Lowest SAS? - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


Suspension Tech General discussion of suspension for the Ford Ranger.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 02-18-2007
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Richmond, ME
Posts: 12
Lowest SAS?

Anyone have any idea the minimum lift required to do an SAS on a '99. Funny question I know, but I'd like to do one for 33s and 4" lift max...possible?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-18-2007
jtslmn720's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Kent State, Kent Ohio
Posts: 7,367
you couild probably do stock height if you really wanted... just have to get small leafs/coils....


only problem i see that might arise though is with the solid axle, if its not far enough from the engine bay it may cause damage if you articulate it enough...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-18-2007
jrpro130's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4X2XLT
you couild probably do stock height if you really wanted... just have to get small leafs/coils....


only problem i see that might arise though is with the solid axle, if its not far enough from the engine bay it may cause damage if you articulate it enough...
For example, take the ford excursion suspension.

They have about 3" of uptravel before the bumpstop. (when stock). You can't even see the axle when you look at the truck dead on, it's very tucked up.

Now of course you could get about 1" of lift from stock, but I'm sure you could ride nearly stock height if you REALLY wanted to.


Anything can be done, it's just a matter of tools/time/experience!!!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-18-2007
telemaster1952's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dover, Deleware
Posts: 3,481
i wouldnt waste my time on a SAS if you are going to keep it that low
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-18-2007
l2en's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Keystone State
Posts: 4,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by telemaster1952
i wouldnt waste my time on a SAS if you are going to keep it that low
If I were to do an SAS, I'd only run 35"s with enough lift to clear the tires all the way around.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-18-2007
ScottG's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lewiston, Maine
Posts: 4,926
ive seen pics of a ranger with the front axle as a spring under axle (similar to a explorer's rear setup) and that took alot of the lift away
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-18-2007
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by telemaster1952
i wouldnt waste my time on a SAS if you are going to keep it that low
It's still beneficial. Not sure why you'd say that actually.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-18-2007
telemaster1952's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dover, Deleware
Posts: 3,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by n3elz
It's still beneficial. Not sure why you'd say that actually.
if you arent going to lift it, why put all the custom work into a SAS when the indep would be just fine lifted a few inches and prob ride nicer on the road.

i might be missing something, but im not sure how it would be benefitial to change what already works?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-18-2007
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: College Station, TX
Posts: 5,782
Jeeps are still very capable in stock form with solid axles and spring-under-axle setups, so a ranger with mild lift and 33s should be just as capable with a solid axle under there. You will want to be careful with your bumpstops though because you do not want your axle to be able to articulate up into the bottom of your engine! It certainly CAN be done.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-18-2007
telemaster1952's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dover, Deleware
Posts: 3,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by l2en
If I were to do an SAS, I'd only run 35"s with enough lift to clear the tires all the way around.
that makes sense to me, but 33's can fit without a problem without a TON of lift


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gearhead61
Jeeps are still very capable in stock form with solid axles and spring-under-axle setups, so a ranger with mild lift and 33s should be just as capable with a solid axle under there. You will want to be careful with your bumpstops though because you do not want your axle to be able to articulate up into the bottom of your engine! It certainly CAN be done.
thats most of what i was thinking, but then again jeeps dont come with independent suspension up front
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-18-2007
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Richmond, ME
Posts: 12
The main reason I'm asking is because by previous vehicle, a 4" lifted '92 on 33s has been retired to plow vehicle status. I don't do a whole lot of wheeling anymore being an adult building a house and maybe a garage this summer. In any event, the Explorer will handle a steel plow fine, but the new B4000 ('99), maybe not so much. I always wanted to do an SAS on the Explorer, but at this point its on its way out (250K, starting to rust bad after a few Maine winters). I figure the B4000 with SAS would be a mean plowing machine so if it's possible to keep it under 4" with SAS, that'll help me choose a steel plow instead of a plastic one.

Plus it'll just be a fun project that I've always wanted to do you know...:)

Anyway, if anyone comes across some pics of a low slung SAS please, post them in here as well, or a link. Thanks for all the info.

Last edited by JCByrd24; 02-18-2007 at 02:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-18-2007
l2en's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Keystone State
Posts: 4,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by telemaster1952
that makes sense to me, but 33's can fit without a problem without a TON of lift
You don't need a ton of lift. There's not SAS kit that you buy lol. It's as high as you design/build it to be. I wouldn't mind SAS'ing my truck if I have it long enough to turn 150k miles and the front end is all phukt. I wouldn't be running 37's or 38's like most guys do though. The SAS is alot more resiliant and simpler than the IFS. I'd love to have a SFA, I just don't have a need/time/energy for it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-18-2007
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
im pushing it to the minimum lift.

i only have about 6"-8" of uptravel before i hit the frame
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-18-2007
HarryTasker's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,491
I only have about 6 inches also and I am running 31's.






