IF it has to be IFS..........

[OX1]

Hopefully, it's closer to this than not (See Pages 5 and 21 especially)
(I know it won't be, but I can dream...........)

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/851d52_a99c5a0699be41cbb20b45cd57cc1cfd.pdf

Sponsored

 

[TeocaliMG]

Hopefully, it's closer to this than not (See Pages 5 and 21 especially)
(I know it won't be, but I can dream...........)

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/851d52_a99c5a0699be41cbb20b45cd57cc1cfd.pdf

I would love the chassis performance afforded by an ultra-narrow diff. I've seen the one you linked to when digging up ultra-4 stuff for a build I want to do myself! Unfortunately it is not actually a differential, the CV's turn together more like an ultra-narrow spool or Detroit locker. This then would not be acceptable to drive on the road. Though it is great for ultra-4 or any extreme off road racing and competition.

From what I have seen and heard we have every reason to believe that the IFS system would share the beefy long arm long travel DNA of the raptor, making it significantly better than typical stock IFS rigs. I hope thats the case at least, it needs to have a lot of wheel travel to offer the articulation needed.

 

[OX1]

From what I have seen and heard we have every reason to believe that the IFS system would share the beefy long arm long travel DNA of the raptor,

Where did you see and hear that?

 

[Bronco II]

Unless something weirder than a furniture CEO running a car company happens it will be IFS.

 

[TeocaliMG]

Where did you see and hear that?

The 2021 bronco will be based on the new ranger. Though this will be a new, heavily updated and modified platform compared to the old ranger there are no signs that it will be leaving the IFS architecture. And due to engine package the chassis cradle could never be made as narrow as what your link shows.

That said, there is a lot more that can be done with proper IFS than what was done with the current ranger. Look to the the Colorado Zr2 for example, and that only has about 8" of travel compared to the raptors 13"

If the bronco can manage to carry that DNA along with sway-bar disconnect and a multi link solid rear axle it will be a solid performer.

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

Saying that it will share a chassis with the Ranger is no guarantee that IFS will be used, the Brazilian Troller T4 uses the same chassis and it has solid axles. The superduties and T4 demonstrate that Ford can make a stable reliable solid steering system. Most people won't notice the difference, but the ones who are going to build the image/cache Bronco needs to compete and be taken seriously off road will. Even something as simple as upgrading to some 35-37" tires will force an axle swap if it comes with IFS.

While the F150 Raptor might be better than the standard IFS, it is still terrible compared to what lightly modified solid axle can do for articulation. Being the best terrible option doesn't make it a good one. It is built for a different purpose.

 

[OX1]

The 2021 bronco will be based on the new ranger. Though this will be a new, heavily updated and modified platform compared to the old ranger there are no signs that it will be leaving the IFS architecture. And due to engine package the chassis cradle could never be made as narrow as what your link shows.

That said, there is a lot more that can be done with proper IFS than what was done with the current ranger. Look to the the Colorado Zr2 for example, and that only has about 8" of travel compared to the raptors 13"

If the bronco can manage to carry that DNA along with sway-bar disconnect and a multi link solid rear axle it will be a solid performer.

I thought maybe you saw or heard something official.


I'm more interested in the IFS bolt on portals if I HAD to have IFS.
My portal rig (78, 400/C6/Mog 404's/42 IROKS) routinely beat out my buddies 89 bronco.
We both had the same 42 IROKS for years, but he has more gear
(5.13's and 4:1 doubler, vs 7.56's and 2:1 case for me),
better motor (him 460 EFI, me stockish 400 on pane),
more suspension travel (since I was very limited uptravel
due to mog 404 diffs, especially).

But 6" more clearance made it seem like I had 54's compared to him
and could make up for a lot of deficiencies from a downgraded axle/suspension
system like IFS/IRS.

 

[BroncoMike]

there are no signs that it will be leaving the IFS architecture.

While I agree that IFS is a more likely scenario, there are no signs that the new T6 platform will maintain IFS, either. There are simply no signs. Zero evidence in either direction. Absence of information does not result in weight in favor of either option. And if one this is abundant in the Bronco story, it is absence of information.

