Raptor.Tremor.Bronco

Wildtrak
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
260
Reaction score
609
Location
Miami, FL
Vehicle(s)
2021 Bronco Wildtrak, 2014 Raptor, 2020 Tremor
Vehicle Showcase
3
This thread is literally about what fits, based on the extensive evidence gathered thus far. 37” fit in the wheel wheels with a 3” lift and approx +33mm offset wheels.

But the 1.1” lift found on Sas is at the end of the Bilstein/UCA/CV effective range, so if you want to go higher than that, you need new coilovers and UCAs.

Ryan from 4wp worked hard on the science of the Bronco lift, and I trust the conclusions he came to… he has the math to back it up. He has posted some videos on the forum with pages of technical discussions following. He brings the receipts.

A9C705FE-ADD9-4B68-8891-CE45E6ABFED0.png


(It’s worth noting that the 4wp rig with 37’s also has the fender flares removed… and some minor trimming in the wheel well.)


Though, depending on your style, you can contrast that with Loren Healey’s position on running 37”s, which can be summarized as (and I’m paraphrasing here): “2 inches up, 2 inches out, and f*ckin send it!”
I just found a video of Vaughn Gittin Jr jumping an RTR on true 35s and the front wheels tucked hard enough to rub the inner fenders just like my raptor. Ford actually made 37s fit the gen 3 raptor by limited suspension travel and also cheating by using 37s that aren't true to size. I guess that's the end of my want for 37s.





Advertisement

 

ZackDanger

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Zack
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
6,089
Reaction score
26,826
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicle(s)
2014 Wrangler JKU
Clubs
 
I just found a video of Vaughn Gittin Jr jumping an RTR on true 35s and the front wheels tucked hard enough to rub the inner fenders just like my raptor. Ford actually made 37s fit the gen 3 raptor by limited suspension travel and also cheating by using 37s that aren't true to size. I guess that's the end of my want for 37s.
I totally believe that. Ford did say they had to limit travel and articulation on the Sas to accommodate the 35s.

All in all, it seems like the standard BL with 33 is the “most capable” suspension… and likely what they designed for… but obviously with a mind that they would offer 35s all along.
 

Razorbak86

Badlands
Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
1,330
Reaction score
6,636
Location
Northwest Arkansas
Vehicle(s)
Lexus RX-450h, BMW R1150 GS
Clubs
 
Though, depending on your style, you can contrast that with Loren Healey’s position on running 37”s, which can be summarized as (and I’m paraphrasing here): “2 inches up, 2 inches out, and f*ckin send it!”
Zack, do you remember when Loren said that? @North7 and I were discussing it yesterday, and I distinctly remember hearing it awhile back, but I tried to find the source video last night and failed. :unsure:
 

BAUS67

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
redneck
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
2,186
Reaction score
8,794
Location
Central PA
Vehicle(s)
88 5.0 LX, 08 F-150 Stepside, 13 Explorer XLT, 97 Jeep Wrangler
I come from the Toyota side that has experience with IFS and lifts. With Toyota's that get lifted +3" you need to also install a "Diff Drop" to correct the CV axle angles. These are very cheap on a Toyota, but could cost some coin and even require some grinding on the Bronco from the pics I've seen.

I could see an aftermarket bracket being designed to replace this:
KP2KuYw.jpg


I could also see some weld-on extensions for this location here:
mtVqrus.jpg

Same applies on the Bronco. Below is a new Ranger lift by BDS. 3.5 " , new coilovers, upper arms and those two triangle shaped brackets are diff drop along with the thing in between the upper control arms.

1623725965272.png


Taken from the info section of the lift kit.........


Finishing out the front of these 3.5" systems are fully fabricated differential relocation brackets to correct CV axle operating angles.
 

ZackDanger

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Zack
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
6,089
Reaction score
26,826
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicle(s)
2014 Wrangler JKU
Clubs
 
Zack, do you remember when Loren said that? @North7 and I were discussing it yesterday, and I distinctly remember hearing it awhile back, but I tried to find the source video last night and failed. :unsure:
In the first post of this thread @North7 says it was Vaughn Gittin Jr. who said it in his Hells Revenge interview video… so I very well could be mistaken.

It’s tough keeping all these lies quotes straight at this point… but in my defense I did say I was paraphrasing!

;)
 

BAUS67

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
redneck
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
2,186
Reaction score
8,794
Location
Central PA
Vehicle(s)
88 5.0 LX, 08 F-150 Stepside, 13 Explorer XLT, 97 Jeep Wrangler
Yeah. I actually posted a little bit after that and corrected myself because I realized that while perhaps the word could be technically correct for that sleek, slender, sexy rod… using the term “spindle” in that post, in the context of discussing off roader geometry, would easily be misinterpreted.

;)

Ok no problem dude. (y) (y)

And for the record that sleek, sender, sexy rod is the shock absorber. I know it is confusing because it looks like a strut with its stem at the top and the lower spring perch on it, but mark my words it is a shock and NOT a strut.

