Better SAS Lift Kit - Zone OffRoad or ICON

[goatman2]

Also, there is a good reason to use a spacer and keep the factory PSD Bilstein shocks if just wanting a small lift.

Sponsored

 

[rtaylor]

I am not convinced that the track bar upgrade is needed or even worth any effort. Ford ignored it for base vs. sasquatch.

Since the bar is so long, the error with 3" lift is only about 0.1". There is probably already more variation in the frame already. I think it is mostly just a 4WP gimmick unless you plan to be banging it into rocks a lot.

However, a bracket that sets the bar level (like base bronco) may yield better high speed street cornering (directs all side force into wheels, instead of twisting the body). Plus, this gives ideal centering and moves it out of the way of rocks. As far as I know, the only bracket so far is in the RC 3.5" base kit.

 

[Silver-Bolt]

I would never run a spacer lift kit. You want to raise your SAS Bronco 3"? What do you plan to do for the axles/CV joints? They are not going to be happy.

 

[rtaylor]

So the king's will raise the vehicle enough to run the 37's?

The amount of lift is somewhat irrelevant for clearing 37's, unless you are only talking about street or mild offroad use.

Fitting 37's is very tight. The factors for no-rub offroad are:
1 - tires (diameter and shape of sidewall near tread)
2 - wheels (less offset may clear front better, more offset may make rear rub)
3 - UCA upgrade (adds maybe 0.25"). Perhaps use wheel with +6 higher offset with UCA.
4 - minimum compressed coilover length (bump stop is inside the Bronco coilover)

Slightly smaller tire such as BFG KO2 or KM3 will clear better than Nitto. Don't exceed 12.5" width.

Icon recommends 17x8.5+0 offset w/o UCA. Zone (Fox) recommends 17x8.5+12 (+6 to +18) offset w/UCA.

Minimum compressed coilover lengths(front):

SAS: ~16.8"​

Zone 2dr SAS: ~18.7" (based on measurement of actual parts)​

Icon 2dr SAS: ~18.5" (estimate - I haven't measured actual parts yet)​

King: 17.88"​

Fox: 17.94"​

Fabtech: not specified​

4WP: they refuse to disclose travel specs​

Minimum compressed coilover length (rear):

SAS: ~16.8"​

Zone 2dr SAS: ~18.6"​

Icon 2dr SAS: ~18.0" (the Icon 2dr configuration has no preload or bump stop spacer)​

King: 18.55"​

Fox: 18.44"​

Fabtech: not specified​

4WP: they refuse to disclose travel specs​

Note that that Zone/Icon/King/Fox have about the same max CV angle, which is determined by the maximum extended length (23.72-23.96"). Sasquatch is 22.8". That means the front wheel is dropping 1.5" lower than stock SAS. It is perhaps reassuring that they all felt that this was OK.

I would never run a spacer lift kit. You want to raise your SAS Bronco 3"? What do you plan to do for the axles/CV joints? They are not going to be happy.

I guess you will have to argue that out with Fox/BDS/Zone, King, Icon, and Fabtech. They are all running nearly the same CV angles in their coilover and spacer kits.

 

[ZoneOffroad.com]

Any chance your Sasquatch adventure kit would allow enough clearance for a 37x12.5 on the stock Sasquatch wheel? Without rubbing?

No.. It'll rub. Through suspension travel and steering, the tires will contact the front body mount area and possibly the back of the inner fenders.

 

[goatman2]

I am not convinced that the track bar upgrade is needed or even worth any effort. Ford ignored it for base vs. sasquatch.

Since the bar is so long, the error with 3" lift is only about 0.1". There is probably already more variation in the frame already. I think it is mostly just a 4WP gimmick unless you plan to be banging it into rocks a lot.

However, a bracket that sets the bar level (like base bronco) may yield better high speed street cornering (directs all side force into wheels, instead of twisting the body). Plus, this gives ideal centering and moves it out of the way of rocks. As far as I know, the only bracket so far is in the RC 3.5" base kit.

Just more discussion on the topic, if it helps anyone. Yes, agree the track bar is very long so not much difference if only lifted a small amount. To clarify, the issue is keeping the rear axle centered side to side. As the vehicle is lifted the arc of movement of the track bar moves the axle side to side very slightly, to much lift, so too much arc, and the axle won't be centered. Adjustable track bar for a taller lift will allow the axle to stay centered side to side. The same thing is true for the rear control arms and keeping the axle/wheel centered in the wheel well. As lift goes up the angle of the arm goes up and so the arc of movement of the arm moves the wheel out of the center of the wheel well, so a longer control arm is needed to keep it centered.

