Dana 50 ifs from F250

[legoms013]

I never said it was a better setup in the rear of a truck than a solid axle. The rear axle on a real truck will always be SOLID, thats what makes it a truck. Solid axle is simple, and strong, and suited for a work vehicle. period end of story.

But I particularly didn't like what the one person said about "just let these axles die already" that was what I was referring to. TTB has special niche of the offroad crowd and I will be sad the day no one knows what TTB was and when it can no longer be found in junkyards.

TTB in the rear would be an interesting, and very original idea for a rear axle. That does not mean it should be on a hauling truck though as TTB has camber/castor issues with a load.

 

[gwaii]

I never said it was a better setup in the rear of a truck than a solid axle. The rear axle on a real truck will always be SOLID, thats what makes it a truck. Solid axle is simple, and strong, and suited for a work vehicle. period end of story.

But I particularly didn't like what the one person said about "just let these axles die already" that was what I was referring to. TTB has special niche of the offroad crowd and I will be sad the day no one knows what TTB was and when it can no longer be found in junkyards.

TTB in the rear would be an interesting, and very original idea for a rear axle. That does not mean it should be on a hauling truck though as TTB has camber/castor issues with a load.

i was thinking he was referring to the pic earlier in the thread of mine with the rear ttb.....though i could be wrong about that.

i know exactly what you mean about the attitude of some people concerning these systems,and the loaded camber issues is why i stated that it is not the best choice for an f350....these trucks are intended to haul large loads a large percentage of the time,not just on occasion as the ranger and f 150,and to a lesser extent the 250 are.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

i was thinking he was referring to the pic earlier in the thread of mine with the rear ttb.....though i could be wrong about that.

That along with the opening post of the thread.

 

[gwaii]

That along with the opening post of the thread.

jeez...i forgot about that!

had to go back and check to see what this thread started out as again

 

[KLAKEBRONCO]

One thing that helps close the gap in flexibility is in the newer low COG setups. Like my truck. A truck that has big tires, and isn't lifted very high doesn't have alot of uptravel. Bump stops have to be used to limit bottoming. When you do this much of the "articulation" is no longer "forced articulation" You are simply relying on the droop of the axle. Which the TTB does fine with.

Another plus is with this setup, running TTB allows the truck to be lower-big tires with 3" of lift. You can't SAS on the fullsize and only lift 3"

 

[1slow5oh]

I don't mind seeing them being used. And i'm sure some of you have done some amazing things with them. But by no means are they stock ttb's. And in my opinion upgrading with a solid axle is easier than a ttb, and for most budget minded people it is better. But just my opinion.

I do think they make some sweet ass looking front ends for fast moving off road wheeling like desert and fire roads....

But if the TTB would have never been thought out I'm pretty sure somebody would have designed something that would work just as well if not better.

One thing that helps close the gap in flexibility is in the newer low COG setups. Like my truck. A truck that has big tires, and isn't lifted very high doesn't have alot of uptravel. Bump stops have to be used to limit bottoming. When you do this much of the "articulation" is no longer "forced articulation" You are simply relying on the droop of the axle. Which the TTB does fine with.

Another plus is with this setup, running TTB allows the truck to be lower-big tires with 3" of lift. You can't SAS on the fullsize and only lift 3"

I see no reason anyone cant SAS a full size and only have 3" of lift, besides full size trucks have been coming with solid axles for years.....I'm guessing your limiting factor is the center section? Because really the rest is pretty identical....But it is not much larger than a ttb center.....
My ranger is sitting at 5" of lift with 39.5's and I could have went lower with the 60 center not hitting anything(with 351w and 7qt oil pan.... Just tires meeting fender wells.....Which wouldn't change no matter what axle I am using....

 

[huggyb1972]

I like the Idea of TTB it's a all Ford idea but I did SAS my FSB. My Ranger on the other hand will be a TTB setup but I have not set on which one but I am looking at air ride as a possibility due to lack of weight.

