IFS vs SAS

So I am wondering besides the travel is better with a SAS whats the advantages over ifs besides that?

 

Pretty much everything from the offroad stand point...

 

there are hundreds of threads like this and people are going to come in and here and yell give you shit.

A SAS allows you to use a bigger tires. also with a solid axle such as a dana 44 or a dana 60 it is much stronger and more reliable than IFS. there are many parts to IFS that have potential to break meaning SAS is much more reliable. There are two ways to do SAS either 3 link or leaf spring. both of these can be researched fairly easy. A big reason not many do SAS is because of the massive cost and the amount of fabrication. On a truck like yours for a 3 link you are looking at probably $15,000 to do everything.

Basically they are not comparable. They are on two levels, if you are a serious off roader you will have a SAS rig.

 

Thanks Blake and I kinda created this thread since it would be nice to have a sticky for this topic

 

Different applications. IFS is more comfortable especially at speed. But IFS is far more comfy on the rocks and in the mud. Depends how you want to wheel. Wanna hit desert whoops? IFS. Want to play in the mud and rocks? SAS. Want to do it all pretty well? Buy icons.

 

^ you misspelled KING's in the last sentence...

 

A built right three link SAS can be nicer than a lifted IFS... and also did you mean to say "SAS is far more comfy on the rocks and in the mud"?

 

It gets talked about a lot from a lot of people. it is kinda like all the engine swap threads. If you are going to go SAS you already know what the pros and cons are and usually the truck wont be used as a daily driver

 

Yup, mistyped. And yeah, I'd agree with the linked statement.

 

certainly don't need a sticky on this....

 

uptravel
downtravel

one for jumping
one for crawling

 

Bingo! Nailed it!

 

ask this guy about his LT, he'll set you straight.

 

mods should delete this thread and refer member to SAS section...


OP:YOU ONLY NEED TO CLICK THIS LINK

http://www.tacomaworld.com/forum/solid-axle-suspension/

 

It is in the SAS section...

 

Sir you failed to use the "search" key.

 

You slipped a letter there. You meant to say ST (stock travel) haha

 

I took this right from my thread, the sticky on this section of forum.

Reasons why SAS is more beneficial over IFS. I've been asked before so I figured I'd post some information. This pertains to rock crawling and trail riding. IFS is superior to desert racing over SA.

I'll offer one reason, but I'm sure there are many more: The solid axle acts as a very long control arm. Longer control arms are favorable for off-road because...hum...it's difficult to explain. Things like springs and shocks don't have to swing through as much 'arc displacement' (to coin a phrase?) with longer control arms. Take a sheet a paper and draw and independent suspension set-up and a solid axle set up. Remember that an independent set up has control arms that hinge near the center of the vehicle. (There may be a modern 4WD independent front suspension whose control arms extend across the front of the vehicle; I can't think of one…Ford's old 'Twin I-Beam' [not 4WD] set-up comes to mind.) Go ahead and draw springs and shocks on the set-ups. Simple 'stick' figure representations will do.

Now imagine the suspension types being 'flexed.' The hinge point for the flexure of the IFS will be about the respective control arms' inner end. The hinge point for the solid axle front end is the opposite wheel/ground interface or, roughly twice the 'radius arm' of the IFS. The shocks and springs are fixed at the top (they don't move there) on either set-up while the bottom of the springs and shocks move with the axle (on solid axle) or control arm (IFS). Now, looking from the front or rear, note where the control arm/axle spring/shock attach points are while the vehicle is sitting on level ground (un-flexed). Allow one IFS wheel drop and allow one solid axle wheel to drop. Remember to hinge the IFS about the inside of the control arm and hinge the solid axle about the opposite wheel/ground interface. Still looking from the front or rear, note how much the lower end of the spring/shock mount point has moved left or right compared to the solid axle design. The solid axle's control arm is so long--compared to the IFS--that the spring and shock practically moves straight up and down. The spring perches (top and bottom) remain more parallel when the solid axle is flexed compared to the IFS. On the IFS, the spring wants to 'pop out' more easily as the wheel droops. This is what I like about IFS torsion bar 'springs' suspension…good packaging, and it solves the IFS coil-spring-deflection problem. But, even with torsion springs, the geometry of the IFS is too much to package (in my opinion) if it's designed to excel off-road.

 

IFS is also better in sharp turns and lighter hence short course racers run IFS. You can run some pretty rugged trails with IFS as well. However, if you want reliability and rugged dependability in an end of the world scenario SAS would be the best since you'd have to crawl over all those Jeeps. But then again with IFS... they're just different.

 

I'm just gonna put in my .02 & bow out before things get heated. SA Rigs= Win. IFS= moderate wheelin& street duty.