To Sasquatch or not to Sasquatch, lots of Cons!

[Cheshire]

I LOVE the Sasquatch look with 35" MT tires! The proportions are great, BUT, since my initial infatuation, my desire has shifted toward 33" AT tires, standard on Badlands. Hard core rock crawler(?), then Sasquatch makes sense, if you're like me, you want Sasquatch for the cool factor. After reading about the 35" beadlocks, I thought I'd list the negatives that have me wanting the 33s.

35" MT tires w/beadlock rim CONS:

1) It's loud! - I had a 94 Def 90 with MT tires and was loud as crap, also had 95 Def 90 with AT, less loud but still loud. I have not lived with 35" mud terrains that come w/Sasquatch, but I imagine they will be louder than a fleet of 747s rolling down the highway. Sasquatch 35s are Mud Terrains.

2) Sucks gas - The weight and friction of 35", 315 MT tires will probably increase fuel consumption 10%.

3) Expensive - Replacing 35" tires costs a lot.

4) Hard to find - Buying replacements may be difficult relative to 32s or 33s.

5) Beadlock rims require maintainance - Beadlocks need to have bolts tightened and adjusted regularly. Tire swapping and maintenance will be difficult as many places won't be comfortable doing this work. I'm not big on maintaining things, so this is a pain for me.

6) It's heavy! - I've raced mountain bikes and understand how much seemingly small weight changes affect rolling interita. Those heavy 35" tires plus heavy rims need a lot more torque to get them rolling relative to lighter 32 and 33 setups.

7) Stress - Extra weight and moment of 35" tires puts a lot more stress on the axels and differentials. This is one reason that adding the Dana 210 front end axel option should be obligatory when putting Sasquatch on lower trims.


Agree or disagree?

I bet most people considering Sasquatch are like me and have NEVER DRIVEN 35s.
Ford should offer a 33" Sasquatch option!

Sponsored

 

[bbqbronco]

Yep, all that's valid. Rotational mass makes a big difference. So how bad do you want the squatch look? ?

 

[GotGOAT]

I do not think your list is wrong but, I wanted to mention a few points.
The Sasquatch comes with the 210 front axle and 4.70 gearing to handle the additional rotational mass and overcome the inertia.
As a Mountain Bike Racer you know that 29er wheels/tires are heavier than 26” but, once underway the 29” handles obstacles great.
Most folks that have commented on the different tire options from Ford have spoken about swapping to BFG KO2 or Falken Wikdpeaks for their grip, performance (including wet weather and snow), and how quiet they are. I don’t know the last time you have aggressive tires or if you still run your Defender but tire technology, rubber compounds, siping, and patterns have come a long way from the 90s.
You are correct the 35s are going to be pricey but, this is a fact for any performance type vehicle. I chuckle when my friend complains about buying tires for his Mustang GT, yup expensive.
What I like about your list is that it takes a realistic view on living with your selection/options on the Bronco.
I see threads where people are worried about the wind noise, tire noise, and comfort for their 65 mile commute. The Bronco is going to stun folks because of how great it is but, it’s also going to surprise a bunch of people who think it is going to drive like a RAV4, CRV, Explorer, or Lexus RX.
The Bronco is going to be louder, use more fuel, have more NVH and be absolutely amazing with the top off, radio cranked, coming home from work...enjoy the a Bronco for what it is and you’ll be happy, wish it was the 4X4 Prius and city yourself to sleep.

 

[kodiakisland]

The only con that matters.
No MT.
Made the choice easy.

 

[DonM]

I LOVE the Sasquatch look with 35" MT tires! The proportions are great, BUT, since my initial infatuation, my desire has shifted toward 33" AT tires, standard on Badlands. Hard core rock crawler(?), then Sasquatch makes sense, if you're like me, you want Sasquatch for the cool factor. After reading about the 35" beadlocks, I thought I'd list the negatives that have me wanting the 33s.

