IFS compared to straight axle?

I swapped my rig a couple years ago now. I love it, it actually rides just as good as my ifs did. SAS isn't the best option for everybody though. I love the reliability of a solid axle. I tend to beat on mine pretty hard.
Although when I was IFS, I was locked front and rear. I could keep up with my buddies on 38s with solid axles, although I was dragging myself across the rocks.


Here's a few pics of the progression of my runner.




 
santanvalleydirt said:
Awesome! I'm finally getting my brakes fixed Monday. No more shakin while brakin.
Click to expand...

Had good luck and got the piece and some bearings. They felt smooth when I turned them so they should be good. One thing I gotta ask though is if its bad to put them on the left side if I took them off the right?
 
I've had both SA and IFS version 4 runners. Because its my everyday drive & offroader as well, I've compromised and now live with the IFS on a gen2.

My perspective here...To survive the initial shock of going from SA to an IFS, I added a 4" lift kit, lockers/LSD, run BJ spacers and modified the lift kit bump stops to increase travel up front. Swaybar disconnect in the rear. I set mine up differently, focused on droop rather than lift. My front A Arms run parallel to the ground rather than downwards like standard. Chassis clearance is helped by the 4" kit, but the 32" rubber also helps as that is the only thing that counteracts running less elevation in the torsion bars. It now rides like a full coil vehicle on the trail, but has taken a while to get it all sorted and most likely cost more than an SAS swap.

One CV failure to date when I drove onto a rock platform, turned 4wd off but failed to remember in low range it won't disconnect and by turning broke a front CV. Only failure ever, and sadly was my fault.

One thing that bugs me with IFS is the amount of moving parts - leafs its just the spring hanger rubbers that go. IFS its the A arm rubbers, the upper & lower ball joints. More replacement parts ongoing with the IFS.

In the rear leafs are awesome, but coils can give similar travel and are less maintenance than leaves in themselves but for the upper and lower control arms bushes wear instead. So easy to swap coils in and out to suit your requirements. Horses for courses for what you do in the rear.

Here's what achievable (no blazeland kit) with IFS, but blazeland will achieve better just by bolt on.

PA180181.JPG


PA180180.JPG


P1040698a.JPG
 
theking11863 said:
Had good luck and got the piece and some bearings. They felt smooth when I turned them so they should be good. One thing I gotta ask though is if its bad to put them on the left side if I took them off the right?
Click to expand...

I have absolutely no idea. I don't know too much about that kind of thing, this 4Runner is my first personal vehicle. I plan to learn more about it though :embarassed:
 
Darrie said:
I've had both SA and IFS version 4 runners. Because its my everyday drive & offroader as well, I've compromised and now live with the IFS on a gen2.

My perspective here...To survive the initial shock of going from SA to an IFS, I added a 4" lift kit, lockers/LSD, run BJ spacers and modified the lift kit bump stops to increase travel up front. Swaybar disconnect in the rear. I set mine up differently, focused on droop rather than lift. My front A Arms run parallel to the ground rather than downwards like standard. Chassis clearance is helped by the 4" kit, but the 32" rubber also helps as that is the only thing that counteracts running less elevation in the torsion bars. It now rides like a full coil vehicle on the trail, but has taken a while to get it all sorted and most likely cost more than an SAS swap.

One CV failure to date when I drove onto a rock platform, turned 4wd off but failed to remember in low range it won't disconnect and by turning broke a front CV. Only failure ever, and sadly was my fault.

One thing that bugs me with IFS is the amount of moving parts - leafs its just the spring hanger rubbers that go. IFS its the A arm rubbers, the upper & lower ball joints. More replacement parts ongoing with the IFS.

In the rear leafs are awesome, but coils can give similar travel and are less maintenance than leaves in themselves but for the upper and lower control arms bushes wear instead. So easy to swap coils in and out to suit your requirements. Horses for courses for what you do in the rear.

Here's what achievable (no blazeland kit) with IFS, but blazeland will achieve better just by bolt on.

PA180181.JPG


PA180180.JPG


P1040698a.JPG
Click to expand...


Thanks for the info, and nice pics! What tires are you running there?
 
santanvalleydirt said:
Thanks for the info, and nice pics! What tires are you running there?
Click to expand...

32" Toyo's on 16" rims, but now running Hankook Dynapro MT's that look similar. Just as quiet onroad, $140 cheaper each tyre, much lighter. Traction I think is actually better than Toyo's (my last trip they never broke traction once even in 2wd trail work), but possibly weaker in sidewall than the Toyo's (understandably as I'm sure the Toyo's could take a bullet and still stay inflated !!!).

