You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Engine & DrivetrainDiscussions about the engine and drivetrain of your vehicle.
This is a discussion thread titled "Why solid frong axle?", within the Engine & Drivetrain forum, part of the Technical & Vehicle Assistance Forums category.
Hello I have some questions for you guys. I've been hearing that Tundras don't compare to toyotas made in the 80's off-road-wise because it has independent front suspension, so my questions are: Why is solid front axle better? What can solid front axle do that IFS can't do? And if solid axle is that good, why do most trucks made today have IFS? Thank you.
Beyond what the previous person said, a solid front axle works for itself which improves stability in off road. When one side of the suspension on a solid axle is raised on top of a rock or something, it forces the other side of the axle to push down, gaining in traction, and keeping the vehicle more level, plus the durability issue. An independent front end, likes to fall in those holes, or tip the vehicle when crawling in topsy turvy areas. Gives a feeling like the vehicle wants to roll over, and causes independent bouncing in rough situations. Much less stability. Go offroading with someone with a solid axle Dodge, or better yet in an old Bronco, not the ones with the I beam suspension. Yes our trucks are better for climbing than the Dodges and getting around off road, but there are areas that I was sure that I was going to flip the truck, that I used to take my old F150 solid axle out on all the time with total confidence, specifically due to the articulation. The Dodge is a bad example due to the fact that it has one of the stiffest suspensions, and limited articulation capability. The reason todays trucks have independent suspensions in the front, including the new Dodges, is the fact that 95% of truck owners will never take their 4x4s off road. I happen to have 3 friends that would not have bought there trucks without 4x4, but none of them have ever taken out there trucks, even on a dirt road. This is just then a waste of money, due to the extra maintenance that a 4x4 costs, plus with higher ride hiegth, they loose handling and braking capabilities. Our Independent front suspensions are designed for smoother ride, better handling, more car like ride. This is due to the fact that this is what the consumer market is asking for! Solid axle suspensions, and heavy recirculative ball steering are slow and sloppy compared to rack and pinion. You cant use a rack and pinion on a solid axle truck, it has to much movement that would bind the steering components. People like big vehicles. They always have, when America got rid of the big muscle cars, and went to economy vehicles, that was the start of the market turning to SUVs and Trucks. Come on, what is more cooler. Taking the minivan to the ball game or the 4x4 SUV. A lot of people think that it is just good to have 4x4 in case they ever need it, plus with larger vehicles you feel safer in case of an accident. You can see over traffic on the freeway, or you used to, but now every other vehicle on the road is a truck now, so now you can only see the back of their trucks. Look out on the road next time on the freeway, and you will see about 40% of the vehicles are trucks and SUVs. Cars still lead the way, but trucks are taking over. It was rare to see a 1 ton 4x4 crew cab on the road, except early in the morning when the construction people went to work. Now I bet one of your neighbors has one of these bohemeths. Completely impractical for 85 percent of the people who own them.
Whoops, was I ranting? Actually I was, due to this market turn, it is no longer affordable to get a 4x4 truck anymore. Remember about 10 years ago, trucks were really cheap compared to cars, now most of the nice trucks that I would really want are in the $40,000 to $50,000 dollar range. Inconceivable!!!!!!!!
Thanks you two. And Hodgeee, come on, people can buy whatever they want even if they don't really need them. How many times have we seen a 60 year old guy driving a red sports car. So long as what they spent on make them feel good. If they don't need big SUVs or trucks but just need to look cool, so be it. After all this is a free country and we have to respect other people's freedom to choose. Well welcome to TS!
Originally posted by hovisimo
also, no one makes gears or a locker (that i know of) for the reverse-rotation tundra front differential. [/b]
ARB makes the front locker - RD90 and the first shipment has arrived. Randy's and Precision gears have gear sets for the Tundra. I currently have the ARB front locker installed and I changed my gears to 456's with 33's.
Also - that ole fart in the red sports car is usually getting a "little" something extra besides his ego.
Solid axles and IFS comparisons are an "apples and oranges" issues. They are designed for two different purposes, so what is "better" depends on the job you want to do.
