Look at the reviews for Wabfab, and ask members on here about them.
Then contact me.
Will do! On my LJ they were great off road but as is being discussed, major body roll on road hence the ease of disconnecting them to match your given activity. With Runner's being coils they too could benefit from the dico'd advantage for sure.
BUT...just some things to talk about with all this...Jeep guys get into fist fights over this at times because there are some very real physics and nuances to the articulation benefits vs traction, etc. Which is why Currie and others came out with things like the antirock...to try and create the best of both worlds (being dico'd and connected) as both have their potential advantages and disadvantages depending on the situation. So it's not so much a "good" or "bad" but some points to ponder that I've learned coming from Jeeps and that world. AND, I'd be interested in everyone's thoughts on all this.
The first main point is that by increasing articulation and removing the sway bar you decrease the force pressing down on the suspension and tire thus decreasing traction. And this turns out to be true but to what extent? And, certainly in certain situations traction may or may not be more important than articulation. Hard to say and VERY scenario dependent.
Second, another point is that by removing the sway bar, body roll increases. This is mainly an on-road / speed issue (most agree it's better to be connected on the road and at speed) although it can translate to off-camber situations off road as well where the vehicle's weight will be transferred further to one side without the sway bar attached. The vehicle can physically "list" further on the downhill side of an off camber situation disconnected because the sway bar is not there to hold it more upright. Again, how often and to what degree does this matter? Very scenario dependent again.
Finally and to this end, however, there are "stories" out there in the Jeep realms of guys being disco'd (front and rear usually) and hitting a trail section with an obstacle (and usually an off camber angle as well) such that the wheels (front and rear simultaneously usually though some claim it has happened with only one or the other) drop suddenly while coming off said obstacle (or hole) and shifting the vehicle weight suddenly and dramatically from one side to the other to the point that it flops. I have done a fair amount of wheeling and can't quite buy this entirely...and/or that in such a severe situation that it wouldn't have flopped anyway being connected. So I'm not sure on that, but so the argument/warning goes for what it's worth.
In my personal experience, the advantages of being disconnected up front (off-road) are positive. The increase in articulation outweighs the slight traction loss in most offroad situations. To do this of course all else has to be inline...extended brake lines, other clearances checked etc. And don't be that guy that flexes out and loses a spring (luckily unlike a lot of Jeeps, we have coilovers). But still you want it all to stay put. So, to do it right there's some work and testing involved at the upper ends of the articulation limit that can be achieved with disco's. In the rear, I find that it is not as helpful and sometimes the additional traction in the rear is better actually (why a lot of guys like XJ's with coils front and leafs rear...same idea...flex up front, stand firm in the rear.)
So, for me and what I do, I'm all about quick dico's up front and leaving the sway bar on in the rear. On the highway I'd be connected the entire time front and rear (unless driving from trailhead to trailhead). Off road I'd be disco'd in the front on any decent trail but anything lower end or overlandish...I'd just stay connected front and rear. But...always nice to have the option up front!
Just some thoughts on all that coming from the dark side (Jeep world.)
