Rock Crawler Daily

[BigMeatsBronco]

Did you do a side by side comparo on the uca's ? aftermarket ones should have an offset that would add more naturtal caster after a 3" lift for example. And depending on BJ you're going with, Icon Delta Join, or any of the ones with the uniballs, they're stronger than conventional BJ's, should flex a tad more as well. That ain't bad of a flex for those factory BJ's though., assuming both pics you're showing are factory UCA's ? showing the BJ angle at full compression and full droop.

Yep those are factory OEM bronco SAS UCAs.
Yes the aftermarket ones are beefier and look cool, but I see zero advantages. And the aftermarket ones rub on stock SAS wheels, and the angle the uniball is capable of is NOT significantly better than stock.

After buying at set and using them, I've decided I'll build my own. Pretty dissatisfied with the aftermarket ones.

(I build tube and fabric airplanes, so this is super easy since I already have most of the correct tools and know how) just need to make a nice jig first.

Sponsored

 

[KyleQ]

Great discussion here guys, I can't wait I'll have to wait until I get my Bronco to really play around but the pioneers can sure save a lot of time and perform some quite valuable testing!

I'm fairly confident that we'll have a setup that will allow max travel on 37's before having to go custom LCA/diff drop and have another combination for folks who want to go beyond that. Hopefully we can start with some raw data that can help steer folks in the right direction.

 

[RainbowStix]

Actually maybe you should look at the angles the factory UCA and LCA ball joints are capable of. Check out the pic for an example
I DO already have aftermarket UCAs although I doubt there even needed. I already have achieved 11” front wheel travel.

Yep all that is on the checklist and diff drops already done...limiting straps needed too.

No biggie

You are right, friend. Not a lot of people know this because every other platform needs an aftermarket UCA to flex more (and it’s a conflict of interest for the companies to share anything else). In terms of real world wheel travel, none of the aftermarket upper arms will offer more than the stock one. You just need extended coilovers and they’ll flex just as much with the stock upper arms. Have tested.

What about added strength/durability from an aftermarket? Maybe, but everyone knows the lower arms take the hits and will likely give out long before the stock uppers (maybe a bushing replacement every 20k if you’re hitting it hard?)

Now that leaves us with the ability to get a “good” alignment with added caster (I’ve gotten an in spec alignment before the arms too), and eye candy. And a harsher ride from Heims/polyurethane over rubber bushings

 

[BAUS67]

You are right, friend. Not a lot of people know this because every other platform needs an aftermarket UCA to flex more (and it’s a conflict of interest for the companies to share anything else). In terms of real world wheel travel, none of the aftermarket upper arms will offer more than the stock one. You just need extended coilovers and they’ll flex just as much with the stock upper arms. Have tested.

What about added strength/durability from an aftermarket? Maybe, but everyone knows the lower arms take the hits and will likely give out long before the stock uppers (maybe a bushing replacement every 20k if you’re hitting it hard?)

Now that leaves us with the ability to get a “good” alignment with added caster, and eye candy. And a harsher ride from Heims/polyurethane over rubber bushings

I agree, If you look at Zone Off Road's UCA it uses the stock ball joint. When I read your comment about the flex in a stock UCA it reminded me of the Zone tech article that made my decision on how to alter my Bronc......... when Ford decides to build it.

No bling just something that improves on what is there from the factory, because what came from the factory is pretty damn good.

 

[RainbowStix]

I agree, If you look at Zone Off Road's UCA it uses the stock ball joint. When I read your comment about the flex in a stock UCA it reminded me of the Zone tech article that made my decision on how to alter my Bronc......... when Ford decides to build it.

No bling just something that improves on what is there from the factory, because what came from the factory is pretty damn good.

Haha, It’s unfortunate because even that article is wrong. You don’t gain any real world wheel travel back with this arm or any aftermarket because it was never “lost” to begin with (lifted or unlifted)

what I mean by this is, you will change your travel when you lift because you’re changing where the vehicle is starting its suspension travel from. 2” lost on the Down travel is another 2” gained on the up. However, with the bronco platform, an aftermarket upper control arm will not change any of this

pretty much everyone slinging UCAs know this but are choosing to ignore it

 

[RainbowStix]

Where are you getting those travel numbers from ?
Fox and King should be extended travel, though for whatever reason in this application Fox 2.5 front/rear are a little shorter than King.
Look at the exteded/compressed numbers
Fox 2.5 CO's front, 23.720" extended, 17.94" compressed
Fox 2.5 CO's rear, 26.42" extended, 19.44" compressed

King 2.5 CO's front, 24.6" extended, 18.5" compressed
King 2.5 CO's rear, 27" extended, 18.5" compressed

Kings front are literally 1" longer, the rear are just 0.5" longer with respect of Fox.

