North7

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2020
Messages
5,558
Reaction score
19,127
Location
North Texas
Vehicle(s)
Bronco Badlands
Clubs
 
We can finally answer the ongoing Bronco question, "how much lift" does each trim level have compared to the others?

Now that we have the Ford General Specifications document, Bilstein Coilover Information and Ford Part Number information we can finally get a clear and complete picture on what the stock Bronco lift dimensions are and what is possible to lift each trim level. In this discussion the goal is always to maintain maximum functionality of your Bronco for off-road use. If you want to do something for looks only, you may be able to bend the rules a little and do a budget lift, but you want to be cautious of tire rub, binding, CV joints and steering component damage or other unintended consequences.

Vaughn Gittin Jr. or Loren Healey (both Bronco racers) said something to the effect, to put 37" tires on the Sasquatch you need to go up 2 inches and out 2 inches. Going out 2 inches most likely will require new control arms. On the other hand, Ryan of 4WP, only recommended new control arms when doing a lift 3 inches or higher. Further, he prefers a +35 wheel offset to maintain the ideal scrub radius to minimize wear on components. While this thread cannot possibly address every variable, these are general guidelines that each manufacture will handle differently, depending on the lift kits they offer.

Each of the below tables can be read separately to understand the information or points made within that table. Some data is repeated in other tables to provide clarity or present the information in a different way to make it understandable to the most number of people. This thread is intended to help newbies and experienced alike, with those more knowledgeable forum members helping others learn the ropes of suspension modifications and lift. Please post any corrections or clarifications you feel are needed.

Thank you to @ZackDanger, @Razorbak86 for their knowledge shared and for some of our unnamed friends of the forum.

1623675007580.png


1623675016912.png


1623678791332.png


1623923171610.png


1623679999570.png


1623703851978.png


1620995530591-png-png-png.png





Advertisement

 
Last edited:

Lakelife36

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
977
Reaction score
1,439
Location
Lee Creek, BC
Vehicle(s)
2010 Kia Borrego, 2012 Chevy Cruze
Clubs
 
Wow that looked like a lot of work. Thanks @North7! A while ago Ford marketing made it sound like Sas and BL had the same suspension, but Sas sat higher and had less travel. There was all kinds of discussion about this and how it was achieved. Can we now mark this down as yet another Rockstar moment for them and put the whole discussion to bed?
 

DC9atnight

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
First Name
John
Joined
Sep 7, 2020
Messages
336
Reaction score
1,182
Location
California
Vehicle(s)
Toyota Tacoma
Clubs
 
Thank you, great work. Two questions. Am I correct in assuming the reason for the different part numbers for front and rear BD coilovers is related to the BD’s weight vs Base, BB and OBX? And if so, what is different with the BD coilovers?

Secondly, I would have assumed the addition of the tow package might have changed the rear height numbers.
 

ZackDanger

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Zack
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
5,967
Reaction score
26,285
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicle(s)
2014 Wrangler JKU
Clubs
 
I learned a ton about IFS and Ryan from 4WP, in both his video(s) and his conversations here, really opened my eyes to some things.

I come from the jeep side where a "budget lift" is a regular and appropriate things.... with a budget lift you basically just put some spacers on top of the suspension to give you some quick increased clearance for larger tires.

The problem is that with an IFS, when you add lift in that way, without taking other things into account, you reach the limits of the front axles and CV joint angles.

The weird thing is that you can "safely" budget lift the lower trims but not the upper trims...

1623679399246.png


Ryan was able to shed some light on something that didn't make intuitive sense to me at first but it an important point:

On the Base-OB the shocks themselves don't have a very large range of motion. On the yellow bilsteins (BL and Sas), the travel is so much greater and you're already lifted, that they basically already allow for near maximum droop as far as the CVs are concerned.

What that means is that counterintuitively, it's easier to "cheaply" lift a lower trim Bronco than an upper trim....

The lower trim shocks don't allow the wheels to drop enough to create a problem if you add some spacers to raise the vehicle, so you can get a base up to squatch height pretty easy with a budget boost. On the upper trims if you add more lift with spacers the wheels can drop so far that you bind the axles and can create serious problems.

Ryan's point was that if you want to eventually get to a 3" lift for 37s... even if it's only a small increase over your BL or Sas height, you're already at the end of the CV capability. Starting with Sas doesn't mean you get to save money by just adding cheap spacers for the 37" clearance, you have to swap out coilovers and UCA anyway... So, if your plan is 37s, it may make more sense to *not* sas from the factory since you're going to have to replace those components anyway.

Granted, the Bilsteins, with their longer range of travel mean better articulation off road, but if your goal is to just lift your Bronco fast and cheap, it could potentially make more sense to go with a lower trim and add spacers.

(Of course, if you want to lift your BL or Sas, and aren't worried about damage that may occur if you were to hang one of your front wheels in the air... a spacer may be worth it to you... or if you're worried about damage but don't mind limiting droop, you could put limiter straps in or something... I'm sure we'll see plenty of different solutions once Broncos become more prolific.)