You can go a taller tyre up to 32" with a few suspension mods, but recommend any new taller tyre combo try getting it on an alloy rim rather than steel, and look closely at tyre weights - keeping the rotational mass down reduces the need for regearing diffs which is expensive.
 
Darrie said:
32" Toyo's on 16" rims, but now running Hankook Dynapro MT's that look similar. Just as quiet onroad, $140 cheaper each tyre, much lighter. Traction I think is actually better than Toyo's (my last trip they never broke traction once even in 2wd trail work), but possibly weaker in sidewall than the Toyo's (understandably as I'm sure the Toyo's could take a bullet and still stay inflated !!!).

You can go a taller tyre up to 32" with a few suspension mods, but recommend any new taller tyre combo try getting it on an alloy rim rather than steel, and look closely at tyre weights - keeping the rotational mass down reduces the need for regearing diffs which is expensive.
Click to expand...

What did you do to fit 32'' w/out a total lift?
 
santanvalleydirt said:
What did you do to fit 32'' w/out a total lift?
Click to expand...

32's narrows fit, but under compression on full lock the tread will touch the mudflap bolts ... but how hard depends on just how big/how worn your tyre is and the rim offset (narrower track tucks in and clears better). Some run a ball joint spacer kit and lift the front - this lessens the amount of times you touch, but again hard offroad wheel stuffed up on tight lock you can still touch. Round flat headed screws on the mudflap are a good choice as they don't get grabbed by the tread like the bolts do.
 
KidVermicious said:
Skinnies are key. [MENTION=84642]Quatre Coureur[/MENTION] has 33x10.5s with no lift at all. I stuffed 255/85r16s under my '86 with just ball joint spacers and some pounding.
Click to expand...

Yup. Skinnies make it all possible. There's no way in hell I could run 12.5s. The way I have it setup on the OEM 15x6" rims let it tuck under the fenders. That and the 'ol PWM(BFH!). I am going to lift it(1.5F, Ome2.R)but primarily for a bit more clearance underneath. Got the BJ spacers(4x4Wire). Did an install on [MENTION=125363]MrAhso[/MENTION] RNR. Was fairly easy. I haven't forgotten Alex! :hat:

Kevin did u experience any issues w/bjs? My CVs are flat as can be.
(forgive me if I've already asked)
Btw the IFS works pretty good.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    103.3 KB · Views: 786
My only trouble with ball joint spacers was a little rubbing on the upper control arms when I first put them on (31x12.5s on 10 inch rims). A little work with the flap wheel took care of most of that, and I had the shop delete a little camber to take care of the rest.

But that was because I was running stupid wide tires on stupid wide wheels. No fitment issues at all once I switched to the skinnies. And my CV angle was always great.
 
Last edited:
Excellent! Answered all my ?s. On the rear I'm planning on some CS009Rs. I will be pulling a small trailer in the near future. Most likely a teardrop/utility type. Thoughts? :loco:
 
Last edited:
If I only had a dollar for every time I heard that! ;): The trailer would be around 1500#. I've towed bigger trailer when it was 4:10/31s. Hauled a big load(seats down,packed)up a mountain with a full hitch rack too. Ran friggin strong! Cruised at 80. NP.
 
I'm definitely with the SAS crowd on this one. It all comes down to articulation, and the only ones that come close to the solid axle are, like some have mentioned, the super high dollar IFS set-ups. My last rig was actually much taller than I wanted it, due to the body lift I needed for a V8 swap, and yet it still was very stable when sticking one side on very large rocks. I cringe at the thought of taking my IFS rigs over serious rocks--if you don't tip over, you drag everything as you slide down your skidplates. Even a 4" lift you still barely increase your articulation with IFS, and that is what keeps your wheels planted and you moving forward--you could actually make do with a non-locking diff on the SAS because your tires stay in better contact. This also means you can go slower over tougher obstacles, because you maintain four contact patches longer. Another plus with SAS is increased CENTER height. No matter what you do with IFS, you have all that junk down the center, whereas the solid axle lifts it's center section as the tire climbs. If you want the SAS to handle better on pavement, hook up swaybars with quick disconnects, and you have the best of both worlds! Yeah, for my money, I'll go with a solid front axle.

p.s. Will whoever keeps posting the giant pics which make the posts run away out the right side PLEASE find a site that can minimize photos before posting?! LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 381 (members: 5, guests: 376)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,309
Messages
3,554,075
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top