Regarding the mounting height of the track bar. Besides locating the axle side to side, the track bar also controls the roll center at that end of the chassis. The higher the track bar is mounted the higher the roll center. If you watch NASCAR you hear them talk about adjusting the track bar during the race to control loose or free (oversteer or understeer). Generally on a track car, or sports car it's good to have the roll center/track bar very low which helps the driver feel what the car is doing, and using other elements to get the handing that is desired. (notice on NASCAR the track bar sometimes drags on the ground) On a trail vehicle, raising the track bar or roll center gets the roll center closer to the center of gravity (longitudinglly) which adds to resisting body roll and roll overs. The down side is that the driver can't feel it as well so it can go from ok to oh no! faster. For rock crawling we want the roll center as high as possible to add stability and resist body roll. So, agreeing with the above post, if there was a choice between adding a longer adjustable track bar, or raising the mounting point on the axle to level out the stock track bar, there would be a benefit to raising the bar which could add a bit of stability off road. As long as the mount is strong enough.

 

[Silver-Bolt]

The amount of lift is somewhat irrelevant for clearing 37's, unless you are only talking about street or mild offroad use.

Fitting 37's is very tight. The factors for no-rub offroad are:
1 - tires (diameter and shape of sidewall near tread)
2 - wheels (less offset may clear front better, more offset may make rear rub)
3 - UCA upgrade (adds maybe 0.25"). Perhaps use wheel with +6 higher offset with UCA.
4 - minimum compressed coilover length (bump stop is inside the Bronco coilover)

Slightly smaller tire such as BFG KO2 or KM3 will clear better than Nitto. Don't exceed 12.5" width.

Icon recommends 17x8.5+0 offset w/o UCA. Zone (Fox) recommends 17x8.5+12 (+6 to +18) offset w/UCA.

Minimum compressed coilover lengths(front):

SAS: ~16.8"​

Zone 2dr SAS: ~18.7" (based on measurement of actual parts)​

Icon 2dr SAS: ~18.5" (estimate - I haven't measured actual parts yet)​

King: 17.88"​

Fox: 17.94"​

Fabtech: not specified​

4WP: they refuse to disclose travel specs​

Minimum compressed coilover length (rear):

SAS: ~16.8"​

Zone 2dr SAS: ~18.6"​

Icon 2dr SAS: ~18.0" (the Icon 2dr configuration has no preload or bump stop spacer)​

King: 18.55"​

Fox: 18.44"​

Fabtech: not specified​

4WP: they refuse to disclose travel specs​

Note that that Zone/Icon/King/Fox have about the same max CV angle, which is determined by the maximum extended length (23.72-23.96"). Sasquatch is 22.8". That means the front wheel is dropping 1.5" lower than stock SAS. It is perhaps reassuring that they all felt that this was OK.



I guess you will have to argue that out with Fox/BDS/Zone, King, Icon, and Fabtech. They are all running nearly the same CV angles in their coilover and spacer kits.

Time will tell.

 

[Rkgzx9leftcoast]

A couple of first-hand notes on this topic:
1) First, Zone Offroad does not offer any products that would cause suspension bind. Follow our instructions and use the parts as designed.

2) Specific to the new Bronco, Ford did an excellent job designing a chassis that accommodates tall tires and high-performance driving out of the box. Presumably, the Bronco chassis may have also been designed to accommodate future configurations, as well. Bottom Line: It's an excellent and easily upgradable chassis design.

Based on the above, the old saw "..All spacers are bad!" does not apply -- at least not with Zone Offroad systems. We determined effective spacer height limits that work within the chassis' available suspension travel range and clearance -- and did not exceed those limits. It's also worth noting that proper spacers may open up your available shock options in the future. We don't expect to convince everyone, nor are we saying all spacers from all manufacturers are effective, but we did do the math on numerous actual Broncos and stand behind Zone Offroad Bronco Spacer Systems.