Solid axles are cheaper and generally a lot tougher than an IFS. Big, beefy parts and normally, a lot less of them. Solid axles have been made for years and years...so they are cheap and easy to work on. The bugs are out of them. Advantages? For sure, they are the best for massive articulation. Rock crawlers have known this for years. For slow, deliberate navigation over really crazy terrain, solid axles all the way. Problems? Well, they evolved from the horse-drawn carriages. High speed operation of a solid- axle over mild surfaces does not give the best ride possible. Why should the movement of a single wheel affect both the axle and the other wheel? Not the best design for a smooth controlled ride. Check out any sports car: road or F1. All IFS. Some of the most serious, heavy, military 4x4's and even 6x6's use solid axles, in fact, solid "portal" axles, which offset the hub flange from the axle itself for more clearance. Look up the Unimog line of vehicles to learn more.
So, IFS, while not the best for extreme articulation, gives a better ride. Each wheel can move independantly. Thus when one wheel is moving up an obstacle, it won't interfere with the traction of the other one. Each can do it's job more-or-less independently. This is why we see IFS on most new trucks...people are not really off-roading them, they are driving them on the highway at 75MPH or gravel roads. At speeds like this, an IFS is much better than a solid axle solution. One of the most respected off-roaders available, the Hummer, uses a very beefy IFS on all 4 corners. Why? the US Army does not crawl around on rocks at 3 MPH. They wanted a high-mobility, high-speed machine that could carry a load, at speed, over moderately rough terrain: like gravel roads, fields, deserts, etc. The IFS on the Hummer is very advanced, the hubs being driven from the EDGE, like a portal axle. This equals more clearance. Oh, and as far as diffs go (lockers, LSDs, etc) the Hummer uses (IMHO) the best solution, 100% gear Torsen-style diffs. No clutches, no plates, no air hoses.
So, short and sweet: Solid axles are inexpensive and simple, and are best for extreme articulation on very difficult, slow-speed, driving. IFS is best for high-speed, high-manoueverability, over smooth to moderate terrain.
Toy's first 4X4 trucks were solid front axle because the suspension was taken directly from the Toyota FJ-40 "LandCrushers". Not much R&D here for the transfer to the small 4X4 truck.
Originally posted by toolbox Solid axles and IFS comparisons are an "apples and oranges" issues. They are designed for two different purposes, so what is "better" depends on the job you want to do.
Solid axles are cheaper and generally a lot tougher than an IFS. Big, beefy parts and normally, a lot less of them. Solid axles have been made for years and years...so they are cheap and easy to work on. The bugs are out of them. Advantages? For sure, they are the best for massive articulation. Rock crawlers have known this for years. For slow, deliberate navigation over really crazy terrain, solid axles all the way. Problems? Well, they evolved from the horse-drawn carriages. High speed operation of a solid- axle over mild surfaces does not give the best ride possible. Why should the movement of a single wheel affect both the axle and the other wheel? Not the best design for a smooth controlled ride. Check out any sports car: road or F1. All IFS. Some of the most serious, heavy, military 4x4's and even 6x6's use solid axles, in fact, solid "portal" axles, which offset the hub flange from the axle itself for more clearance. Look up the Unimog line of vehicles to learn more.
So, IFS, while not the best for extreme articulation, gives a better ride. Each wheel can move independantly. Thus when one wheel is moving up an obstacle, it won't interfere with the traction of the other one. Each can do it's job more-or-less independently. This is why we see IFS on most new trucks...people are not really off-roading them, they are driving them on the highway at 75MPH or gravel roads. At speeds like this, an IFS is much better than a solid axle solution. One of the most respected off-roaders available, the Hummer, uses a very beefy IFS on all 4 corners. Why? the US Army does not crawl around on rocks at 3 MPH. They wanted a high-mobility, high-speed machine that could carry a load, at speed, over moderately rough terrain: like gravel roads, fields, deserts, etc. The IFS on the Hummer is very advanced, the hubs being driven from the EDGE, like a portal axle. This equals more clearance. Oh, and as far as diffs go (lockers, LSDs, etc) the Hummer uses (IMHO) the best solution, 100% gear Torsen-style diffs. No clutches, no plates, no air hoses.
So, short and sweet: Solid axles are inexpensive and simple, and are best for extreme articulation on very difficult, slow-speed, driving. IFS is best for high-speed, high-manoueverability, over smooth to moderate terrain.
