LOBO OFF-ROAD STAGE X FRONT SUSPENSION KIT

Lobo Off-Road is proud to introduce the next level in suspension performance for the Ford Bronco! Our front suspension system has been race inspired by our multiple decades of off-road racing experience and incorporating the X-Travel technology. All bronco owners know that the steering rack and tie rods are two of the weakest links on the bronco. That is why we teamed up with our friends over at X travel, to incorporate their patented virtual pivot system into our kit. Essentially eliminating the heavy loads that have been leaving people stranded on the trails or in the middle of the open desert.




KEY FEATURES!!!
-Increased track width by 4 inches per side, providing optimum stability
-Almost 30% more wheel travel with 12.5 inches of wheel travel
-HD outer ball joints
-1” uniball inner pivots
-Made with 4130 and 4140 chromoly
-TIG welded
- MADE IN USA
-SIGNIFICANTLY TAKES LOAD OFF THE FACTORY RACK AND TIE RODS

X-travel technology revolutionizes Independent Front off-road Suspension geometry by allowing the wheels to steer on a virtual axis that remains constantly centered through the wheel and tire assembly, throughout its range of suspension travel. The result is a new level of vehicle control at regardless of the speed or terrain, while alleviating punishment on steering components, reducing driver fatigue, and increasing safety.





The Lobo Offroad bronco suspension kit is entirely made out of high quality 4130/4140 chromoly, creating a robust front suspension kit, that provides not only, bind-free location control of the wheel and tire through its range of motion. We also were able to eliminate scrub radius, bump steer and virtually all terrain feedback through the steering system, but also provides confidence to push their vehicles further and faster while maintaining safer control of the vehicle, knowing that the kit is American made with high grade chromoly components.



KIT INCLUDES
-Upper links
-Lower links
- Shock mount trunnion
-Fabricated spindle
-Brake lines
-Tie rod extension
-Longer stub axles
-Necessary hardware

Learn more about the Lobo Front Suspension System with X-Travel Technology at our website
https://lobooffroad.com/product-category/shop-by-category/suspension/

Also make sure to follow all our other social channels as we will posting all the content we have from testing, as well as all the adventures to come!!!
https://lobooffroad.com/links/

This looks amazing. I am not that familiar with full race suspensions, J-arms and such, but this looks next level. +4" per side is huge, I am guessing owners will need to install the wide Dana rear end as well.

AttackGuy64 said:

+4" per side is huge, I am guessing owners will need to install the wide Dana rear end as well.

Click to expand...

I was wondering the same thing.

ScLeCo said:

I was wondering the same thing.

Click to expand...

Nah, f'it. I will get some 4" spacers and roll with it.

AttackGuy64 said:

This looks amazing. I am not that familiar with full race suspensions, J-arms and such, but this looks next level. +4" per side is huge, I am guessing owners will need to install the wide Dana rear end as well.

Click to expand...

4” per side is a basic “long travel” kit for IFS, pretty standard.

Is this street legal and how is the feel on the street? In some of the videos it's mentioned that there isn't any steering feedback.

Great idea! Love the engineering! The execution is terrible! Factory mounts, open uniballs and way more failure points.

I am going to grab some for this one.

Is this the Ford/Audi collaboration we’ve been waiting on? Lol

Snacktime said:

Great idea! Love the engineering! The execution is terrible! Factory mounts, open uniballs and way more failure points.

I am going to grab some for this one.

Click to expand...

Im sure if the failure points are properly engineered to take the increased loads it will be ok. Assuming they are.

I know they started advertising testing at Sand Hollow. Curious how many miles they have on the test setup and what types of terrain.


I’m ok with the stock mounting points if they are beefed up. My LCA brackets for example are beefed up and the uppers May need a double shear kit too but I’m not sure.

I will no longer be interested due to the increased track width. 8+ total inches makes it the second widest kit only behind Wicked Creations. That coupled with the possibility of needing a wider offset wheel (is one needed to clear the new knuckle?) will make these setup very wide up front. At least 10+ inches. On the website it still advertises 4+” increased track width. Maybe change that to (per side) or 8” total?

Still, the concept is very unique and I appreciate that. Hats off and hopefully it works out.

