Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Question.....

If Nissan does the unthinkable and decides to replace the front end with IFS will you ever replace your current rig with an IFS model??

#Tiny wrote:Question.....

If Nissan does the unthinkable and decides to replace the front end with IFS

There is no IF about it, the next model has IFS.
I ts
F ucked
S uspension

I'll prolly never replace my rig.

Area54 wrote:I'll prolly never replace my rig.

Buy another GQ now and put it in storage for when current wheels die!

#Tiny wrote:Question.....

If Nissan does the unthinkable and decides to replace the front end with IFS will you ever replace your current rig with an IFS model??

I currently have an MQ, i am a long way off even considering a GQ, and even further away from a GU, i'll be dead or incapable of driving by the time i am at that point. Maybe if the market falls on it's arse and i can buy one for $1000 i might consider it.

Bogged, how can you be so sure the next model has IFS........what is your basis..........or are you just making it up?

Maybe IFS technology can be improved to give more articulation?

Or maybe you will have to buy a tray back.

Personally I"m not worried, I'll buy my GU while its still solid axle and by the time I need to replace it who knows there may be a better suspension system anyway........10 years is a long time who knows what technologies may emerge in that time..

mabsydney wrote:Bogged, how can you be so sure the next model has IFS........what is your basis..........or are you just making it up?

1) it was in a magazine.
2) mate works in testing dept of nissan in dandenong.
3) nissan boss dude informed club dudes at some dinner they went to

the nissan IFS will probably have more travel than what the nissan straight front axle does. wouldn't be hard. IIRC when they do the new vehicle tests in the magazines the ifs/strut prado outramps the shit out of the straight axled patrol. also, every time nissan bring out a new patrol model they add beef to the axles, so the new IFS will probably also be stronger than the current front axle. it will also have much better clearance obviously.
so your average weekend 4wheeler will be able to buy a new patrol that is stronger, more flexible, and has better clearance. what is wrong with that?

Wendle wrote:the nissan IFS will probably have more travel than what the nissan straight front axle does. wouldn't be hard. IIRC when they do the new vehicle tests in the magazines the ifs/strut prado outramps the shit out of the straight axled patrol. also, every time nissan bring out a new patrol model they add beef to the axles, so the new IFS will probably also be stronger than the current front axle. it will also have much better clearance obviously.
so your average weekend 4wheeler will be able to buy a new patrol that is stronger, more flexible, and has better clearance. what is wrong with that?

Prolly right there, but the added complexity of the links and bushes will add to the nightmare of longevity. Add in some mods for extra height, and start wheeling the thing, the wear rate of consumable components (bushes etc) will skyrocket. The current front system( as in links and bushes), although flawed flex wise, is a solid, reliable system needing very little in the way of maintenance. It is a design of set and forget, whereas the ifs systems can be finicky, requiring regular alignments and component replacement through regular use. This can only be a bad thing for future 2nd hand owners...

No probs with IFS as a tourer, the problem is that as tracks close and the sport gaind popularity, more 4x4s desend on allready overworked tracks causing worse ruts and so forth, not to say greenies putting conservation humps the sise if a D9 when a small one would do just to try and stop 4x4s the outcomer is the need to inrease clearens ets in order to negociate tracks previously driven by stock 4x4s

Tiny

Area54 wrote: ifs systems can be finicky, requiring regular alignments and component replacement through regular use.

maybe, maybe not. this will be a brand new system, unseen as yet. nissan have been putting off introducing it for a long time, i reckon the amount of R & D it has been through by now would be phenomenal...

#Tiny wrote: the outcomer is the need to inrease clearens ets in order to negociate tracks previously driven by stock 4x4s

so nissan introduce a new suspension with inarguably more clearance, and more than likely more travel. it just happens to be IFS.

the only person who has nailed the possible downsides to the model is area54.

with IFS the truck may even be introduced back into the US market. watch the aftermarket support jump then.

Like all systems that are 'improved' this adds in more complexity and more compromises. The Nissan engineers will no doubt have done their homework for the regular user, I suppose time will tell as to the durability for everyone else.

Damn shame they're putting IFS under the next Patrol, truly...
Bet it's going to be another variant of the F-Alpha platform that Nissan is using for all their other frame-based trucks/SUVs (Titan, Armada, Pathfinder, Frontier/Navara, Xterra) and none of them have anything groundbreaking under the front end, I would be surprised if the Patrol has something unique regardless of what platform it's on.

?
Brent

Buy the time my rig is dead all the tracks will be closed

So I will have a comp buggy on a trailer and a gay car to tow it

im sure someone will manage to find a way to fit a live axel on the new patrols somewhere along the line.

when that happens, and i break my rig, ill buy the new one

we will never see the Patrol re-introduced into the USA. It has been 36 years since a Patrol was sold in the USA and I see no reason they will bring it back. We have the X-terra, Pathfinder, Armada for Nissan SUV's and we have the Frontier & Titan for trucks. Why would they bring in the Patrol? It would be bad business for them as they already have the market flooded here with 3 SUV's and 90% or more of yanks have no idea what a good truck is anyways.

C'mon Bruce my twin locked IFS Jabber will run rings around your live axle Truckster so what's the problem

Wendle, I don't agree there mate it's extremely difficult to make an IFS as strong as a live axle especially a GU version with the bigger CV's. The strongest CV joints around are from a Porsche 936 that have a maximum operating angle of 45 degrees. A normal IFS CV joint is rated at around 29 degrees. To produce a CV like the 936 is big $$$$.
Assumming Nissan can produce an extreme angle CV that will cope with plenty of torque there is the issue of maintenance with the other components. Idler arms, tie rods and drag links cop an absolute pounding in IFS format. Then you have the A arms and bushing arrangement.
I seriously doubt Nissan would produce a super beefed up IFS that would rival the live axle for reliability and flex as it would be too expensive.
Look at Toyo's pathetic effort for the 100 Series I doubt Nissans IFS would be that bad but I can't see them spending the development $$ on a super system either.
Remember these are also big, heavy trucks.......................
In terms of the 4x4 mags ramp testing they are only an arbitary figure and mean bugger all out on the tracks. Sure an IFS has better clearance and can be an advantage in certain situations but the unsprung weight differences are the killer offroad especially for stability.

Bitsamissin wrote:C'mon Bruce my twin locked IFS Jabber will run rings around your live axle Truckster so what's the problem

thought you was converting it to real suspensino?

Area54 wrote:Like all systems that are 'improved' this adds in more complexity and more compromises. The Nissan engineers will no doubt have done their homework for the regular user, I suppose time will tell as to the durability for everyone else.

Dunno about this. Seriously most IFS systems are a LOT simpler than a 5 link.

It comes down to a couple of things - strength of CV's, max angles of CV's, and your ability to lift the car up.

The IFS on my vitara was definately NOT the biggest limiting factor - it was the weakness of the alloy front diff, then the gearing. The IFS itself was definately third on the list of weak points.

A point I was reminded of the other day when I (33"s and rear difflocked) was no better in most circumstances (except certain descents with the front dropping in) than an unlocked SWB vitara on 31"s.

IFS on a car with a decent sized stock tyre needs far less lift proportionally than my vitara needed (remember my tyre size jumped 20%) so I dont think most of us wheeling with 33"s or 35"s on a patrol would face that max lift issue.

You need to lift the car a lot less with IFS cos it travels vertically rather than pivots in - so there would be absolutely no point in a 6" spring lift on anything under a comp rig anyway.

The IFS on the vitara was very limited by the cv design and the shape and unnecessary length of the front third member - my old datsun 240Z independant rear had way longer CV's which could provide more travel than my vitara could. Jag guys would know this kind of thing too.

