Something about his smirk when he said the axle will be under the "upcoming Ford product" really seemed to hint at the D44 SFA being under the Bronco. I'd be fine either way, but this is definitely interesting.
Same, something about it made me do a double take. I still agree with most others here that IFS is on the Bronco, and I don't see Ford making two different front ends. But well, will see this Spring ...Right?! I could not help but notice how much excitement he showed when he made the comment.
Don't forget, they make two very different suspensions on the super-duty trucks.Same, something about it made me do a double take. I still agree with most others here that IFS is on the Bronco, and I don't see Ford making two different front ends. But well, will see this Spring ...
Or someone that really wants to "get after it" could put in a 60 with only 35/36'sDo you really need me to answer that? If you want to turn a stock vehicle into a build that needs a D60, you're likely doing upgrades to wheel & tires, armour, suspension, drive line, and steering.
It’s about an inch difference, and the 60 is gonna be cheaper than a built 44.
We do, but the TTB is for 2wd only. As Toyhoarder pointed out however, the trickier part for us would be the steering. Both the TTB and SFA Super duties use a pitman arm/RCB gear (the same one actually), they simply have different linkages connecting all the hard points.Don't forget, they make two very different suspensions on the super-duty trucks.
Built 44 doesn't get you better axle tubes, bigger ball joints (or even king pins), thicker C's, etc...
Great info, but I specifically posted up about things you can't upgrade on a 44 to get to 60 strengthYou missed the real achilles heel of a Dana 44 which is the 1310 size U-joints.
The "next generation" Dana 44 in the JKs got 1350s, which is what Dana 44s should have had all along. The new Dana M210 in the Rubicons has 1410 U-joints which means they should hold up quite well with 37s and even 40s if you aren't stupid with the Throttle. Old Dana 44s were marginal with anything bigger than 35s since the 1310 U-joints are the same size as the '91+ ABS Dana 30s and all '95+ Dana 30s.
For reference, old Dana 60s have 1480 U-joints, while the 2005+ Super 60 has 1550 U-joints (the super 60 axles shafts will go right into a 2005+ non-super 60 with no modifications) and if I recall correctly, all 2014+ Dana 60s have the 1550 U-joints.
Unfortunately the 1550s are missing from this picture.
Again, valid, but not for the tire sizes I run, still matters even if rig itself is light.The things you pointed out are certainly valid, but are more vehicle weight related. Under a lighter rig those things aren't really an issue.
and the ball joints have been OK with those on 40's??Update to the tech I posted:
Apparently the 1410 U-joint axle shafts are only on the Dana Spicer "Ultimate" M210 and not on the factory JL Rubicon M210 which has 1350 U-joints like the older "Next gen" Dana 44 from the JK. However, the 1410 axle shafts supposedly fit right into the Rubicon M210s without any modifications.
That means that going bigger than about 37s on the factory Rubicon M210 axles will start to get dicey, but if you upgrade to the 1410 shafts, you would probably be okay up to about a 40.
As I mentioned already, could be a real big help if the bronco somehow comes in say 2-400 lbs lighter than it would have with a steel body, butNot everyone is wheeling a 6,200 lbs. rig. I haven't had to change out any ball joints on my Dana 35 with 37" tires that weigh 104 lbs. each after years of wheeling. The caveat is that rig weighs 3,900 lbs. with all my tools, recovery gear, and spare tire. My other rig has a Dana 44 front with 38" tires that weigh 140 lbs. has been doing well so far, but I have only had it for a little over a year and I replaced the ball joints when I first got it.
The ball joint spacing is larger on the Dana M210 than on the "next generation" Dana 44, which itself had larger ball joint spacing than the legacy Dana 44 axles, so I would assume it is stronger. I haven't had the opportunity to disassemble an M210 yet to see for myself, but I haven't heard of issues yet, although it is still a very new front axle. For reference, a 2 door JL Sport soft top with a V6 and the manual weighs 3,972 lbs. according to Car and Driver, while a 4 door Rubicon soft top with the V6 and an automatic weighed 4,629 lbs. Both are a lot lighter than your rig and will consequently be easier on parts.
Sure there are people who will add a ton of armor and crap and get the 4 doors up to 6,000 lbs+, and those are the same people who were bending axles on their JKs. If your Jeep is that heavy, of course it is going to have problems breaking stuff since it was designed to be ~1,500 lbs. lighter. I have been weight conscious with my build, but I haven't done anything crazy or exotic to keep the weight down. At 3,900 lbs., I am only about 500-600 lbs. heavier than stock, which is pretty good considering about 300 lbs. of that is in wheels and tires alone, and maybe another 100 lbs. of that is in tools and recovery gear.