My last question that I havnt been able to get answered that I’ve seen a few people ask now if the steering still retains castor effect. Does the steering wheel want to return to center or is it a dead stick so to speak? A dead steering wheel feels VERY different and would require getting used to. The reason I ask is in the videos it appears to be a dead wheel and it’s talked about how no feedback comes through. Just curious if I saw right or if it’s just the aired down tires in the sand acting like it.

Show me how the suspension is isolated when a tie fod is completely gone. I understand this suspension may be able to reduce tie rod shock loading by precise placement of the virtual king pin axis. But the way I see it, the tie rod has become an integral member of the suspension.

Even as a Bronco/IFS apologist, I think it is a hard sell to make the Bronco tie rod an integral member of the constraining the entire wheel motion. Now it is responsible for a part of the control/constraint of additional degrees of freedom.

I am curious to see what travel limits are in place in this suspension to constrain the wheel and keep it from crashing into the fender or firewall in the event you lose a tie rod. I'm sure there's something, i'd like to see it demonstrated. Like is it limited by binding of the knuckle/control arms, or binding of the cross-link the shock mounts to?

popo_patty said:

My last question that I havnt been able to get answered that I’ve seen a few people ask now if the steering still retains castor effect. Does the steering wheel want to return to center or is it a dead stick so to speak? A dead steering wheel feels VERY different and would require getting used to. The reason I ask is in the videos it appears to be a dead wheel and it’s talked about how no feedback comes through. Just curious if I saw right or if it’s just the aired down tires in the sand acting like it.

Click to expand...

Modern electric power steering systems generally have a returnability cal, to naturally drive the rack back to center even with limited caster effect. But I would still be curious to see how perceptible the change in returnability might be. At end of travel the caster-return force is very high (just hold your steering at lock and key off to see). I wouldn't mind a slight reduction in that effect, but I imagine some caster return is still present if the virtual kingpin axis isn't perfectly vertical.

TeocaliMG said:

Even as a Bronco/IFS apologist, I think it is a hard sell to make the Bronco tie rod an integral member of the constraining the entire wheel motion. Now it is responsible for a part of the control/constraint of additional degrees of freedom.

Click to expand...

Also curious about this. How are the additional degrees of freedom constrained? Via tie rod only?

Snacktime said:

The execution is terrible! Factory mounts, open uniballs and way more failure points

Click to expand...

would like to see the loads and stress analysis for keeping the factory mounts. Seems to be a very challenging stress state.

@87-Z28 well think about the lower shock mount. Its like trying to squeeze a spring between two fingers. Lot more lateral load than you would initially think. Its now mid mounted between to links pushing forces everywhere! I have no clue how to even calculate this. Modeling software might be able to get this figured out but I would want a lot of testing.

I would love to run this, but I would want a trailer and a tow rig.

for the $$$$ and additional track width, it should have 16" wheel travel, not 12.8" or whatever...

wonder what the CV plunge is now, since the outer CV now makes a wide arc since its no longer on the steering axis???

I think the uppers need double shear frame mount...the loads to one side must be greater now?


The only Advantage I see to the whole design would be to use it with portals, if you could get the scrub to go away that the portals add, or add the virtual Center of axis, out to where the tire center is somehow (with the portal), with this four link setup it would certainly make the portals perform better than they do now with the jumbo scrub radius. That's the only thing really holding me back from buying portals is the ridiculous scrub radius. So this seems like an actual solution to that problem but of course the knuckle would need to be re-engineered with the double bolt design so it's probably a long ways out for that to ever happen.

Snacktime said:

@87-Z28 well think about the lower shock mount. Its like trying to squeeze a spring between two fingers. Lot more lateral load than you would initially think. Its now mid mounted between to links pushing forces everywhere! I have no clue how to even calculate this. Modeling software might be able to get this figured out but I would want a lot of testing.

I would love to run this, but I would want a trailer and a tow rig.

Click to expand...

indeed. Keeping all the oem mounting locations gains wheel travel with longer LCA. Big bonus. It works the other way around also, now input loads from wheel amplify shock and mounting point reaction loads.

If LCA was 10 feet long and oem mounting points remain the same. Small lateral wheel inputs would have massive loading consequences for shock and all mounting points. Add extra DOFs and big concerns.

not sure how much affect a 4” increased LCA length will have. Some good analysis is warranted. Lateral loads could be generated by assuming some initial eccentricity but challenging to get wheel input loads.