The more I think about this more clear (I think) things become to me.

Basically, here's the breakdown as I see it:

- If all you want is lift to clear 35" on the street, it's almost certainly cheaper to get a Base-OB and add a budget boost.
- If you want maximum off-road capability for 33-35" it's probably cheaper to Sas.
- If you want maximum off-road capability for 37" it's cheaper to go base and upgrade coilovers and UCA.


And here's the link to the video where Ryan very quickly talks about how a "level lift" (budget boost / spacer) wont work because of CV angles on the "Yellow Bilstein" (BL, SAS) equipped Broncos:

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...-37”-tires-on-2021-bronco-4wp-explains.16623/
 
Last edited:
OP
North7

North7

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2020
Messages
5,558
Reaction score
19,127
Location
North Texas
Vehicle(s)
Bronco Badlands
Clubs
 
Thank you, great work. Two questions. Am I correct in assuming the reason for the different part numbers for front and rear BD coilovers is related to the BD’s weight vs Base, BB and OBX? And if so, what is different with the BD coilovers?

Secondly, I would have assumed the addition of the tow package might have changed the rear height numbers.
Regarding Black Diamond, I also assumed the higher weight, but less than the Badlands, required a separate part number. Please understand, the part numbers are directly from Ford's documentation, no speculation on my part.

There was no mention of the tow package in the documentation, we can assume this may mean there is no additional built in rake to accommodate the tongue weight.
 

ZackDanger

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Zack
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
5,967
Reaction score
26,285
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicle(s)
2014 Wrangler JKU
Clubs
 
Thank you, great work. Two questions. Am I correct in assuming the reason for the different part numbers for front and rear BD coilovers is related to the BD’s weight vs Base, BB and OBX? And if so, what is different with the BD coilovers?

Secondly, I would have assumed the addition of the tow package might have changed the rear height numbers.
Regarding Black Diamond, I also assumed the higher weight, but less than the Badlands, required a separate part number. Please understand, the part numbers are directly from Ford's documentation, no speculation on my part.

There was no mention of the tow package in the documentation, we can assume this may mean there is no additional built in rake to accommodate the tongue weight.
On the jeep side there are a bunch of different spring P/N... the whole idea is to maintain the same average height across the vehicles that ship with hard tops / soft tops / tow packages / bash plates / heavier bumpers / 2 door / 4 door etc etc etc.

I suspect the reason for different part numbers is related to achieving consistency across like trims:

1623677076919.png
 

Lakelife36

Big Bend
Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
977
Reaction score
1,439
Location
Lee Creek, BC
Vehicle(s)
2010 Kia Borrego, 2012 Chevy Cruze
Clubs
 
There was no mention of the tow package in the documentation, we can assume this may mean there is no additional built in rake to accommodate the tongue weight.
A while ago @LEGEND posted that there was some observed on the floor, although he had strong feelings about using that specific term. Unfortunately he hasn't elaborated since then. It's looking more and more like there isn't any, which I suppose shouldn't be too surprised given the max tongue weight of 350lbs. Like all things, we'll see in the end once they start rolling.
 

Tricky Dick

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2021
Messages
1,154
Reaction score
3,652
Location
PNW
Vehicle(s)
Bronco
I learned a ton about IFS and Ryan from 4WP, in both his video(s) and his conversations here, really opened my eyes to some things.

I come from the jeep side where a "budget lift" is a regular and appropriate things.... with a budget lift you basically just put some spacers on top of the suspension to give you some quick increased clearance for larger tires.

The problem is that with an IFS, when you add lift in that way, without taking other things into account, you reach the limits of the front axles and CV joint angles.

The weird thing is that you can "safely" budget lift the lower trims but not the upper trims...

View attachment 130117

Ryan was able to shed some light on something that didn't make intuitive sense to me at first but it an important point:

On the Base-OB the shocks themselves don't have a very large range of motion. On the yellow bilsteins (BL and Sas), the travel is so much greater that they basically already allow for maximum droop as far as the CVs are concerned. What that means is that counterintuitively, it's easier to "cheaply" lift a lower trim Bronco than an upper trim....

The lower trim shocks don't allow the wheels to drop enough to create a problem if you add some spacers to raise the vehicle. On the upper trims the wheels can drop so far that you bind the axles and can create serious problems.

Granted, the Bilsteins, with their longer range of travel mean better articulation off road, but if your goal is to just lift your Bronco fast and cheap, it could potentially make more sense to go with a lower trim and add spacers.

(Of course, if you want to lift your BL or Sas, and aren't worried about damage than may occur if you were to hang one of your front wheels in the air... a spacer may be worth it to you... I'm sure we'll see plenty of that once Broncos become more prolific.)
Limit straps are an option if you're set on a spacer lift on the non-standard suspensions. This is SOP in the hardcore 4x4 world.
 

Advertisement







 
Diode Dynamics


Advertisement
Top