It isn't so much that if you do a SAS you have to lift the truck up high, as people that want to jack their trucks way up have to do a SAS.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-18-2007
redranger4.0's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Firey depths
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard
im pushing it to the minimum lift.

i only have about 6"-8" of uptravel before i hit the frame

your way beyond minimum lift. 6-8" of up travel is alot. my sas is shooting for 3-4" of uptravel
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-18-2007
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
well im only an inch or so. if it hits at 6" ill prolly limit it to 5, 5" seems like alot anyways, shouldnt ever need more then that.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-18-2007
brianjwilson's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 3,650
Depends on what sort of driving you're doing. But for street driving/rock crawling 3-4" of uptravel should be fine. I wouldn't want to do much of anything at highspeed like that though (dunes for example). There are plenty of advantages to SAS'ing a truck even if you don't want a huge amount of lift. It's generally stronger, simpler, and articulates better. Ideally if I were to SAS my truck I would run 33's, maybe 35's max. I like the idea of the adjustable coils lake zach is doing, and setting the minimum height to 3.5" of uptravel, max height at 6" of uptravel. Run straps and 1.5" stroke airbumps or something.
I'd love to ditch my bodylift and sas with fiberglass fenders and 35's, minimal lift.

redranger, how much lift over stock will you sit with 3-4" of uptravel? What is the first contact point on the axle? Is it the axle tube on the frame, pumpkin on the oil pan, or control arms on the frame?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-18-2007
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by telemaster1952
if you arent going to lift it, why put all the custom work into a SAS when the indep would be just fine lifted a few inches and prob ride nicer on the road.

i might be missing something, but im not sure how it would be benefitial to change what already works?
A lot more flex (IFS sucks bad on flex) even with stock height. Think of Jeep Wranglers and how well they perform at stock height and you'll figure it out, lol.

Independent suspension can't conform as well on terrain and it's easier to lift a wheel and lose traction. Especially with an open front diff, a flexy SAS is far superior to the stock or lifted stock IFS.

If you are correct in your reasoning, no one would bother wheeling a Wrangler since that solid front axle isn't any better than IFS -- but the fact is it's far superior offroad and so would a SAS'd Ranger even without additional lift.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-19-2007
redranger4.0's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Firey depths
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianjwilson

redranger, how much lift over stock will you sit with 3-4" of uptravel? What is the first contact point on the axle? Is it the axle tube on the frame, pumpkin on the oil pan, or control arms on the frame?

My upper 3 link arm is going to be what contacts first i think. Its going to have an 8" tall link tower off the tube. Another problem I ran into with going so low is that my upper arm is going on the passenger side, which means I have the exhaust routing to deal with. It looks like im going to be making a whole new exhuast so that I can fit my chassis side link mount in.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-19-2007
gatorblue92's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Delaware
Posts: 8,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by l2en
If I were to do an SAS, I'd only run 35"s with enough lift to clear the tires all the way around.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-19-2007
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
That's what I'll be doing. Too much lift can be a problem especially on the street. It think it contributed to Ben's (Ranger1's) rollover. He had the coilover lift plus the body lift and it was quite tall. Really big looks great and for some things it is great -- but overall with a daily driver I think it's a potential problem.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-19-2007
redranger4.0's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Firey depths
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by n3elz
That's what I'll be doing. Too much lift can be a problem especially on the street. It think it contributed to Ben's (Ranger1's) rollover. He had the coilover lift plus the body lift and it was quite tall. Really big looks great and for some things it is great -- but overall with a daily driver I think it's a potential problem.

Not only for a DD but for a truck thats going to see any serious trail time its a good idea to keep it as low as possible.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
whats the lowest psi i can go? on a p235 75r 15x8? Ranger_EDGE Wheels & Tires Semi-Tech 6 06-19-2011 08:15 PM
Fallback 2010 show and lowest truck limbo <TX>TORKiT Snapshots 7 11-17-2010 10:34 PM
Lowest Price source for Ford Truck Parts? 93-4cyl-Ranger General Ford Ranger Discussion 5 09-07-2010 06:59 PM
Lowest Ranger ive ever seen HighRollerII General Ford Ranger Discussion 42 08-04-2007 11:49 PM
lowest Edge i'v ever seen Skyjacker_44 General Ford Ranger Discussion 6 01-25-2006 05:37 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:53 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.