-- As far as how to compare Zone Offroad with other brands, this is IMPORTANT: Beware "one size fits all" offerings. Zone Offroad offers multiple spacer systems -- each geared towards a specific Bronco model. Some companies appear to use one top spacer height for all Bronco shock package lengths. This is bad: The wrong thickness spacer can cause UCA, tie rod end and CV shaft components to be overextended. When in doubt, check for vague fitment notes or poor/missing instructions. That may help separate the brands that did legit development from brands that rushed to market.

-- Additional Consideration:
Bump Stop Extensions: Our 3" and 4" Adventure Series systems include bump stop extensions - which in addition to their basic function, help prevent spring fatigue due to repeat overcompression of the springs. Some brands will omit this critical feature to cut costs or make their sell price look more attractive.
Control Arms: We are super proud of this part. They work to restore suspension geometry and ball joint articulation range at taller lift heights along with allowing for proper alignment. Also, they are dead sexy. You need to see them in person and will be proud to have them on your Bronco.

The entire Bronco product range can be found HERE

I Have a question.... I was wondering if it would be possible to Use just the top spacers on Sasquatch equipped Bronco, out of the 3 inch kit and not utilize the spring perches... to net what looks like 1.5 inches of lift??? Wasnt sure if that had been tested that way?? If I didnt want to go the full 3 inches ?

 

[goatman2]

I would never run a spacer lift kit. You want to raise your SAS Bronco 3"? What do you plan to do for the axles/CV joints? They are not going to be happy.

Looking at the measurements above, it appears none of those coilovers provide more travel, just lift. Roughly an inch more compressed length and an inch more extended length. So, except for quality and valving and rebuildabilty, the end result is exactly the same with a spacer and the stock shocks. If the Bilstein PSD shocks are on it, there is a strong argument for using spacers. We need more info and experience to learn if the aftermarket shocks spring rates and valving are better than the factory Bilsteins.

Agree that adding just spacers for a taller lift without considering maxing out other components is not a good idea.

 

[rtaylor]

I Have a question.... I was wondering if it would be possible to Use just the top spacers on Sasquatch equipped Bronco, out of the 3 inch kit and not utilize the spring perches... to net what looks like 1.5 inches of lift???

The spacer-to-lift ratio is ~1.5 for front and ~1.1 for rear if you want to mix-and-match spacers.
In 2dr SAS kit, the strut spacers are 1.08" (sloped) and 1.32". These are maximum safe strut spacer without a diff drop.

example: ~1.6" 2dr SAS level using Zone and RC parts (bump stop for 37" tire clearance)

If you use preload spacers to adjust ride height, you can install a matching bump spacer to prevent spring over-compression. The bump stop spacers reduce max wheel travel. The bump spacers can also be used to improve rear 37" tire clearance. In 2dr SAS kit, preload spacers are 0.39" and 0.96" (bump stop 0.5" and 0.87").

Some combinations for 2dr SAS. The bump spacers are added for tire clearance (option).
3" - Zone F1301
2.6" - Icon IVD4300
2.2" - Front: 1.08" strut + 0.39" preload (no bump), Rear: 1" spacer + (0.5" bump)
2.2" - Front: 1.08" strut + 0.39" preload + 0.5" bump, Rear: 1" spacer + (0.87" bump)
1.6" - Front: 1.08" strut, Rear: 2 x 3/16" RC spacer + (0.87" bump) (level)
1.6" - Front: 1.08" strut, Rear: 1.25" spacer + (0.5" bump) (w/rake)

 

[BAUS67]

@ZoneOffroad.com, thank you for the explanation on your spacer design. Every good engineering review requires peer critique, this is a great discussion to understand the Bronco chassis and suspension capabilities and the impact of modifications to the Bronco drivetrain components; longevity, performance and ride comfort. Please don't take offense to us discussing your spacer claims, if true, they should hold up to peer review.

@TeocaliMG, @BAUS67, @goatman2, with your suspension industry knowledge and experience can you please give us your thoughts on the Zone spacer design approach?

I'm bias I sell more Zone/BDS than anything. Customers call for it by name. They know and if they don't know then I have to try to explain what was posted above to them.

Not everything should be about price point. I see many here say what's wrong with RC it's just a metal spacer, I can make that in my garage. What you do NOT get with the "cheaper" kits is the engineering behind it. Just make it and sell it and if people have problems they just say "It was installed wrong"

All kidding aside bottom line is you get what you pay for. If you are planning on an upgrade do your homework first, investigate, ask questions, READ posts in forums, etc. Figure out what wokrs for what your end goal is.