35" MT tires w/beadlock rim CONS:

1) It's loud! - I had a 94 Def 90 with MT tires and was loud as crap, also had 95 Def 90 with AT, less loud but still loud. I have not lived with 35" mud terrains that come w/Sasquatch, but I imagine they will be louder than a fleet of 747s rolling down the highway. Sasquatch 35s are Mud Terrains.

2) Sucks gas - The weight and friction of 35", 315 MT tires will probably increase fuel consumption 10%.

3) Expensive - Replacing 35" tires costs a lot.

4) Hard to find - Buying replacements may be difficult relative to 32s or 33s.

5) Beadlock rims require maintainance - Beadlocks need to have bolts tightened and adjusted regularly. Tire swapping and maintenance will be difficult as many places won't be comfortable doing this work. I'm not big on maintaining things, so this is a pain for me.

6) It's heavy! - I've raced mountain bikes and understand how much seemingly small weight changes affect rolling interita. Those heavy 35" tires plus heavy rims need a lot more torque to get them rolling relative to lighter 32 and 33 setups.

7) Stress - Extra weight and moment of 35" tires puts a lot more stress on the axels and differentials. This is one reason that adding the Dana 210 front end axel option should be obligatory when putting Sasquatch on lower trims.


Agree or disagree?

I bet most people considering Sasquatch are like me and have NEVER DRIVEN 35s.
Ford should offer a 33" Sasquatch option!

I'm with you on this. I hope that we have a surprise carrot with a "baby" Squatch package. Use running gear from the Badlands package, but swap 4.7 gearing for the sway bar disconnect and 33" A/T tires. Hopefully, there will also be the option of upgrading to the 210 in front without ordering a complete package.

I have a base reserved and would probably be okay with 31's, 2" lift, 210 in the front and running front and rear limited slip. That seems like a good package too!

 

[A_Locke]

I agree with many of your points. I will probably end up getting the Badlands with the 33" A/T's for many of the reasons you listed above. But I did want to clarify one of your points..

"5) Beadlock rims require maintainance - Beadlocks need to have bolts tightened and adjusted regularly. Tire swapping and maintenance will be difficult as many places won't be comfortable doing this work. I'm not big on maintaining things, so this is a pain for me.

Ford sells you "Beadlock capable" rims. Essentially, when you received these wheels from the factory, they are exactly like normal wheels. However, if you desire to, you can purchases beadlock rings from Ford. To make the beadlock capable wheels perform like beadlocks, you remove a fascia ring around the wheels, you unseat the tire bead, install the beadlock rings and clamp down on the tire bead.

Just wanted to clarify this. Ford is not allowed to sell you fully beadlock wheels from the factory (per DoT rules). They sell beadlock capable wheels on the Raptor and Bronco to give people an option without needing to fully install all new wheels. There are a few videos on youtube to get you an idea how the conversion works.

 

[Bronkytonkman]

Geat comments, It all makes sense. I'd say having the squatch wheels for the crawling days and a set of big BFG KO's is what I'll be looking at.....we've got the time to make a few more $ before they arrive so dust off the piggy bank! lol

 

[coolrain]

Agree ..... mostly. Like it was already said tire pattern design has come a long way. Once the MT have lost some tread I’ll replace with an AT that will be a little more friendly. MPG and cost of tires comes with playing in this sandbox

 

[Canuck]

I can’t see them being any louder then a 37” nitto mud grappler tire, i ran a set on my Jeep and u were unable to talk to your passenger unless u were yelling at each other. Will still be cheaper then 37’s so I’m good with 35’s. I use to run B.A.D wheels which were a bead assist wheel. Technically a bead lock tho it was dot approved. Was a pain to get tires done. No shops wanted to touch them.

 

[Raptor911]

1 - the GY territory are NOT mud terrains. MT stands for max traction. There was a video about this from Goodyear. Also the tires have a load rating of C which is soft. They will not be loud. And you can’t compare a modern day tire to a tire made 20+ years ago.

2. If you are worried about mpg then you are looking at the wrong vehicle. If the bronco with the Sasquatch package gets more then 20mpg then I am happy.