With the HUMMER it must also be remembered that this vehicle is also 3 feet wider than almost any street vehicle and that all the weight is set very low. Yeah it has great articulation, but that vehicle was completely designed as a go everywhere offroad vehicle. The center of gravity on that truck was designed to be set as low as possible. A HUMMER is nothing compared to a pasenger car or truck and shouldn't really be compared with idenpendent suspension vehicles that were designed for the street. If you have ever driven a HUMMER on road they feel like a fish out of water. You also feel like you are sitting on the top of the vehicle the way that no real comfort was setup for the driver or passengers, must have been second consideration. Yeah IFS on a vehicle like that will perform outstandingly, but would never compare to your Truck for daily use.
With the HUMMER it must also be remembered that this vehicle is also 3 feet wider than almost any street vehicle and that all the weight is set very low. Yeah it has great articulation, but that vehicle was completely designed as a go everywhere offroad vehicle. The center of gravity on that truck was designed to be set as low as possible. A HUMMER is nothing compared to a pasenger car or truck and shouldn't really be compared with idenpendent suspension vehicles that were designed for the street. If you have ever driven a HUMMER on road they feel like a fish out of water. You also feel like you are sitting on the top of the vehicle the way that no real comfort was setup for the driver or passengers, must have been second consideration. Yeah IFS on a vehicle like that will perform outstandingly, but would never compare to your Truck for daily use.
Actually, the comparison is quite valid. The Tundra was designed to be used primarily on-road, at high speed. The off-road performance is secondary, while competant, it cannot match a "full out" rock-crawler with massive 33" tires and extreme articulation. The Hummer was not either. Yes, it's wider, yes it has a lower center of gravity, and they put IFS (and IRS) on it because it improves the performance of the vehicle for what it was designed for. The Hummer, like the Tundra, was NOT designed as a dedicated, highly articulated, rock-crawler. I'm not trying to compare vehicles here, just the rational for suspension choices. Of course, the Hummer feels terrible on the road...the spring rate is high (stiff) and it is just a plain noisy machine. If it had leaf springs it would be much worse. The Hummer's suspension design avoids having axles spanning the vehicle. Thus, the Hummer (with it's belly pan) can "slide" over things that would hang up solid-axle vehicles. The Hummer is remarkable in that people do buy and drive these things EVERY day on the street, considering the size and capacity of the vehicle. You would not buy the military vehicles the Hummer replaced for every day use.
Call me crazy, but I am currently considering changing the IFS in my factory Ivan Stewart to a solid front for all the heavy duty reasons discussed in this forum. I am perplexing as to which axle and steering system to use as well as which suspension setup. A swap to the dana 44 with leaf springs would be easiest, that is not considering the steering modification question, however I would lean toward a coil-over setup with some axle locating bars. Then again the late land cruiser front axle would keep the vehicle "corporate pure" and parts friendlier.
I don't see the front differential drop options currently availiable as being to significantly better off road than a stock truck, those systems will still limit maximum suspension articulation. IMHO to make the truck more off road capable, the axle change option seems to be the route to go. So, to whoever has accomplished this conversion, which parts and how?????
__________________ 2001 Factory I. S., TRD supercharger, Downey headers, K&N FIPK w/ ram air, Flowmaster muffler, home built dual exhaust exiting through cutout in side of bed, 5-link SAS w/ King 12" coilovers and Rubicon Express flex joints, Alcan 7-leaf rear springs, home made shackle flip, U-bolt flip kit, homemade traction bar, Bilstien 5150 14" travel rear shocks on O.R.S. mounts, rebuilt IFS steering box with 1.5" ram, braided lines, 4.88 gears w/ front and rear ARBs, Eagle Racing 15X10 589's, 37" XT's, ARB front bumper, T-Max 9500, Synthetic winch rope, spray-in bed liner, Rhino coated homemade roof rack, rock sliders, and rear bumper/slider, roof, and lower side body Rino liner coated, 4 Pro-Comp lights 130 watt driving lights, 2: roof rack, 2: bumper mounted
Ok, so you're crazy. Your IS Tundra sounds like a sweet machine, why would you want to go through the hassle of sticking a solid axle on it? Agreed, you have a lot more options with solid axles, but if I was looking to build a serious off-roader, I'd buy an old Toyota FJ, or an old Jeep and go from there. With the Tundra, you are going about things the hard way. Better to mess with an inexpensive, easy-to-modify FJ or Jeep, than to hack your big $$$ IS Tundra.
