6100s on non-sas badlands and 315/70/17

[ronij]

Can someone confirm for me that 6100s provide enough lift for a non-sas badlands that at full compression, I would not have rubbing with 315/70/17 on sasquatch wheels when offroading? Or do I need a longer bumpstop like what comes on the sasquatch models to reduce travel a little?

As I understand it, no matter what circlip setting is used on the 6100s, the compressed length of the shock is the same and so the circlip setting is irrelevant to this question but please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Sponsored

 

[RagnarKon]

I can confirm.

For just driving around town and the vast majority of situations off-roading, the C-clip is fine in any position. If you want to ensure no rubbing on the rougher stuff... you'll need to put the C-clip in the 2nd or 3rd position (depending on if you have 2 or 4 door), but it's absolutely achievable.

Edit: Not true. I was operating under the impression that the bump stops were different as reported by several users in the forum. But turns out this is false.

---

Also quick aside for future Google searchers...

The non-Sas Badlands trim is the only non-Sasquatch trim that can use the 6100s. Every other non-Sas trim will need the Bilstein 6112s.

 

[ronij]

If you want to ensure no rubbing on the rougher stuff... you'll need to put the C-clip in the 2nd or 3rd position (depending on if you have 2 or 4 door), but it's absolutely achievable.

Thanks for the quick reply.

As I understand it, even if you change the circlip position, you are not changing the length of the shock and as such, you are not changing the position of the tire relative to the vehicle at full compression. You are only changing the ride height (e.g., the position when you are not at full compression). So, if there will be rub with the lowest circlip setting, then there should be rub at any circlip setting if you manage to bottom out the shock. Or am I misunderstanding this?

 

[Muffin Top]

You are completely correct. The factory sas package extends the bumpstops (reducing overland travel) to ensure those larger tires won't rub.


However, there is a meaningful distinction that prompts so many on the internet to favor a lift :


If you inspect your wheelwells, you'll see there's more room available for uptravel when the tires are pointed straight ahead, and less room available when the tires are turned sharply to either side (i.e., when articulating offroad).


So a given set-up might not be able to rub when the tires are pointed straight ahead, but can rub when the wheels are turned.


How do we utilize this insight to make our Broncos more awesome ?


If you add just a little bit of spring lift (or inside-the-strut spacer lift), to make your IFS uptravel just a tiny bit greater than your downtravel, then when you're articulating offroad you won't get stuck. Having less available downtravel, as the set-up I suggest, means the tire on the other side won't remain at full bump, so rubbing that occurs when articulating will be transitory instead of disabling.


So you're right to worry about uptravel tire clearance when they're pointed straight ahead, because of the possibility of jouncing to full compression when you're driving at speed on the road. If this same set-up has occasional transitory rubbing offroad, you won't get stuck by it.

 

[RagnarKon]

Thanks for the quick reply.

As I understand it, even if you change the circlip position, you are not changing the length of the shock and as such, you are not changing the position of the tire relative to the vehicle at full compression. You are only changing the ride height (e.g., the position when you are not at full compression). So, if there will be rub with the lowest circlip setting, then there should be rub at any circlip setting if you manage to bottom out the shock. Or am I misunderstanding this?

The circlip is basically preloading the spring to achieve the ride height. So yes your thought process is spot on.

As @Muffin Top mentioned... the issue is the bump stop. Part of the 6100 installation process requires you to transfer your factory springs and the factory bump stop over to the new suspension. Several non-Sas Badlands owners have discovered that the bump stops on the non-Sasquatch Badlands are actually shorter than the bump stops on the Sasquatch packaged vehicles. So to combat the shorter bump stop you effectively have to pre-load it a bit more to help prevent it from bottoming out on those bump stops.

Truthfully I haven't actually verified if the bump stops are in-fact different. Enough owners have mentioned it at this point that I imagine if it was false someone would have noticed by now. But I also have a non-Sas Badlands so maybe I'll take a peak next time I do a tire rotation.

 

[RagnarKon]

Truthfully I haven't actually verified if the bump stops are in-fact different. Enough owners have mentioned it at this point that I imagine if it was false someone would have noticed by now. But I also have a non-Sas Badlands so maybe I'll take a peak next time I do a tire rotation.

Alright... curiosity got the best of me.

As of today.... it appears the bump stop on the Sasquatch and non-Badlands vehicles are exactly the same, at least according to the parts database.

• Front - MB3Z-18198-C
• Rear - MB3Z-5K570-C

I do see them split out separately between the two different suspension systems, but they both ultimately lead back to the same part numbers. My hunch is that they were previously two different part numbers, but I'm guessing that both configs are now shipping with the same parts (probably done just to simplify manufacturing a bit). Someone who works for a dealer would probably have to pull up some HVBOMs to find out for sure, but... yeah.

So long story short @ronij... this whole bump stop discussion may be a non-issue.

 

[GNFITR]

Alright... curiosity got the best of me.

As of today.... it appears the bump stop on the Sasquatch and non-Badlands vehicles are exactly the same, at least according to the parts database.

• Front - MB3Z-18198-C
• Rear - MB3Z-5K570-C

I do see them split out separately between the two different suspension systems, but they both ultimately lead back to the same part numbers. My hunch is that they were previously two different part numbers, but I'm guessing that both configs are now shipping with the same parts (probably done just to simplify manufacturing a bit). Someone who works for a dealer would probably have to pull up some HVBOMs to find out for sure, but... yeah.

So long story short @ronij... this whole bump stop discussion may be a non-issue.

It was verified a couple of years ago that the bumpstops were the same. I think somebody threw the idea out there that the bumbstops were different to explain the heighth difference and it stuck, but this thread from two years ago, including photos of takeoff bumpstops, shows they are the same.

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...uatch-shock-length-but-different.42480/page-3

I have an order in with Flip/Ruxer and he verified the part numbers you listed above to be the correct replacement parts for my 2023 Non-SAS Badlands. He verified they are the same for a Sasquatch and non-SAS Badlands. I have an order in for the required hardware to assemble a set of 6112's without reusing the factory parts. I plan to sell my assembled takeoffs but in hindsight it may not make sense. By the time you buy the hardware required (top mounts X 4, Dustcover/bumpstop X 4, insulator X 4, etc) to assemble the 6112's, you are looking at over $500. Since I am ordering from Ruxer I was able to use my Ford points to knock off $200.

 

[GoodThunder]

My non-sas Badlands with 6100s on the 3rd clip in front and 2nd clip in back with 315/70/17 tires on 17" wheels with a +30 offset. Ends up being about 0.5" inches taller than a sas Badlands on those clips. No issues at all, and you could go higher if you had the urge, although as you said I'm not sure how much difference that makes to your question.

Sponsored