Edit: See here, I used a snip from @rtaylor post above .........

If companies do not give specs then I, personally, would steer clear. They are not giving you specs for a reason. They are withholding info from you. They do not want you to find out what they already know but don't want to tell you. If some one says well buy mine because mine is the best but don't want to explain why ....... then steer clear.

 

[BAUS67]

No.. It'll rub. Through suspension travel and steering, the tires will contact the front body mount area and possibly the back of the inner fenders.

And this is where the disclaimer ....... "some trimming is required" comes from.

Personally, when I read this , I read they fit. Crash bar mount and inner fenderwells can be "adjusted."

As I have posted before....... my F-150 level kit says 33"s but I run 35's

 

[Rkgzx9leftcoast]

The spacer-to-lift ratio is ~1.5 for front and ~1.1 for rear if you want to mix-and-match spacers.
In 2dr SAS kit, the strut spacers are 1.08" (sloped) and 1.32". These are maximum safe strut spacer without a diff drop.

example: ~1.6" 2dr SAS level using Zone and RC parts (bump stop for 37" tire clearance)

If you use preload spacers to adjust ride height, you can install a matching bump spacer to prevent spring over-compression. The bump stop spacers reduce max wheel travel. The bump spacers can also be used to improve rear 37" tire clearance. In 2dr SAS kit, preload spacers are 0.39" and 0.96" (bump stop 0.5" and 0.87").

Some combinations for 2dr SAS. The bump spacers are added for tire clearance (option).
3" - Zone F1301
2.6" - Icon IVD4300
2.2" - Front: 1.08" strut + 0.39" preload (no bump), Rear: ~1" spacer from ZONF1220 + (0.5" bump)
2.2" - Front: 1.08" strut + 0.39" preload + 0.5" bump, Rear: ~1" spacer from ZONF1220 + (0.87" bump)
1.6" - Front: 1.08" strut, Rear: 2 x 3/16" RC spacer + (0.87" bump) (level)
1.6" - Front: 1.08" strut, Rear: 1.25" spacer + (0.5" bump) (w/rake)

Thanks for the detailed reply. Lots of info to go through. Thanks! I am leaning toward minimal amount of lift and 37s.... will play with it once I get it in a few months. Eventually will go coil overs, but want to test in steps.

 

[contented]

Our Outer Banks 4 dr non Sas was just ordered on Black Friday. Driving a BMW X3 now. Newbie here to all things lifted and as such I follow these threads w/ great interest. This one is very detailed. Much appreciated. Many thanks to all.

I learned a lesson w/ a 2017 Mini Cooper which caused me to adopt the follow analogy - Newton's third law of physics says, "for every action there is an opposite an equal reaction". (Action) I put a set of coilovers and fat rear sway bar on above Mini and lowered it at about 20k miles. The good, it handled like a go cart. Just amazing. The bad (opposite reaction), it became a scrape magnet. But even worse it instantly developed a vibration in the front end. Trial and error taught me the vibration went away long as the drop didn't exceed 3/4". The problem? New angles on the CV joints didn't like the wear patterns that had developed in the first 20k. Lifting does exactly the same thing, changes the angle of cv joints. My second example is tuning. I added a Dinan Elite tuning module. Results were instantaneous (the good). Brought a big smile on first trip down the road. The bad - it would occasionally throw code, always at an inopportune time, and required a trip to the dealer to reset.

My point in all of this? And this thread with its differing opinions has reinforced it to me, I'm staying absolutely stock. No desire to sort out opposite and equal reactions.

 

[Werkedperformance]

The spacer-to-lift ratio is ~1.5 for front and ~1.1 for rear if you want to mix-and-match spacers.
In 2dr SAS kit, the strut spacers are 1.08" (sloped) and 1.32". These are maximum safe strut spacer without a diff drop.

example: ~1.6" 2dr SAS level using Zone and RC parts (bump stop for 37" tire clearance)

1.08” and 1.32” is that the measurement on the zone off-road thermoplastic spacers?

do you have a measurement on the icon spacers?

could the spacers be used in opposite locations? I saw the sloped note, can you expand on what you mean?

I’m trying to run Bilstein’s on the BajaKits long travel. Basically need to make the fronts king length. I need 1 - 1.1 “

I still need to get spring rates to compare…… unless you know those for any of the aftermarket setups

Sponsored