Bronco engineered to beat Wrangler's VCI (traversing soft terrain) according to member on Wranglerforums

[BigMike949]

That was a very informative read, but it leaves me wanting much more information. The key thing I noted is that the Badland's VCI will out perform the Rubicon's within 90% of the Rubicon's articulation. I interpret that to mean that the Sasquatch suspension VCI will be better within ~85%, since the bump stops will limit the travel. Still dang good. The base suspension (Base, BB, BD, OB, non-Sasquatch) will compare even less favorably, which (although I couldn't care less about how my Bronco will compare to a Wrangler) leaves me wondering if the base suspension will be good enough for backcountry roads I regularly travel.

And that, has me second guessing my freakin order! Do I change my order to a BL, or stick with a BD and my plan to upgrade the suspension later on? We need more information on the FPP suspension!

I was thinking that but if you had a jeep and got a spacer lift it would come with bump stops that limit it to.. and if you wanted to spend less than 2600 for wheels, tires, lift, shocks especially coilover shocks.. you would certainly have to go with a spacer lift.. so it's relatively the same as a rubicon with spacer lift and 35's .. which i ran for sometime.. and the vehicle was totally capable i never found myself totally upset that i didn't have that extra half inch of UPWARDS wheel travel.. and then i looked at what lifts for raptors cost and pooped my pants, hopefully its more expensive because the raptor is heavier, but if its really that lifts cost more for IFS .. then i am fine with the spacer lift.. because i am just not in a place to spend 8-10k on a lift wheel and tires on a 58k vehicle

Sponsored

 

[Gamecock]

I was thinking that but if you had a jeep and got a spacer lift it would come with bump stops that limit it to.. and if you wanted to spend less than 2600 for wheels, tires, lift, shocks especially coilover shocks.. you would certainly have to go with a spacer lift.. so it's relatively the same as a rubicon with spacer lift and 35's .. which i ran for sometime.. and the vehicle was totally capable i never found myself totally upset that i didn't have that extra half inch of UPWARDS wheel travel.. and then i looked at what lifts for raptors cost and pooped my pants, hopefully its more expensive because the raptor is heavier, but if its really that lifts cost more for IFS .. then i am fine with the spacer lift.. because i am just not in a place to spend 8-10k on a lift wheel and tires on a 58k vehicle

Yeah, his 85% number didn’t make sense. The Badlands with 35s is going some places easier than the same truck without Sasquatch. An inch of extra ground clearance means more than 10mm of up travel more often than not. Both in the same ballpark of capability though.

 

[Mainerunr]

I believe he also went up Backdoor WITHOUT winching.

Yeah, that was the one I was thinking of. I knew I had it wrong but couldn't remember what it was...

 

[MadMan4BamaNATL]

That was a very informative read, but it leaves me wanting much more information. The key thing I noted is that the Badland's VCI will out perform the Rubicon's within 90% of the Rubicon's articulation. I interpret that to mean that the Sasquatch suspension VCI will be better within ~85%, since the bump stops will limit the travel. Still dang good. The base suspension (Base, BB, BD, OB, non-Sasquatch) will compare even less favorably, which (although I couldn't care less about how my Bronco will compare to a Wrangler) leaves me wondering if the base suspension will be good enough for backcountry roads I regularly travel.

And that, has me second guessing my freakin order! Do I change my order to a BL, or stick with a BD and my plan to upgrade the suspension later on? We need more information on the FPP suspension!

Hey, your budget is what it is, but I'll say this, if you go out to wheel or camp often, upgrading to a Badlands makes sense if you can afford to.

I say this since you are in Utah, which is fertile off roading round, I'd be in a Badlands without second thought.

However, if you already are making a plan on which upgrades and from which manufacturer you'll hope to get these upgrades, then it may still be best to go with your Black Diamond, which is a great and capable platform.

I am bias towards my build which is a 2dr BadSquatch, but if you're going 4dr, Badlands is an even more critical upgrade for better off road performance, so it depends on what terrain you'll tackle ultimately. Be honest with yourself and buy smart.

 

[Toccoa]

Nice try, but compare the angles of the front and rear axles between the two pictures. The Wrangler is clearly more "crossed up". That said, both compare very well and I'm encouraged that my Bronco will go where I've taken my Jeep.

I know. It was just too perfect a picture match to pass up.

