miles under my belt.

And as far as washboard roads, again, my SAS soaks it up way better than my old IFS. Maybe this and the above were a function of torsion bar IFS and not coilover IFS.

One thing I'm not super happy with the SAS is the height. Loading stuff onto the roof is not only a royal PITA, but the raised CG is rarely what you're after.

I'd put most of that on the somewhat poor performance of the RBV ifs. Crappy torsion bars and very limited travel. Additionally it sounds like you cranked the torsion bars up for lift, leaving very little down travel. That additional cranking of the torsion bars also meant that the suspension rebound came with a stronger force, and the shocks in that application didn't have proper rebound dampening. The suspension topped out way too easy. If the sway bar was connected it was bouncy and rocky. You could get a "decent" ride with a small torsion bar adjustment and sway bar disconnected, but it was never great.

Either way, if you're able to comfortably carry more speed with your solid axle now, good on you! I always wanted to swap a solid axle under one of my rangers or explorers in the past, but never had the time or money then.

 

[01tundra]

IFS and SAS can both work equally as well, depends on the terrain, driver, vehicle, etc.

I laugh at people trying to justify one over the other for "overlanding".......they both work, just get out and drive what you like.

I've had them all and liked and disliked certain things with all of them too.

 

[leelikesbikes]

on my sas tacoma you would have to notch the frame to keep the rig low and have decent up travel, yeah you can have a 6" lift and get some up travel, but the axle hits the frame if you are trying to keep close to stock ride height. obviously anything can be done, but if you are gonna have to re-do the front of your frame to keep a low cog you'd be better off doing a long travel ifs set-up, going fast is way more fun than going slow anyhow!

 

[donaldcon]

Some folks say that Up travel is over rated anyhow.

 

[OSV]

if you want any kind of a built rig, people are constantly selling everything from projects to pricey completed builds, it'll always be much cheaper than if you did the job yourself... better know what to look for tho.

if i want to smooth out dirt road washboard with my sas, i'll air the 37's down to 10psi or whatever, which helps a lot, but i still can't go fast over the whoops at glamis, that's some serious washboard, lol

i've seen old ifs toyotas on the rubicon, but it's a struggle, in part because ifs generally equals smaller tires, and 37" is the minimal size for being somewhat comfortable running a trail like the rubicon.

there aren't many trails like the rubicon east of the mississippi, so where you live, where you want to go, and what tire size you need are going to be factors in ifs vs. sas.

 

[poriggity]

I'm of the thought that for "expo" type travel, whatever your vehicle came with on stock form is good enough. Of yohre a fan of rock crawling races you know all about king of the hammers.. Most of those guys run custom rock buggies with ifs front ends now... They have proven to do well in both the fast stuff and the rocks. My truck is a solid axle and has both it's advantages and downfalls. Imho what is comes down to is "run what ya brung"

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk

 

[Stoffregen Motorsports]

Some folks say that Up travel is over rated anyhow.

And a bit misunderstood.

If you have 4" of uptravel (bump) before the axle hits the bumpstop, and that bumpstop is located at the frame, with articulation, that 4" now becomes about 8" at the tire (depending on certain variables, of course).

You almost never compress both sides of the suspension at the same time unless you're out in the desert flying off a jump.

 

[codybutz]

:Wow1: This thread really took off. So for starters, I kind of was directing this original question to the Toyota truck crowd, but was glad to hear from everybody. Thanks for all the input and information! Really this question stemmed from the Idea of picking up a some what rare Toyota truck, that is only 2wd with a 1-ton rear end, 22-re, auto trans. It is a 1986 pickup. There is no way I could leave it 2wd, and would want to convert it to 4wd. And if I was going to be doing all that work, would it be worth it to got from 2wd IFS to 4wd IFS or do the SAS. And if I'm correct (which isn't as much as I'd like to think) doesn't the 2wd pickup front frame rails have the arch in it, making you able to do a SAS with a lower center of gravity? I would want to do the swap/ conversion using as many stock toyota parts as possible. Either taking a 86' 4x4 IFS front end or stepping back a year to an 85' 4x4 solid axle. I probably should have mentioned this all from the get go, to allow for better more precise feedback. Again Thanks to all that tossed their .02 in. There are some seriously knowledgeable people on this forum, the rest of you not so much:jump: