Outer Limits 4x4 Board

isnt it just HORSES 4 COURSES and i think that most people that are happy just dont complain..........I.F.S. cars will go 90% of the places that live axles will in the hard going....
On corigated and unsealed roads ifs is superier and if you have center diff lock .....in awd ....then you are that far in front it doesnt matter
Eight years ago about 15% of4x4s were i.f.s. now about 80% of new 4x4s are. .......heaven forbid........even the all mighty KING OF THE OFF ROAD....SO if the toyo/moto/co...has seen the light may be the atitude of.....mine is bigger and better than yours will disappear

I wonder how many live axel 4x4s have won the worlds most gruling and toughest motor rally.....PARIS TO DAKAR Pajero for me

Rob e Gee wrote:...I wonder how many live axel 4x4s have won the worlds most gruling and toughest motor rally.....PARIS TO DAKAR Pajero for me

When Pajeros come with carbon fibre shells sitting on tubular frames with all the other modifications that they have done as well, then I might consider one. As previously noted IFS/IRS are good in the sand.

I have an IFS in the Kia, reasonable ground clearance, reasonable wheel travel, but still doesn't cut it in the rough stuff. The 90% estimate would be about right, it's the other 10% that you need to worry about. Can make for a long and arduous night

Rob e Gee wrote:I wonder how many live axel 4x4s have won the worlds most gruling and toughest motor rally.....PARIS TO DAKAR Pajero for me

You honestly believe they are really Pajeros?

I wonder how many actual Pajero parts are in any of the PTD trucks - none - well maybe the air vents on the dashboard. Everything from the Chassis to the shell is custom made.

The triple diamond and thats it.

havin done a wynns safari in mid 80's and seeing one of the factory imported trucks roll over and 2 dudes roll it back on the wheels, you soon learn that they are serious carbon fiber machines. light weight, no expense spared, nothing stock on them...

hey all

all i have to say is dont get IFS iam now selling my o4 sr5
hilux IFS= shit

u will only ever by one car that has IFS i sure know i will
so now iam buying a brand new nissan patrol cab chassis coil ST

Bruce, the running gear is essentially factory thats why the super select 4x4 system is a good un. They do modify them with torque distributing lsd's and they have front and rear diff locks. The earler 90's models were closer to factory than the current Evo's though.

RATLUX wrote:u will only ever by one car that has IFS i sure know i will
so now iam buying a brand new nissan patrol cab chassis coil ST

So in about 5 years time you won't be buying anymore new 4x4s then

There is no doubt a live axle is superior than IFS when the going gets tough.
I also think that Toyo's have unfairly given IFS a very bad name in terms of breakages & reliability. Putting in pathetic little front diffs with undersized CV's and other components have left a lot of pissed off owners vowing never again to buy an IFS truck.
The only things that went wrong with the Paj IFS was CV boots splitting (x2), 3 broken tie rods (due to a bent steering arm) and a bent idler arm shaft in 5 years of rough stuff. Their fine running up to 33"s and a front locker, over 33"s steering components are overstressed but the diffs and CV's will handle it.
The Paj front diff is virtually identical to a 8" Hilux live axle centre but the C&P is much stronger (thicker) in the Paj. Very few people break these even with front lockers.
With twin lockers and 35"s mine would go a lot places and keep up with live axle vehicles until the going got really tough but I was generally doing it harder. At times the IFS can be an advantage due to better front clearance so you can slide over stuff.

[
I wonder how many live axel 4x4s have won the worlds most gruling and toughest motor rally.....PARIS TO DAKAR Pajero for me [/quote]
Whats the go dude? Is this a rallying site now? How many pajero's have got a place on the podium in the Outback challenge? Hold on.... has a pajero ever even been entered in the outback challenge? a winch challenge maybe? nah didnt think so...

Buying a new jigger? get live axle so later on when we go to buy a good second hand rig there is still something decent left out there to buy.

what is this IFS? and how do i know if i have it?

Just saying HORSES FOR CORSES...never seen a Rolse Roice or Bentle in a smash up darby either ...Out back challenge and the like can only be run on the back of after market gear ...NO arb diff lock..winches...oversized motors and tyres NO out back challenge ..... Lets not fool our selves here... All 4x4s have there limits .

Most 4x4s these days are good in there own right .... Just get the one thats right for you .I have had 4x4s about 18 years now and I think my Pajero 2.8.itd with IFS a suspention lift and larger tyres..BFGs... is a very capable 4x4....not the best bye any means but good enough to get out of a bog on her own steam ......that a red faced GU patrol owner with twin lockers had to be pulled out of ....At Fraser Iland the biger and heavier 4x4s ..especialy with narrow wheels seem to have more trouble as well..
This is a 4x4 forum but most 4x4 owners dont want nor need a vehicle that can clime Ayrs Rock..I got a 4x4 so i wouldnt get stuck ...Ididnt get one just to drive around and try to get stuck.

Yep and yesterday a little swb Paj with twin lockers & 33" X Terrains kicked our live axle arses at Toolangi

Let's face it guys, vehicles with IFS are only on the light duty "toys" which are basically designed for on road use or gravel road travel. This goes especially for the 100 series which is an absolute embarrassment to the 4wd species. It is shame that there are so many naive buyers out there with too much cash.

Let's face it guys, vehicles with IFS are only on the light duty "toys" which are basically designed for on road use or gravel road travel. This goes especially for the 100 series which is an absolute embarrassment to the 4wd species. It is shame that there are so many naive buyers out there with too much cash.

Bitsamissin wrote:Yep and yesterday a little swb Paj with twin lockers & 33" X Terrains kicked our live axle arses at Toolangi

Noisey wrote:

Bitsamissin wrote:Yep and yesterday a little swb Paj with twin lockers & 33" X Terrains kicked our live axle arses at Toolangi

Not to forget the Raider taking 2nd in my clubs all terrain event (out doing patrols and yotas)

Light duty dosent mean we carn't have fun with IFS. It just means when it all goes to custard, we are not in it as deep

Yep more evidence how pathetic IFS trucks are even if they are well driven

With all these IFS kick ass stories about.........no wonder there is a few live axel RAW NERVES about..... ....

With all these IFS kick ass stories about.........no wonder there is a few live axel RAW NERVES about..... ....

One thing you have all forgotten to mension. Hit a hole or bump in a track with an IFS vehicle and the diff or sump will get closer to the ground potentially hitting a rock or high point between ruts as the momentum of the vehicle pushes the suspension down.
hit the same in a beam axle and hey presto "nothing happens"except the suspension moves but the diff centre gets no closer to a potential disaster and generally the sump is well up out of the way.

DR Frankenstine wrote:One thing you have all forgotten to mension. Hit a hole or bump in a track with an IFS vehicle and the diff or sump will get closer to the ground potentially hitting a rock or high point between ruts as the momentum of the vehicle pushes the suspension down.
hit the same in a beam axle and hey presto "nothing happens"except the suspension moves but the diff centre gets no closer to a potential disaster and generally the sump is well up out of the way.

Another thing with solid axles is that in a cross axle situation the wheel that droops will be longer on the ground , because the force from the wheel on the other side will be levered by the bumpstop and pushes it down.... More traction. But nothing a locker can't fix....

cheers ron

DR Frankenstine wrote:One thing you have all forgotten to mension. Hit a hole or bump in a track with an IFS vehicle and the diff or sump will get closer to the ground potentially hitting a rock or high point between ruts as the momentum of the vehicle pushes the suspension down.
hit the same in a beam axle and hey presto "nothing happens"except the suspension moves but the diff centre gets no closer to a potential disaster and generally the sump is well up out of the way.

Presenting an alternate view...

Most of the initial instantaneous impact is taken through the deformation of the tyres (that is one of the reasons why we let them down, isn't it?), therefore the beam axle wil have its pumpkin a little closer to the ground than the IFS initially.

As an example my Kia now has about 13" under the front between the wheels with 31" tyres (static, on the level). To get the same clearance to a pumpkin of a beam axle would require (based on 10"overall diff height) would require 2 X 13" + 10" = 36" tyres (real dia -> marketed as 37-38"??). The deformation of the larger tyres would be considerably more than the smaller tyre at an equivalent pressure (larger contained volume -> less pressure change with deformation -> greater deformation with same applied external pressure).

At full compression both sides (estimate as not easy to do statically) I have about 9" to the ground which corresponds to about a 28" tyre. This is not a situation that ocurrs for very long as usually it is only one wheel that is at full compression with the other being anywhere from neutral to fully extended.

The IFS has a bit more room to play with before they bottom out in parallel ruts, and also has the ability to increase the clearance momentarily (in my case up to about 17" -> equal to 44" tyres!) by the addition of a bit of right foot. They are however let down by limited wheel travel leading to loss of traction (fixed with lockers). The IFS will be able to "ride over" the lump in the track, whereas the beam axle doesn't have that ability by virtue of its fixed height above the tyres.

There is another factor to be considered, that is that driving an IFS requires a different technique than driving a beam axle, more of a "momentum modulating clearance" thing than "drive up and flex the shit out of it".

just adding to the debate......

the times i have been out wheeling, i have discovered that with decent tyres, locker(s), and a little clearance, most trucks can get to most places. presonally, i prefer solid, purely becuase they seem to break less parts than IFS.

the amount of flex / travel you have seems to be a bit of a penis sized argument... who has the most!

De-lux wrote:the times i have been out wheeling, i have discovered that with decent tyres, locker(s), and a little clearance, most trucks can get to most places. presonally, i prefer solid, purely becuase they seem to break less parts than IFS.

the amount of flex / travel you have seems to be a bit of a penis sized argument... who has the most!

"...the amount of flex / travel you have seems to be a bit of a penis sized argument... who has the most! ...."

The point I was making is that IFS have varying amounts of clearance and basically fixed travel vs fixed clearance and variable flex of beam axles, and that they require different driving styles. It is not a matter of being able to jump out of one into the other and adoptng the same strategies. I was using my own vehicle to demontrate a point as I already had the figures for it.

"... i prefer solid, purely becuase they seem to break less parts than IFS. "

Design it right in the first place and it really shouldn't matter.

Toyota stuffed up the LC 100 IFS by putting underweight Hilux diffs in the front. Suzuki really haven't had a significant design dimension upgrade since the W/T Sierra, despite the weight of their vehicles going up by 50-80% (Vitara/GV). Hilux IFS wheel travel is limited due to the use of a sightly modified leaf spring chassis (already pretty wide). Interesting to note the new Hilux IFS is coil sprung (coil over??).

Most IFS use torsion bar suspension which uses the chassis as a "return" path for the twisting moment forces, the 93-96 (??) Rodeo and Jackaroos are now turning up with massive cracks around the suspension/streering areas of chassis from torsion loads acting on the chassis near the steering mechanism (actually subject to recall notices overseas, even ARB supplies a fix for them). Torsion bars also restrict the distance the suspension mechanism can be away from the chassis rails, and due to their length, they effectively require that the bars are as wide as the main body of the chassis +/- the width of the chassis rails, restricting the length of the actual suspension arms and therefore the travel (not to mention increasing the angles on the CV's/DOJ's).

All these have combined to give IFS a bit of a bad rap.


It could reasonably be argued that the open knuckle design of IFS will also allow a tighter turning circle than the closed knuckle design of the Japanese/English beam axles, giving them an manouverability advantage in "go around or go over" situation.

I admit the beam axle will be able to "go over" more readily, but at the cost of adding to any "unusual attitudes" they may already be experiencing. The more angle they are subject to, the less the potential is for sufficient grip, and the more stresses that are placed through the driveline.


adding further to the debate (not getting personal).....

Rob e Gee wrote: I wonder how many live axel 4x4s have won the worlds most gruling and toughest motor rally.....PARIS TO DAKAR Pajero for me

You tell'em I take my paj through some pretty hairy tracks It does better than a lot of other non-modded trucks (keeps up with a 80 series 4' lift and 35's) who cares if I get a front (or rear)wheel off the ground with a rear locker still doing better than most. biggest problem is the inability to put some big tyres on it ....if that could happen it would owesome.

Dream on Grumpy.

Well I know a bloke with 4 fourbies :-
- IFS swb Paj, twin lockers, 35"s
- GU 4.2TDI coilcab ute, 37"s, twin lockers, rockhoppers
- Rocky, twin lockers, V6 conversion, 35"s
- Suzuki, twin locks, rockhoppers, 35"s
He reckons they all have their good and bad points in certain situations but none is way superior than the other, he luvs the Paj for the fun factor and instant poke.
Can't argue with this bloke he has a cabinet full of offroad trophies and knows his shit.

GaryInOz wrote:It could reasonably be argued that the open knuckle design of IFS will also allow a tighter turning circle than the closed knuckle design of the Japanese/English beam axles, giving them an manouverability advantage in "go around or go over" situation.

This is very much make/model dependant. The turning radius of a mid ninties B2600/Courier is 6.35m

patrolmad wrote:Dream on Grumpy.

Yep Dreamin of the day I can get some decent rubber under it

Nev62 wrote:

GaryInOz wrote:It could reasonably be argued that the open knuckle design of IFS will also allow a tighter turning circle than the closed knuckle design of the Japanese/English beam axles, giving them an manouverability advantage in "go around or go over" situation.

This is very much make/model dependant. The turning radius of a mid ninties B2600/Courier is 6.35m

My point was that there is more scope for angling the hub in an open hub than a closed hub.

Nev62, you correctly identified another aspect that has a considerable effect on turning radius, the wheelbase. This is why most ppl suggest that somewhere in the range of 100-110" (2.5-2.8m) is pretty much the "sweet spot". Long enogh for logditudinal stability, without being too long for turning circle. This assumes "sane" tyre sizes though...(up to 35-37" on most rigs).