 

[KLAKEBRONCO]

I don't mind seeing them being used. And i'm sure some of you have done some amazing things with them. But by no means are they stock ttb's. And in my opinion upgrading with a solid axle is easier than a ttb, and for most budget minded people it is better. But just my opinion.

I do think they make some sweet ass looking front ends for fast moving off road wheeling like desert and fire roads....

But if the TTB would have never been thought out I'm pretty sure somebody would have designed something that would work just as well if not better.




I see no reason anyone cant SAS a full size and only have 3" of lift, besides full size trucks have been coming with solid axles for years.....I'm guessing your limiting factor is the center section? Because really the rest is pretty identical....But it is not much larger than a ttb center.....
My ranger is sitting at 5" of lift with 39.5's and I could have went lower with the 60 center not hitting anything(with 351w and 7qt oil pan.... Just tires meeting fender wells.....Which wouldn't change no matter what axle I am using....

4" is about the bare minimum lift, and that is with a D44 solid axle. Which is going backwards in strength vs the 44/50/60 hybrid TTB.

I guess 3" with a D60 might be possible but it would take removing the entire engine/TTB crossmember and fabbing a new one.

 

[lepp1892]

Hmm... What if you don't want a steering TTB axle out back... would it be possible just to weld the knuckles to the arms? I think it would be very interesting to see how that setup would do....

 

[gwaii]

Hmm... What if you don't want a steering TTB axle out back... would it be possible just to weld the knuckles to the arms? I think it would be very interesting to see how that setup would do....

you wouldnt weld the knuckles,you would just use solid mounted tie rods.this would also allow adjustment of rear toe and toe change characteristics.

 

[1slow5oh]

I guess you have done all of these because you seem to know for sure....

Maybe were comparing apples to oranges here....I can tell you that I can lower the front of my ranger roughly 6 more inches before the center comes close to the cross member... But I wouldn't have any up travel at all and the tires would be at the hood. I don't think pumpkin to cross member is the limiting factor in more peoples minds, as it was not in mine because its been modded as you said....But I guess some people would rather build a TTB whatever than modify the cross member. I went the latter route, moved the front end forward about 4, mostly to improve approach angle, and modified the cross member.
So instead of spending money I dont have on an weaker setup, I went bigger and moved stuff around a little.

Either way..... You can have your TTB and ill take a d60 and be done with it...

4" is about the bare minimum lift, and that is with a D44 solid axle. Which is going backwards in strength vs the 44/50/60 hybrid TTB.

I guess 3" with a D60 might be possible but it would take removing the entire engine/TTB crossmember and fabbing a new one.

 

[86 slo-vo]

I guess you have done all of these because you seem to know for sure....

Maybe were comparing apples to oranges here....I can tell you that I can lower the front of my ranger roughly 6 more inches before the center comes close to the cross member... But I wouldn't have any up travel at all and the tires would be at the hood. I don't think pumpkin to cross member is the limiting factor in more peoples minds, as it was not in mine because its been modded as you said....But I guess some people would rather build a TTB whatever than modify the cross member. I went the latter route, moved the front end forward about 4, mostly to improve approach angle, and modified the cross member.
So instead of spending money I dont have on an weaker setup, I went bigger and moved stuff around a little.

Either way..... You can have your TTB and ill take a d60 and be done with it...

different strokes for different folks, most people bah the ttb because they dont know how to work it...it can be everybit as strong as the d60

there are several guys on pirate putting d50ttb's and one off custom ttb's in highpowered buggy's

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

My biggest peeve is that it doesn't really take much for it to be a fairly crappy plow... either for snow or mud. The thing hangs down pretty low.

 

[86 slo-vo]

with a cut and turn you ca gain alot of GC

 

[gwaii]

i wish i still had my pics from that hard drive....i built a 6'' lift d50ttb cut and turn on an f250 that used the stock height brackets(and longer d44 arms)that had more clearance under the pumpkin than you usually get under the beam.
it looked(and rode)like a prerunner.had to use a cv in the center joint to get the angle needed for the axle,though.