The 2021 Ranger has a tow rating of 7500lbs with the same chassis. Seems stiffer rear springs could allow real-world safe towing of a lot more than 3500lbs.If you say that there is little difference in squat under load between the three suspension types then I believe you, but even accepting that there is still too much discrepancy for me to accept at face value only the idea that tongue weight is the governing driver of tow capacity. Have a look at the GVWR details sheet released last year and compare differences in max tongue weight vs. differences in max payload among trims with the same wheelbase and powertrain. Since the 2.3L+7M in the four-door is BB, BD & BL only I focused on the jumps between those three, and they tell quite the story (while also avoiding any Sasquatch variables). In most of the cases there is a <20lb difference in max tongue weight going from BL to BD and then little or no difference in allowable tongue weight going from BD to BB, yet there is much less difference in allowable payload going from BL to BD than there is going from BD to BB. Check the aforementioned manual 4-doors for the easiest comparison. I don't buy that the BB can handle 250lb more payload than the BD but cannot handle any more tongue weight on that teeny tiny rear overhang, especially not if the the BD can handle only 40lbs more payload than the BL and that gives it 16lbs more tongue weight.
Of note is that all of the rear GAWRs are the same for each wheelbase, with only the front GAWR generally increasing with increasing GVWR. Then compare the front axle curb weights to the total curb weights and note that as the trims (again, within each wheelbase and powertrain grouping) get heavier, progressively more of the curb weight is put on the rear axle than the front axle which should partly explain the decrease in allowable tongue weight. Check out the manual 4-doors for example again though, and you'll see that the BB has ~2000lbs of its curb weight on the rear axle while both the BD and BL have ~2200lbs of their curb weight on the rear axle. So why is there no decrease in allowable tongue weight between the BB and BD, but there is between the BD and BL?
As has been discussed at earlier times in this community, there are a heck of a lot of signs here upholding the hypothesis that if the higher curb weight models have indeed been rated appropriately, then the lower curb weight models were artificially capped at the 3500lbs towing/350lbs tongue weight rating of a Class II hitch receiver, which is a real shame. This is especially problematic for many small travel trailers that come in right around the 3500lb GTWR mark but well exceed 350lbs of tongue weight. If you need more convincing, start comparing the given tow caps to the SAEJ2807 formula of GCWR-curb weight-300lbs. The higher curb weight models come in pretty dang close to the given tow caps, while the lower curb weight models are well off. By that formula a 2-door manual BB should be able to tow ~4200lbs! If it can tow that much, has 1240lbs of payload, and has almost 1000lbs available on the rear axle then why is the tongue weight capped at 350lbs?
It's a different chassis, but yes the suspension is thought to be the limiting factor by far.
Why not? And they are ANTI-sway bars to be precise. Lets not get so millennial sloppy that we end up thinking a sway bar increases sway. An ANTI-SWAY bar decreases or limits sway or essentially suspension movement. Your grandpa's '39 Ford did not come with any anti-sway apparati, although it had a forged dropped solid front axle.
More than suspension a major Limiting factor on towing is BRAKES, that's why a Jaguar F-pace can outtow a Bronco (5290# towing capacity but you will rarely see an airstream behind a Jag) it has much better brakes.
Perspective really matters lol. My non-sas is the squishiest car I've ever driven. It's a weird feeling to nose down so hard when braking.
The technical term is Anti "Roll" bar. So if you want be an ass and assume I'm some type of milennial prick that wants to change the name of a mechanism in a 4x4 go right on ahead. But know you have the name wrong also. I have no care in the world for what you think the name should be. I know how it operates. If disconnecting the front and rear "Roll" bar was so advantageous, then why isn't rear disconnect offered on any other 4x4 vehicle? Yea so what you can do it yourself. That's at your own risk. Back to my original question. It may be beneficial in some applications. But is it worth it with the potential of greater chance of a roll over.
In Rock Crawling, a vehicle with properly setup swaybars, front and rear is extremely stable, reduces the risk of roll over and enhances traction.
You do need to match the length of the links that connect the swaybar to the frame, with your shock lengths
It's way better than being disconnected at 1 or both ends and a big reason why products like the Currie AntiRock and OffRoad Only SwayLoc exist.
The body of a vehicle that has one end completely disconnected will follow the angle of the suspension on the connected end. We see this in a lot of Bronco Videos. The body follows the lower front wheel. The body of a vehicle that is disconnected at both ends will lean downhill. That can make things really tippy on extreme terrain angles
Here is an example with my first Jeep which has front and rear swaybars.
Front is Offroad Only Swayloc, rear is stock with 11.5" links.
Look at how level the tub is compared to the rear axle
and from a different angle you can see that the front axles is flexed out in the other direction
Third angle where you can see the front swaybar and amount of axle droop. My Front shock was the limiting factor.
My current jeep, has a very similar build [Previous Owner copied my original jeep's setup] and as you can see, I have zero Articulation issues
I am still accumulating pictures with the new jeep, but have it dialed in really nice.
You Bronco Owners with the rear sway bar, take it as a win. If need be, you can fine tune it and have a much better offroad vehicle that will not limit the rear axles articulation.
So what’s the actual truth here?
Poll is a bit confusing for a Badlands owner. Should they vote for the Badlands answer or the one that corresponds to whether they have Sasquatch?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong about this, but for MY22 I believe they updated it so only Badlands has the roof rack restriction. 4d BL 2.7L is the only combination prevented from getting the factory roof rack now.
No, can't on Wildtrak either if you opt for the 'full' body bash plates. The bash plate are standard on the badland and black diamond. They are optional on the Wildtrak. Not available at all on other trims. As I said above the Black Diamond is the only trim that you can get factory bash plates, 2.7/auto, and the roof rack on a 4 door. Of course, it really does not add up, because the steel rear bumper has to weigh quite a bit more than the plastic one. Logic and the ford ordering system do not march along the same line......
We come from a different time and place. Call it what you want. I can agree to disagree but i can show you a million vehicles on the road with solid rear axles and not a "roll" bar among them.