A strut is an integral part of the suspension.


1623726931820.png


A strut is used in place of the upper control arm to locate the spindle/knuckle.

Sorry for being a dickhead here but this is what happens things are not called what they properly are. it adds to the confusion.


Told you guys this stuff is complicated. if one is informed of the proper terms then things become easier to understand.

1623727187228.png


Maybe this will clear it up better. The Bronco front is like the middle pic but with a coilover instead of just a shock as pictured.

Just trying to clear the air guys to make it easier.
 

Bronkers

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
87
Reaction score
206
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle(s)
2003 Dodge 2500 5.9L
The idea behind the +55 offset was to bring the wheel/tire underneath the body as much as possible, without the tire sticking way out beyond the fenders. Moving to a +35 offset will allow a wider tire without it rubbing on the inside suspension components.
A zero offset would make the tire protrude further out beyond the fender flares, but you are correct in that it would also better balance the forces on the spindle/bearings.
Firstly, requisite thank you to @North7 for this compilation thread and to all for follow-on discussion.

But I'm not sure a zero offset "better balances the forces..." (?) As many have pointed out on other topics, Ford likely didn't pick +55/+30mm as their only two wheel offsets in a myriad of offerings because they were the cheapest to cast/machine/etc or some other ignorant call - they engineered them that way for a reason.

Isn't the centerline of the wheel bearing (the only metal on metal, moving parts of the spindle/knuckle/hub assy) inboard of the hub face (to some distance I'm not aware of)?

If bearing is inboard, then 'for balance,' wouldn’t you need a positive offset (to some distance), to bring the centerline of the tire tread in line or closer with centerline of the bearing...?

Asking in-part because because I ordered a base and also +35mm 17" methods because I don't want to compromise on limited tire upsize options for 16" steelies aaand I think +35mm gives me a close-to-stock spec that should be flexible as I continue to upgrade and eventually re-tire.

Still debating rubber, thus my next reply to another part of this thread.
 
Last edited:

Bronkers

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
87
Reaction score
206
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle(s)
2003 Dodge 2500 5.9L
You don't "need it" if you don't care about full off-road capability, you will loose some ground clearance, that you may or may not need or care about depending where you plan to drive your Bronco. The tires will fit but you will have to watch out for rubbing.
Not trying to troll this thread. I genuinely appreciate the hard work @North7 and related conversation. And per prior post, I have eggs in a basket of sorts that haven't hatched yet. That said, I have to ask, how would I lose some ground clearance by fitting larger wheels & tires (without doing anything to any other part of the rig)?

I get that I *may* lose articulation/wheel travel, or rub a fender liner, flare, or crash bar, TBD.

But with my base I've ordered, I'm still leaning to put 285/70r17 load range C ridge grapplers on the 17" +35mm methods I've ordered, and guinea pig the rubbing early for everyone here (6/28 build 🤞), WITHOUT adding pucks or any such wrench job this early in ownership.

Down the line I might wait to overpay for SAS takeoffs (think there will probably be more demand than there will be supply, for a good while), after someone's waited for the right aftermarket kit to become available (pending 4WP setups haven't wowed anyone that I've seen so far - king, fox, 8112s, etc are probably further from market), but for now I want 33s on my base and I still feel like it's a calculated risk from all I've read, Without. Doing. A. Thing. More.
 

BAUS67

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
redneck
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
2,186
Reaction score
8,794
Location
Central PA
Vehicle(s)
88 5.0 LX, 08 F-150 Stepside, 13 Explorer XLT, 97 Jeep Wrangler
Firstly, requisite thank you to @North7 for this compilation thread and to all for follow-on discussion.

But I'm not sure a zero offset "better balances the forces..." (?) As many have pointed out on other topics, Ford likely didn't pick +55/+30mm as their only two wheel offsets in a myriad of offerings because they were the cheapest to cast/machine/etc or some other ignorant call - they engineered them that way for a reason.

Isn't the centerline of the wheel bearing (the only metal on metal, moving parts of the spindle/knuckle/hub assy) inboard of the hub face (to some distance I'm not aware of)?

If bearing is inboard, then 'for balance,' wouldn’t you need a positive offset (to some distance), to bring the centerline of the tire tread in line or closer with centerline of the bearing...?

Asking in-part because because I ordered a base and also +35mm 17" methods because I don't want to compromise on limited tire upsize options for 16" steelies.

Still debating rubber, thus my next reply to another part of this thread.

You have nailed it !!!!! The more you push the wheel/tire out the HARDER it is on the bearings. It is better to keep the wheel as "centered" as possible on the bearings.


Want a better example. Hold a hammer at arms length away from you. How long can you hold it there ???? Now hold it close to your body. It's ALOT easier ....... yes.

Once again this Bronco is engineered to have 35's on it, keep that shit as far in as possible things will last much longer it is engineered that way.
 