 

[MoabRox]

Yeah, his 85% number didn’t make sense. The Badlands with 35s is going some places easier than the same truck without Sasquatch. An inch of extra ground clearance means more than 10mm of up travel more often than not. Both in the same ballpark of capability though.

Looks like I didn't make myself clear. The 85% was comparing to a Wrangler travel, not to the Bronco base suspension and it was a total guess. I agree that clearly the Sasquatch suspension will perform better than the base. I also agree that extra clearance usually makes a bigger difference than 3/8" more up travel, but up travel can make a pretty big difference when you're crossing up the axles. The point was the Sasquatch suspension is not equal to the Badland's "unique" suspension.

What I'm trying to figure out is how capable the base suspension is with only 7.9" front and 8.5" rear travel. I've been planning on a suspension upgrade (for the Black Diamond I ordered) after delivery, like the FPP suspension "accessory", counting on getting at least the same wheel travel as the Badlands (9.4"/10.3") or better, along with manual sway bar disconnects. This VCI thread has me wondering if I'll better off just getting a Badlands now (even though I really don't like the auto sway bar disconnect) , since I don't plan on running any bigger than at 33x12.50 tire. There just isn't enough information to be comfortable deciding one way or the other. Ford's doing nothing but "upsale-ing" the Badlands and Sasquatch and it's starting to piss me off.

 

[MoabRox]

I was thinking that but if you had a jeep and got a spacer lift it would come with bump stops that limit it to.. and if you wanted to spend less than 2600 for wheels, tires, lift, shocks especially coilover shocks.. you would certainly have to go with a spacer lift.. so it's relatively the same as a rubicon with spacer lift and 35's .. which i ran for sometime.. and the vehicle was totally capable i never found myself totally upset that i didn't have that extra half inch of UPWARDS wheel travel.. and then i looked at what lifts for raptors cost and pooped my pants, hopefully its more expensive because the raptor is heavier, but if its really that lifts cost more for IFS .. then i am fine with the spacer lift.. because i am just not in a place to spend 8-10k on a lift wheel and tires on a 58k vehicle

Agreed! There's two areas where a SFA beats an IFS pretty much every time--durability and the cost to lift a couple inches or so. Those are the two main reasons I ditched my 89 4Runner for a 98 Cherokee, but dang I wish I had kept that 1st generation 4Runner and just swapped in a solid axle!

 

[BigMike949]

Looks like I didn't make myself clear. The 85% was comparing to a Wrangler travel, not to the Bronco base suspension and it was a total guess. I agree that clearly the Sasquatch suspension will perform better than the base. I also agree that extra clearance usually makes a bigger difference than 3/8" more up travel, but up travel can make a pretty big difference when you're crossing up the axles. The point was the Sasquatch suspension is not equal to the Badland's "unique" suspension.

What I'm trying to figure out is how capable the base suspension is with only 7.9" front and 8.5" rear travel. I've been planning on a suspension upgrade (for the Black Diamond I ordered) after delivery, like the FPP suspension "accessory", counting on getting at least the same wheel travel as the Badlands (9.4"/10.3") or better, along with manual sway bar disconnects. This VCI thread has me wondering if I'll better off just getting a Badlands now (even though I really don't like the auto sway bar disconnect) , since I don't plan on running any bigger than at 33x12.50 tire. There just isn't enough information to be comfortable deciding one way or the other. Ford's doing nothing but "upsale-ing" the Badlands and Sasquatch and it's starting to piss me off.

I have run quick disconnects it’s fine but It’s also inconvenient, I prefer an auto-disco because atleast in the Jeep and probably bronco once acctivated engages and disengage based upon speed, so all you have to do is slow down to under 18 miles per hour (in a Jeep) before an obstacle and it kicks it loose then when you pick up speed after it pulls it back in to make you more stable at higher speeds.. if you don’t have the auto Rico you are either jumping in and out and climbing under your vehicle or your running floppy between obstacles, so for me it’s worth the extra 30 bucks a month .. if I didn’t trail I would go wild track get the look and save a few k

 

[BigMike949]

Agreed! There's two areas where a SFA beats an IFS pretty much every time--durability and the cost to lift a couple inches or so. Those are the two main reasons I ditched my 89 4Runner for a 98 Cherokee, but dang I wish I had kept that 1st generation 4Runner and just swapped in a solid axle!

the old 4runners were awesome and

Agreed! There's two areas where a SFA beats an IFS pretty much every time--durability and the cost to lift a couple inches or so. Those are the two main reasons I ditched my 89 4Runner for a 98 Cherokee, but dang I wish I had kept that 1st generation 4Runner and just swapped in a solid axle!

