The Definitive Guide to 2021+ Bronco Ride & Lift Heights with Wheel & Tire Sizes

[BigFootie]

@North7 , Thanks for the information and efforts to make it plain and simple.

Sponsored

 

[mpeugeot]

So I am getting the OBX and want to run 33's or maybe even 35's. Seems like as easy day to lift it two inches...

But that doesn't solve the other problem... I have two girls and one cup!?! The two inch lift doesn't seem to have any impact on that dirt road action. LOL.

 

[edgeflyer]

Yeah I reread the chart and realized I was reading the spring as the same part number and not the coilover. Thus I’ll have to get those if I want the full Sasquatch capability. Also waiting to see if a cheaper solution (such as .46” spacer) is fine and doesn’t compromise the Badlands too much or is even viable.

Planning on taking a later delivery anyway and don’t even know if I’ll want to up to 35s soon. Plenty of other people to do research for me first lol.

1" lift will not affect anyone who is not overly concerned about articulation. The shock will internally bottom before the CV joints bind. If you want a spacer lift and don't want to lose travel send your struts to me and I'll work some magic on them. Remember that spacer thickness does not equal net lift.

 

[Cbiggs]

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...

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/

I appreciate going to school with these smart guys.

 

[Busterbronco1]

so.... if I understand, no matter which model you have, if you have sasquatch, then you have High Ride right?

 

[North7]

so.... if I understand, no matter which model you have, if you have sasquatch, then you have High Ride right?

Correct.

 

[WCP-82]

Okay so I have no practical knowledge or offroad experience. I want to get into it in a few years after my Bronco has served it's road time and I retire. I ordered a BL non squatch. This set up seems to me to be the best for off roading. It provides the most articulation, right? My only drawback is not getting 4.7 gears because I went auto trans. What's the benefit with going squatch if I do not care to try and go 37" tires? It has a bump stop and less articulation if I understand what everyone is posting. Do I want more articulation or do I want the minimal increase in ground clearance and a wider tire? Or is it more about how you intend to use it? BL without squatch seems to me to be the best set up from the months I have spent on here. I don't have a VIN so I can change still. I have debated going all out with squatch. Is it better functionally or is it more of a looks thing?

 

[BAUS67]

What you aren't taking into account is the gearing you get with the Squatch. Do you want to try to turn 37" tires with a base gearing? I mean you can, but do you want to?

Of course, people don't care about if can't get out of its own way they just want the "look" or to say my Bronco has 37s.

They don't care how it performs just so it looks the part.

 

[North7]

Okay so I have no practical knowledge or offroad experience. I want to get into it in a few years after my Bronco has served it's road time and I retire. I ordered a BL non squatch. This set up seems to me to be the best for off roading. It provides the most articulation, right? My only drawback is not getting 4.7 gears because I went auto trans. What's the benefit with going squatch if I do not care to try and go 37" tires? It has a bump stop and less articulation if I understand what everyone is posting. Do I want more articulation or do I want the minimal increase in ground clearance and a wider tire? Or is it more about how you intend to use it? BL without squatch seems to me to be the best set up from the months I have spent on here. I don't have a VIN so I can change still. I have debated going all out with squatch. Is it better functionally or is it more of a looks thing?

Badlands on 33", 2.7/AT is my choice as well. To me its the best choice for a 95% daily driver. It will give you plenty of offroad capability, including, as you mentioned, articulation. If you later want to go with 35" tires there is such a small difference between the AT 4.46 gearing and the SAS 4.7 gearing to worry about. I think many are choosing to Squatch for the looks.

 

[BAUS67]

No you won't need a lift for the 285/70... Just look at all of the jeep guys who put slightly bigger tires on their sahara's or sports. They run 285/70 even 295/70 no problems without rubbing at all. Now if you are going for maximum clearance for off roading then yes you need a lift. But around town and light trails shouldn't be an issue.

Do you have a 21 Bronco????? Have you tried it yet?????

If the answer is no then how do you know????

I have not seen any official stament yet on that one. To my knowledge it is all speculation.

 

[WCP-82]

Badlands on 33", 2.7/AT is my choice as well. To me its the best choice for a 95% daily driver. It will give you plenty of offroad capability, including, as you mentioned, articulation. If you later want to go with 35" tires there is such a small difference between the AT 4.46 gearing and the SAS 4.7 gearing to worry about. I think many are choosing to Squatch for the looks.

I respect your opinion. I know you know more than I do. I guess I did learn a thing or two on here. I wasn't looking for validation but it does make me feel better sticking with BL.

 

[BAUS67]

@North7

See how everyone takes things. Now when people read this they think it is about the Warthog because it has 37s

I saw NO mention of the Warthog just how to fit 37s on your 21 Broncos.

This is why I tend not to post info in here because people only read half of it and then don t even understand half of what they did read. And then try to call you out on it and it is not even what was said.

Take it from a guy who does this for a living ...

...... this stuff ain't easy.

 

[swooshdave]

Badlands on 33", 2.7/AT is my choice as well. To me its the best choice for a 95% daily driver. It will give you plenty of offroad capability, including, as you mentioned, articulation. If you later want to go with 35" tires there is such a small difference between the AT 4.46 gearing and the SAS 4.7 gearing to worry about. I think many are choosing to Squatch for the looks.

But we really don’t care about those people, now do we?

 

[North7]

But we really don’t care about those people, now do we?

Its like ice cream, pick yor favorite flavor and pile on the toppings, its all good.

 

[BTomorama]

I assume this invalidates this math on this post?
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/thre...-close-to-max-size-after-ranger-testing.9432/

Sponsored