Sasquarch roof racks restricted from factory due to issues with GVWR; can still be installed aftermarket

[sean-florida]

Curious if anyone is thinking about dropping to a 2.3 over the 2.7 to get rails + deadener?

Sponsored

 

[ATLBronco75]

Curious if anyone is thinking about dropping to a 2.3 over the 2.7 to get rails + deadener?

I am. I’ve been selling my family for months on the locknload rack for extra camping space.

 

[Jrod0486]

Or the legal team's covering the lack of sound engineering. Who knows?

Right...?

 

[sean-florida]

Arg - keep forgetting you have to loose Sasquatch as well. Good lord Ford screwed up on this big time.

 

[ATLBronco75]

Well I’m now thinking I’ll wait and get a GOBI rack. It allows you to remove the top and keep the rack. They will almost certainly release a Bronco rack. They already have a JLU rack and support Ford via F-150s.

 

[Krisegon]

I wonder if it has to do with the load-bearing maximums of the Sasquatch suspension components. This is the only thing I can think of that makes sense where it is allowed on the 2 door with SAS and not on the 4 door with SAS. The longer wheelbase and capacity puts more weight on the rear suspension. This is true with non-squatch, too, but those are different suspension components. Thoughts?

Edit: after reviewing this post, I really think this is the case. The position-sensitive dampers come on the Wildtrak, Badlands and Sasquatch (and FE, obvs). Non-squatch Badlands allows it on 4-door until you upgrade the engine to 2.7 EB V6. When you do that it removes the roof rack. I think it has to do with the load-bearing capacity of the upgraded HOSS, which is designed for off-roading, not hauling. Having a certain load on the suspension components must push them into one of the secondary positions too easily.

 

[NPBronco91]

Curious if anyone is thinking about dropping to a 2.3 over the 2.7 to get rails + deadener?

If or when Ford comments on this and if or when it's true I'll have to consider this. I'm not getting the sasquatch package because I don't need it. But I'm in the situation of either I drop down from a 4dr to 2dr to keep the 2.7, dropping the 2.7 and get the 2.3, or just scrap the BL and go to the BD. Hope Ford makes an announcement on this relatively soon.

 

[sean-florida]

I think I've settled on not getting rails or deadening from the factory. Realistically I don't need rails day 1 and can easily be added later, same with deadener. I dont want to forgo both the engine and sas just for those 2.

 

[xXChartmanXx]

Not trying to single you out, I haven't seen anyone who has gotten it yet and you asked about the GVWR. It is higher than curb weight and includes human and cargo capacity. So while the curb weight of the lightest 2-door is, as you say, about only 170-250 lbs lighter (did not verify, took your word for it), you are forgetting cargo. With the rack, you can get the weight of the rack plus, IIRC 110Lbs of cargo in it. As to cargo, they likely use an approved formula for cargo weight per square or cubic foot and there is more storage space in the 4-door, and the big item that I haven't seen mentioned; The 4 door is a five seat configuration, while the 2-door is a four seater, so add the 'average' weight they use for another person in there as well.

That is gotta be at least 300-400lbs more (delta) above curb weight, in the 4-door than in the 2-door (not the total extra, just the, well...extra extra) and it is probably higher, if you go compare the GVWR for the configurations to the curb weight, you can subtract out the number Ford uses for all those extra pounds in each door configuration.

It is more statutory regulations than physics in this case I believe and it might cross that regulatory threshold with some of the options. (don't forget the Sasquatch package is going to be on the high side of the curb weights).

People wonder where the option for that pull out slider is hiding (a 4-door only option). Might be a weight problem as well, I bet it is at least 175lbs.

GVWR is static (not moving), the cost of the supercomputer time for the finite element analysis of a moving (dynamic) load in a vehicle would probably cost more than landing on the Moon did back in my day.

Edit; took out some ranting that was not helpful.

The best part of this argument that I did not take into account is the 5th body they have to account for. That could be the kicker. And no need for any of us to rant. Asking for Ford to clarify this situation is not a rant. It's a valid question from their customers based on something that seems arbitrary to them.

 

[Skeletor]

If it was GVWR issue, why would the sound dampening headlines make a difference. Absolutely no way those things are going to weigh anything substantial.

Also, I'd think that adding a wench or steel bumpers would have a similar effect with the GVWR, but that seems to be allowed.

Edit: as pointed out: winch not wench.

 

[Gamecock]

1) Which states weigh your vehicle during safety inspections?
2) What specific statutes are you violating by exceeding manufacturers GVWR on a passenger vehicle?

 

[dgorsett]

As Drex said, maybe the Sas suspension is the issue. My Rubicon has a 2" puck lift with stock springs, my buddy's Rubicon has a more sophisticated 3" lift with custom springs. My stock springs carry a load much better than his customs, but his articulates empty much better than mine.

Now if it is a close enough call to where a headliner or a hundred pound roof load makes the difference, especially if it is OK with the 2 door, I'd say just buy and install the rack yourself. Ford just doesn't want to get into another Explorer tire pressure fiasco.

 

[AK SNO RIDER]

Also, I'd think that adding a wench or steel bumpers would have a similar effect with the GVWR, but that seems to be allowed.

I think Ford would get in a lot of trouble if they tried to restrict wenches. Equal rights and all that...

Sponsored