Last edited:

BAUS67

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
redneck
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
2,186
Reaction score
8,794
Location
Central PA
Vehicle(s)
88 5.0 LX, 08 F-150 Stepside, 13 Explorer XLT, 97 Jeep Wrangler
Not trying to troll this thread. I genuinely appreciate the hard work @North7 and related conversation. And per prior post, I have eggs in a basket of sorts that haven't hatched yet. That said, I have to ask, how would I lose some ground clearance by fitting larger wheels & tires (without doing anything to any other part of the rig)?

I get that I *may* lose articulation/wheel travel, or rub a fender liner, flare, or crash bar, TBD.

But with my base I've ordered, I'm still leaning to put 285/70r17 load range C ridge grapplers on the 17" +35mm methods I've ordered, and guinea pig the rubbing early for everyone here (6/28 build 🤞), WITHOUT adding pucks or any such wrench job this early in ownership.

Down the line I might wait to overpay for SAS takeoffs (think there will probably be more demand than there will be supply, for a good while), after someone's waited for the right aftermarket kit to become available (pending 4WP setups haven't wowed anyone that I've seen so far - king, fox, 8112s, etc are probably further from market), but for now I want 33s on my base and I still feel like it's a calculated risk from all I've read, Without. Doing. A. Thing. More.

I personally cannot answer that as I have not seen a base in person to see what will fit.

But my first guess is it might be possible with some "clearancing" of the inner fenders. those 30's are small in that wheel well and there is a lot of room to spare in there, just cant say 100% what will fit not "lifted".................yet.
 

MoabRox

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
First Name
Dave
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
175
Reaction score
391
Location
Utah
Vehicle(s)
Two Jeep XJs, Dodge M880, Suburban 2500
Vehicle Showcase
1
If I'm correctly following the logic of your tables, 0.67" (min) lift is required to fit 285/70R17 (33") tires simply because that is the difference (not including radius lift) between the Standard suspension (32" tire) and Special suspension (33" tire). If that is the case, I'm not convinced that is accurate. Remember that the Special suspension has more travel (0.79" in the front and 0.4" in the rear). Right now it's unknown if that additional travel is upwards, downwards or both, but regardless, a 33" tire on the Standard suspension will be moving around less in the front wheel wells so it may not be an issue. As BAUS67 has repeatedly said, "it's complicated".

I gambled and bought 17x8.5 wheels with +35mm offset for my BD. I'm pretty confident that I'll be able to mount 285/70R17s without any issues and hope to mount 33x12.50 Mickey Thompson Baja Boss A/Ts (on 8.5" wide wheels they should have a cross section pretty close to the 285s). If I'm wrong, I may either "settle" for some 275/70R17 Falken A/T3Ws or install a leveling lift until there are more proven options for adjustable coilover lifts. I have a VIN and 7/7 production date, so I might not have to wait too much longer to find out, and you can be assured I'll share what I learn.

By the way, many thanks for pulling all that information together in one place!
 

Bronkers

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
Ben
Joined
Apr 22, 2021
Messages
87
Reaction score
206
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Vehicle(s)
2003 Dodge 2500 5.9L
I personally cannot answer that as I have not seen a base in person to see what will fit.

But my first guess is it might be possible with some "clearancing" of the inner fenders. those 30's are small in that wheel well and there is a lot of room to spare in there, just cant say 100% what will fit not "lifted".................yet.
20210511_173952.jpg
20210511_174000.jpg


Laser measurements from dealer day. 4dr OB front axle crash bars (fore and aft). My alien fingers are 3" wide at mid knuckles and 3-1/2" main width.

My gut says bottoming out/bump stop too-short is the biggest risk.
 
Last edited:

JonD

Outer Banks
Well-Known Member
First Name
Jon
Joined
Jul 29, 2020
Messages
213
Reaction score
252
Location
Los Angeles
Vehicle(s)
Ford Ranger, Hyundai Genesis, Suburu Outback
Great work on this guys. To confirm by charts Wildtrack won't need any work togo to 35s?
 

BAUS67

Base
Well-Known Member
First Name
redneck
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
2,186
Reaction score
8,794
Location
Central PA
Vehicle(s)
88 5.0 LX, 08 F-150 Stepside, 13 Explorer XLT, 97 Jeep Wrangler
20210511_173952.jpg
20210511_174000.jpg


Laser measurements from dealer day. 4dr OB front axle crash bars (fore and aft). My alien fingers are 3" wide at mid knuckles and 3-1/2" wide at face fixer knuckles.

My gut says bottoming out/bump stop too-short is the biggest risk.

There is room that way but when the wheel is turned ( depending on which way it is turned) either the outside or inside of the tire will be much closer to those crash bars than when the wheel is straight.

Hard to convey in words but go out to your current vehicle and have someone turn the wheel and watch how much that "outer" part of the wheel gets closer to the fender when compared to the center.
 

Advertisement







 
4 Wheel Parts


Advertisement
Top