The biggest weakness in the vitara IFS is the alloy case and it's one assymetrical mount to the chassis - I dont think anyone will be stupid enough to copy this portion fo the design. Certainly IFS HIluxes are stronger and better designed, and can cope with more lift.

Strength of CV's - well you'd assume they'd use something at least as strong as the current one.


IFS has some advantages too - even off road. So long as it's done properly I dont see a real issue in it. For all the talk in some magazines about the LC100 being crap offroad cos it has IFS I dont see the ramp figures supporting it - nor do the less biased magazines find it a limitation either.

The potential for something bad would be that it's released "pradolike" with a lot of electronic gimmickery to hide a bad design which limits it's offroad ability.

As for the comp scene no-one will use them for a while - and then if they cant work out a way for the IFS to work they can just bolt mog axles under it anyway.

I do not understand what the fuss is about. My old Pathy never broke a diff or a cv joint. And I had it crancked pretty high. Using aftermarket upper wishbones of course (I think we all know how long it would have lasted it I didn't. Ball joints!). Plenty of groung clearence for the front diff. Too bad you still have a rear diff to deal with! These are not the problem areas of an ifs though. Sure, you get stuff all travel (no downward travel at all when cranked up) but a locker can compensate for that. Sure when you load them up the torsion bars sag but you can crank them back up no problem. The problem with all ifs systems is steering components sh@ting themselves all of the time. You can be sure that something will let go when the going gets too tough. Idler arm! Tie rod! Drag link! Over and over again it happens. Spend the bucks to fix it and it happens again. Sure, some models last a little longer than others, but ultimately, all that you need to do is add oversized tyres to find they are crap. That is why people put live axles in their 4wds.

I will never go back!

give me ifs and drop axles there's an idea.

hope its not torsion bar ifs - fark that my old mans 100 has sagged big time in the year that he has had it, and it has never been close to overloaded. they are shite. its like having a coil spring 25mm thick and 1 turn high

but you cant stop the sands of time

bru

I think the prevalance of torsion bar suspension (which is without doubt the most crap form of IFS) gives people bad ideas about how bad IFS really is for travel.

Especially when people just wind up stock torsion bars to get their 2" lift.

I have never broken an IFS part in all the time I wheeled the Vitara - despite the huge increase over factory loading on what's known to be a weaker system than other vehicles.

With the issues about insurance on modified vehicles becoming greater every year it's not gonna be too long before getting more than 2" lift on a road registered car is gonna cost you your left you know what in insurance.

GQ's were not particularly good in front suspension travel anyway. And that's even with the swaybars disconnected (illegal).



To suggest the porsche 936 is the only option and mega expensive you can try this instead... Porsche 930 is $55 US per CV......

This is something that I'm very interested in as I would like to retain my IFS. I feel something like a Calmini Anvil and new axles/CV 's would be ideal. The Porsche 930 inner CV is used by the Baja racers with extreme travel IFS with high horsepower. It offers a much higher operating angle and durability under load. They can be purchased in the US for USD$55.

930's allow up to 28 degrees of angle, continuously, in excess of 100mph, and they'll take more torque than any factory Toyota CV joint we've ever seen. They'll actually take more angle than the spec says at 28 degrees, we've run them at speed and under power up to about 35 or 40 degrees, but a special boot is required for that kind of use.
This is what we run, day in and day out, on the Rockstomper test truck, and they survive our 300 ft-lb V8 engine, 36" tires, and 123:1 crawl ratio, no problem Rockstomper

There's additional work you can do to lighten and polish components for further angle without binding if required.

By the way here's a shot of a toyota front end running this kind of setup.

System lasted 3 years of offroad racing and the A-arm was the final cause of failure of the setup.

In reality as long as the entire truck is over engineered like a patrol is now and the fundamental gearing etc is still there IFS can be overcome pretty easily.

Like Beastmavster has said it wasn't the biggest limiting factor to him. There are worse things they could go soft on