Did the first gen have the Kinetic disconnect kdds? I have alway that that is such a cool design, always wanted to try it out

 

[MoabRox]

the old 4runners were awesome and


Did the first gen have the Kinetic disconnect kdds? I have alway that that is such a cool design, always wanted to try it out

They didn't. That would have been nice.

 

[MoabRox]

I have run quick disconnects it’s fine but It’s also inconvenient, I prefer an auto-disco because atleast in the Jeep and probably bronco once acctivated engages and disengage based upon speed, so all you have to do is slow down to under 18 miles per hour (in a Jeep) before an obstacle and it kicks it loose then when you pick up speed after it pulls it back in to make you more stable at higher speeds.. if you don’t have the auto Rico you are either jumping in and out and climbing under your vehicle or your running floppy between obstacles, so for me it’s worth the extra 30 bucks a month .. if I didn’t trail I would go wild track get the look and save a few k

I guess I'm old school. My philosophy is to keep it as simple as possible, and in my mind an auto disconnect is just one more electrical/mechanical thing to maintain or break down the road. If I didn't want the lower gearing so much, I'd go with the selectable T-case instead of the advanced for the same reason. Are the auto discos pretty reliable?

I like keeping my Cherokee disconnected in between the big obstacles, as it seems to smooth out the ride a little without excessive body roll. Of course I'm not driving hard into and out of curves, or the body roll could get a little scary. So it wouldn't be any different running the Bronco disconnected, unless the suspension is a lot softer.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[BigMike949]

I guess I'm old school. My philosophy is to keep it as simple as possible, and in my mind an auto disconnect is just one more electrical/mechanical thing to maintain or break down the road. If I didn't want the lower gearing so much, I'd go with the selectable T-case instead of the advanced for the same reason. Are the auto discos pretty reliable?

I like keeping my Cherokee disconnected in between the big obstacles, as it seems to smooth out the ride a little without excessive body roll. Of course I'm not driving hard into and out of curves, or the body roll could get a little scary. So it wouldn't be any different running the Bronco disconnected, unless the suspension is a lot softer.

Thanks for the feedback.

so I have never had a failure on my disco, but lots of reports of issues especially for guys who live in areas where they ford water and the disco get pretty wet, I am in California so a water crossing is a really Exciting big deal...

And I do agree the extra loose travel in bumps can be nice, I had a chip in my last rubicon that would increase the recon sales if I wanted from 18 to 35 miles per hour... I actually did like leaving it loose under 35 for that exact reason... but I did have a Sahara befor with the quick disconnects and it was fine as I said and I would leave it loose and do it during air down and air up... but once I had the rubicon with the auto I wouldn’t have gone back. My business partner is like you he won’t even get power windows, he like thinking if it as his apocalypse vehicle, and wants everything as simple as possible to avoid breakage and increase ease of repair. But for me it being my daily driver, I want the bells and whistles and maybe spring for extended warranty

 

[Norm A.]

Found this post extremely interesting in regards to solid axle vs. IFS, and where Ford is coming from with their design. I’m by no means a suspension expert and had never even heard of VCI, but Erik Latranyi who wrote the posts said I was welcome to share his posts over here. Thanks to him and should be a good discussion!

Works for me

 

[BossMann]

Not really a surprise here, it's known by most that if you wanna climb rocks then buy the Jeep for it's superior capability in that arena and put up with the possibility of death wobble and poor high speed ride due to the solid axle and go with it. You wanna go fast and smooth over less aggressive terrain with better ride then go IFS, it's been proven on the Raptor many times over. Bottom line, the guys that wanna beat it up on the rocks ain't gonna buy a Bronco, they will stick with Jeep. But, good info as to how that is arrived at, thanks for posting.

but Jeep’s are ugly. And uncomfortable.

 

[BossMann]

honestly, after reading this board, I can’t argue. I know I’m getting an inferior rock crawler, but I’ll accept that to not be in a Jeep. Same reason I was in a Tacoma.

Sponsored