4. The tires will be a mass produced tire so it will not be hard to fine. Btw ... you can replace them with any 315/70/17 tire and there are plenty on the market.

5. They are not beadlock from the factory. No manufacturer can sell beadlocks from the factory as beadlocks are not road legal.

7. Don’t forget the bronco was designed to run 35s. Your statement would be correct if you were to upsize but running 35s is not upsizing. The axles, trans, diff and driveline were all designed to run 35s. Btw the raptor is the same ... designed to run 35s.

A good excuse not to go Sasquatch is cost as it is an extra package if you are not buying the wildtrak.

I LOVE the Sasquatch look with 35" MT tires! The proportions are great, BUT, since my initial infatuation, my desire has shifted toward 33" AT tires, standard on Badlands. Hard core rock crawler(?), then Sasquatch makes sense, if you're like me, you want Sasquatch for the cool factor. After reading about the 35" beadlocks, I thought I'd list the negatives that have me wanting the 33s.

35" MT tires w/beadlock rim CONS:

1) It's loud! - I had a 94 Def 90 with MT tires and was loud as crap, also had 95 Def 90 with AT, less loud but still loud. I have not lived with 35" mud terrains that come w/Sasquatch, but I imagine they will be louder than a fleet of 747s rolling down the highway. Sasquatch 35s are Mud Terrains.

2) Sucks gas - The weight and friction of 35", 315 MT tires will probably increase fuel consumption 10%.

3) Expensive - Replacing 35" tires costs a lot.

4) Hard to find - Buying replacements may be difficult relative to 32s or 33s.

5) Beadlock rims require maintainance - Beadlocks need to have bolts tightened and adjusted regularly. Tire swapping and maintenance will be difficult as many places won't be comfortable doing this work. I'm not big on maintaining things, so this is a pain for me.

6) It's heavy! - I've raced mountain bikes and understand how much seemingly small weight changes affect rolling interita. Those heavy 35" tires plus heavy rims need a lot more torque to get them rolling relative to lighter 32 and 33 setups.

7) Stress - Extra weight and moment of 35" tires puts a lot more stress on the axels and differentials. This is one reason that adding the Dana 210 front end axel option should be obligatory when putting Sasquatch on lower trims.


Agree or disagree?

I bet most people considering Sasquatch are like me and have NEVER DRIVEN 35s.
Ford should offer a 33" Sasquatch option!

 

[Dchap263]

It would be great if they offered a choice on the Squatch either A/T, or M/T. 35" A/T would be easier to live with for daily, also much more quiet.

 

[Raptor911]

The Goodyear territory that comes with the Sasquatch package is NOT a MT tire. I am not sure why ford used MT but Goodyear said MT stands for max traction on this tire.

It would be great if they offered a choice on the Squatch either A/T, or M/T. 35" A/T would be easier to live with for daily, also much more quiet.

 

[rak2]

Yes, yes, yes, Hoping we get some options for more/other configuration choices.
35's don't work for me - I'd like to have 33s with front and rear lockers,, and would also like to skip the sway disconnect. (this is not based on any science, just a personal preference that I'd be glad to pay extra for.)

 

[Pork-n-Bean]

A lot of really great points here. Most of us are not buying a 'Squatch Bronco to save money, though. I want it because it looks amazing, is extremely capable, and to ride around in the open air through the woods and town making memories with my kids. I'm willing to shell out a few extra bucks for that.

 

[Mattwings]

It would be nice to test drive a Sasquatch vs. Stock in 2.3 and 2.7 configuration. I am pretty sure stock 2.7l, rear locker and 33” A/T tire are what I want/need(?), but if the package, gearing, step in and ride/drive quality is similar, I would likely pay the premium to get the next level of capabilities. The difference in tire price isn’t a big factor as long as the rest of the components are designed for the added stress of the bigger rubber. What I don’t want is something I get tired of as a daily driver for the two or three times a year I challenge the Sasquatch capabilities. I am old enough now that I can skip the biggest mud hole or hill climb of the day and still maintain my manhood ?

Sponsored