Anyhow, have you looked at IFS lifts for your Tundra?
Maybe you're right. I used to own a FJ-40, and in retrospect this truck would never go where I had that land crusher. I have considered that tuff country kit, was waiting to see if any other manufacturer was going to produce something else. Good point, to, that being, I DO have a high dollar rare truck and it would be considered irrational by some to seriously modify it, but then again when I owned the NHRA national record holding G stock Boss 302 mustang, I modified it into a road-race SCCA car. Yep, I'm certifiable. :-))
__________________ 2001 Factory I. S., TRD supercharger, Downey headers, K&N FIPK w/ ram air, Flowmaster muffler, home built dual exhaust exiting through cutout in side of bed, 5-link SAS w/ King 12" coilovers and Rubicon Express flex joints, Alcan 7-leaf rear springs, home made shackle flip, U-bolt flip kit, homemade traction bar, Bilstien 5150 14" travel rear shocks on O.R.S. mounts, rebuilt IFS steering box with 1.5" ram, braided lines, 4.88 gears w/ front and rear ARBs, Eagle Racing 15X10 589's, 37" XT's, ARB front bumper, T-Max 9500, Synthetic winch rope, spray-in bed liner, Rhino coated homemade roof rack, rock sliders, and rear bumper/slider, roof, and lower side body Rino liner coated, 4 Pro-Comp lights 130 watt driving lights, 2: roof rack, 2: bumper mounted
Hodgeee might have already said this in a lot more words, but my off roading buddies say the IFS just dopesn't transfer the wieght evenly like the solid axel durring maximum articulation. The IFS causes one wheel to bear all the load, which forces the wheel without the load to just spin and kick up dust. A locker would help but that doesn't count.
__________________
First Gen > *
Short List: BFG AT, Demello HD round Sliders, Donahoes, TC UCAs, Rear ARB Air locker, wrap around rear bumper, HAM
Eclipse CD-7100 HU, Zed Audio Deuce, Dynaudio system 240MKII (active), Zuki Eleet 4 channel, Koda 10 sub.
Next up: ?
Just to let everyone know, I have the 5.5" lift and 35's with the IFS (of course) and I was off-roading some really serious terrain (a rock face, completely dry, 100% intense) and busted (to hell) the right front axle. Hopefully my service writer at Boulder Toyota likes me enough to have it covered under warranty, or else, I'm escrewed. Solid Axle would have been great, but only for the 10 minutes I was on that obstacle, IFS is 100% better quality ride.
-A.J.
__________________
Truck: A big green shiny thing with lots of scratches and big tires that sounds loud and crawls over things.
Things That Have Been Broken Off-roading: Front right axle snapped (twice), turned the front diff into a metal milkshake (twice), CV Boots (lost count), Power Steering Rack.... thank god my service writer likes me!
TundraSolutions.com is a registered trademark of Tundra Solutions, Inc.
Other trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the TundraSolutions.com User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
Why solid front axle?
2001 Factory I. S., TRD supercharger, Downey headers, K&N FIPK w/ ram air, Flowmaster muffler, home built dual exhaust exiting through cutout in side of bed, 5-link SAS w/ King 12" coilovers and Rubicon Express flex joints, Alcan 7-leaf rear springs, home made shackle flip, U-bolt flip kit, homemade traction bar, Bilstien 5150 14" travel rear shocks on O.R.S. mounts, rebuilt IFS steering box with 1.5" ram, braided lines, 4.88 gears w/ front and rear ARBs, Eagle Racing 15X10 589's, 37" XT's, ARB front bumper, T-Max 9500, Synthetic winch rope, spray-in bed liner, Rhino coated homemade roof rack, rock sliders, and rear bumper/slider, roof, and lower side body Rino liner coated, 4 Pro-Comp lights 130 watt driving lights, 2: roof rack, 2: bumper mounted
Your IS Tundra sounds like a sweet machine, why would you want to go through the hassle of sticking a solid axle on it? Agreed, you have a lot more options with solid axles, but if I was looking to build a serious off-roader, I'd buy an old Toyota FJ, or an old Jeep and go from there. With the Tundra, you are going about things the hard way. Better to mess with an inexpensive, easy-to-modify FJ or Jeep, than to hack your big $$$ IS Tundra. 
Linear Mode