Do you have the length specs for the stock Coilovers ? anybody wanting to compare travel should start there.

I haven't found what the Icon setup length is, only travel but i'd like to know their actual length is. IFS travel depends on CO travel x motion ratio x tire height etc. Don't know what they doing in the front/ back to claim 11.5/14" travel. Extended IFS travel is typically 1" longer than stock, sometimes 1.5" long, but all manufacturers are constrained by the same IFS, so to say 11.5" travel with factory lowers is a big big stretch when the competition is close to each other in the front .

I Love Icons but their propaganda can be funny at times. Lets ask them about length and they'll claim they can't give out any specs numbers yet here they claim this much travel bla bla bla.

Anybody with the Icon coilvers can do the community a favor and measure base to eyelet center for both front/rear assemblies.

Same with the factory Bistein CO's. it's the only way for you guys to know what are you getting. I've seen the same movie again and again from vendors when they're introducing their stuff. King is King is all i want to say, then there is always the rest

Sorry where’d you get those king measurements? The fox ones match their site but for king, I’m seeing it’s 23.96” 17.88” front and 26.94” 18.55” rear on poly’s site

https://www.polyperformance.com/king-2021-ford-bronco-2-5-shock-set

 

[Dusty at ICON]

It helps to clarify things
According to post #53 in the thread dated Dec 9 2021
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...one-offroad-or-icon.29387/page-4#post-1025535
quoting fro the post above:
"Not certain if BL or SAS (I assume BL), but it was posted on b6g by former bilstein developer:
front 16.5/22.8 (6.3" shock travel)
rear 16.4/25.8 (9.4" shock travel)

Note that Fox is 7.98" rear travel for 2dr. You only see full bump-stop travel if ~75% of bronco weight is on single wheel (tippy on steep slope with swaybar off). Fox has progressive spring, so may have more "articulation" in non-extreme cases. The rebuildable aluminum shocks will have a hard time competing with max travel of steel shocks. ?"

It will be good to find the original post from the Bilstein developer, or even better , somebody to measure their take off.

So looking at the numbers in perspective

Fox 2.5 CO's front, 23.720" extended, 17.94" compressed
Fox 2.5 CO's rear, 26.42" extended, 19.44" compressed

King 2.5 CO's front, 24.6" extended, 18.5" compressed
King 2.5 CO's rear, 27" extended, 18.5" compressed

BL stock CO's
front 22.8" extended, 16.5" compressed
rear 25.8" extended, 16.4 compressed

If this numbers are accurate Fox and Kings are longer than stock, with less uptravel, bad if you're running 33's, good if you're running 37's. The CO's are advertised for 3-4", doubt anybody will run 33's with their Bronco lifted 3" so 35 or 37's will at home with both and the tires will we away from your fenders. It's what is with race CO's. based on these numbers King is the best kit between King and Fox.

Will see what Icon has to say. Doubt they will reply with lenght specs. They're known for pretending to not give any info. but again, anybody can measure them and post the numbers.

Circling back on this since I finally got numbers from engineering. As @rsmtracker pointed out it's hard to get shock measurements out of ICON's engineering department, I've found that out and I'm right here in the building LOL. Anyhow I finally got them to cough up the numbers and here they are for our Bronco coilovers:

ICON 2.5 CO's front, 24.53" extended, 17.60" compressed
ICON 2.5 CO's rear, 28.90" extended, 18.36" compressed

This info is late but I hope it's helpful for those of you who were discussing this last month.

 

[Rkgzx9leftcoast]

Edit: saw you listed Laurens Fun Haver Video. I would imagine, any well sorted suspension, valving, ect...would be capable of the same.

 

[KyleQ]

Edit: saw you listed Laurens Fun Haver Video. I would imagine, any well sorted suspension, valving, ect...would be capable of the same.

Yeah, too bad none of that stuff seems to be available for purchase yet. I really like their clean bumper designs.

Sponsored