I think it's funny that people keep perpetuating the theory that the Bronco is Ranger-based. It isn't. At best, they share platforms. If Bronco is released first, some would argue the Ranger will in fact be built on the Bronco platform.

 

[TeocaliMG]

While I agree that IFS is a more likely scenario, there are no signs that the new T6 platform will maintain IFS, either. There are simply no signs. Zero evidence in either direction. Absence of information does not result in weight in favor of either option. And if one this is abundant in the Bronco story, it is absence of information.

I think it's funny that people keep perpetuating the theory that the Bronco is Ranger-based. It isn't. At best, they share platforms. If Bronco is released first, some would argue the Ranger will in fact be built on the Bronco platform.

I agree that we shouldn't perpetuate what is unknown, but the bronco mule undoubtedly has IFS. You could argue that as a mule it is only partially representative of the final product but I think that is unlikely. Between the photos and the videos you can see the lack of a low hanging diff and also the slight camber change in the few videos of it driving.

As for the platform it is confirmed that the bronco will be ranger based, thats what sharing a platform means really. We also know that the ranger platform under the bronco will be all new, not the global one, though as you pointed out the bronco comes first so its fair to say that the new ranger will be bronco based. Either way they are confirmed to share a platform, and this platform should be technically superior to the current ranger even with the almost certain IFS.

 

[BroncoMike]

One is not Ranger based or the other Bronco based. They are both T6 based. It's semantics, I know, but being "based" on another (arguably less capable) model sometimes comes with negative connotations.

Curious that the rear suspension is so well covered on the alleged test mule. And yet the front isn't concealed in any way at all. Some would assume this is an outright admission that the Bronco will have IFS. On the other hand, it may be entirely the opposite - it is unconcealed because what is on the mule is irrelevant. With Ford being so successfully secretive with this model, why parade one of the most hotly debated and anxiously-awaited components before observers without the slightest attempt at concealment?

Again, I'm in the camp that IFS is very likely, or a high-dollar option/package at best - but not based on any facts or evidence we've seen, simply the market and my assessment of Ford's commitment to make it a Jeep challenger. The message seemes to be one of challenging Jeep, but not necessarily Wrangler Rubicon. That spells a concession to IFS more than any piece of tangible evidence we've seen thus far.

 

[Nickp]

Curious that the rear suspension is so well covered on the alleged test mule. And yet the front isn't concealed in any way at all. Some would assume this is an outright admission that the Bronco will have IFS. On the other hand, it may be entirely the opposite - it is unconcealed because what is on the mule is irrelevant. With Ford being so successfully secretive with this model, why parade one of the most hotly debated and anxiously-awaited components before observers without the slightest attempt at concealment?

According to my buddy at Ford the mule is indeed a rear suspension/frame/ drivetrain mule. He stated that Ford had yet to decide whether they were going to go with a long-travel IFS(I.E. not what we are seeing on the current mules) or a SFA and were still actively testing both options. My guess is that they have decided by now but it’s anyones guess.

 

[Nickp]

Yeah for sure. I’ve had the thought that they might do both and have a SFA as an option. I love to think that I’d wheel the shit out of mine but if I’m being honest I’m probably not gonna. Hence why I’m buying a YJ/TJ wrangler here pretty soon that I can beat up. The Bronco will be for easier trails/shooting/hunting/trips to Mexico.

 

[Stampede.Offroad]

Unless you're buying a Fiesta or some other little commuter car, the vast majority of people always make their purchase based on what it is capable of, and not what they'll actually do with it most of the time, or ever.

99% of pickups with empty beds and no trailer. Check.

99% of sports/performance cars putting around barely over the speed limit just like everyone else. Check.

99% of vans/suvs etc. 3-row people haulers with no passengers. Check.

It's a good thing we don't make purely logical automotive purchasing decisions ... our vehicles would be boring. The reality is often a combination of conspicuous consumption and wishful thinking.

Sponsored