Why the level? Why the rake?

[Muffin1]

I have no evidence to back up my theory other than looking at pictures and knowing that manufacturers do make tweaks based on first runs. But I'm generally full of BS so take it with a pinch of salt!

ok got it thanks for the reply, I'll pass on the salt though lol..

Sponsored

 

[FunInTheSun]

Geometrically speaking, I thought if you raised the front end, with the vehicle rotating around the rear axle, it would lower the rear end. Anything behind the rear axle should be lower, everything in front of the rear axle should be higher. Kinda like a teeter totter, with the rear axle being the pivot point.

You are technically correct, but if you actually do the trigonometry, a 2" lift at the front axle (only), causes the rear bumper to drop only a little more than a half an inch, which would be challenging to even measure accurately, much less be noticeable.

Data: (Approximations, not exact)
Wheelbase = 127"
Rear Overhang = 48"
Axle Height = 15"

Bumper height before lift (assumed for estimation purposes) = 15"
Rear bumper height after lifting body 2" at front axle only = 14.4"
Difference is 0.6"

Apologies for the crappy artwork. Simplified diagram. Rangers are really much more aerodynamic than this...

 

[Ranger_Pawl]

You are technically correct, but if you actually do the trigonometry, a 2" lift at the front axle (only), causes the rear bumper to drop only a little more than a half an inch, which would be challenging to even measure accurately, much less be noticeable.

Data: (Approximations, not exact)
Wheelbase = 127"
Rear Overhang = 48"
Axle Height = 15"

Bumper height before lift (assumed for estimation purposes) = 15"
Rear bumper height after lifting body 2" at front axle only = 14.4"
Difference is 0.6"

Apologies for the crappy artwork. Simplified diagram. Rangers are really much more aerodynamic than this...

That looks correct Dave. I'm sure the drop in the rear is small, but I was implying that it would change the departure angle, a small amount too. Actually, that's a pretty good representation of what happens.

 

[rydfree]

Asking a serious question, are you sure about this? Reason I ask is I see this brought up all the time on here and B6G without any proof. If that were true then how/why does Ford get away from someone suing them on the Bronco with the Sasquatch package as it comes without crash bars? IIRC the Raptor doesn't have them either.

Different tire and wheel packages react differently in a crash . A smaller narrower tire would more likely push into the footwell area more so than a wider assembly . Height of the vehicle and other components affect the crash ratings also . Ford has the resources to test all of the combinations while the average user does not .

 

[AzScorpion]

Different tire and wheel packages react differently in a crash . A smaller narrower tire would more likely push into the footwell area more so than a wider assembly . Height of the vehicle and other components affect the crash ratings also . Ford has the resources to test all of the combinations while the average user does not .

So removing the crash bars and adding larger tires/wheels on the Ranger wouldn't be a liability it would be an asset. No reason for a lawsuit. ?

 

[AzScorpion]

1- Ford doesn't send vehicles for testing NHTSA selects them from their criteria. not all vehicles get tested.
2- do you really think Ford is going to even think about paying for testing of aftermarket wheel tire and suspension modifications? like for real? the combinations are endless, their pocket book isn't. that's the most asinine assumption i have heard on here.

I think he was referring to the testing of the larger tires/wheels on the Sasquatch package. Ford must have tested them and found they were safe without the crash bars in place. No where did he say they tested any aftermarket products.

 

[aeroshots]

You are technically correct, but if you actually do the trigonometry, a 2" lift at the front axle (only), causes the rear bumper to drop only a little more than a half an inch, which would be challenging to even measure accurately, much less be noticeable.

Data: (Approximations, not exact)
Wheelbase = 127"
Rear Overhang = 48"
Axle Height = 15"

Bumper height before lift (assumed for estimation purposes) = 15"
Rear bumper height after lifting body 2" at front axle only = 14.4"
Difference is 0.6"

Apologies for the crappy artwork. Simplified diagram. Rangers are really much more aerodynamic than this...

I don't know about all that fancy math stuff! ? My trailer hitch would contact the wall in my garage 2 inches lower after I raised/leveled the front. Still with a slight front down rake. To add to surprise, my former ram 1500 would contact the same wall even lower. Both with the same drop hitch extension.

 

[rydfree]

1- Ford doesn't send vehicles for testing NHTSA selects them from their criteria. not all vehicles get tested.
2- do you really think Ford is going to even think about paying for testing of aftermarket wheel tire and suspension modifications? like for real? the combinations are endless, their pocket book isn't. that's the most asinine assumption i have heard on here.

The most asinine assumption i have heard on here is the assumption you made regarding my post , LOL .

 

[rydfree]

So removing the crash bars and adding larger tires/wheels on the Ranger wouldn't be a liability it would be an asset. No reason for a lawsuit. ?

I owned a retail accessory shop for 20 years (Closed in 2008) . We did a lot of modifications but one thing we would never do was remove any type of safety device .

 

[rydfree]

I think he was referring to the testing of the larger tires/wheels on the Sasquatch package. Ford must have tested them and found they were safe without the crash bars in place. No where did he say they tested any aftermarket products.

I think he was referring to the testing of the larger tires/wheels on the Sasquatch package. Ford must have tested them and found they were safe without the crash bars in place. No where did he say they tested any aftermarket products.

Exactly . I should have said " Ford has the resources to test all of the combinations THEY OFFER while the average user does not . "

I suppose you can never be too clear

 

[D Fresh]

So removing the crash bars and adding larger tires/wheels on the Ranger wouldn't be a liability it would be an asset. No reason for a lawsuit. ?

With enough poke the quarter panel is your crash bar.

 

[AzScorpion]

I owned a retail accessory shop for 20 years (Closed in 2008) . We did a lot of modifications but one thing we would never do was remove any type of safety device .

I don't blame you especially today when so many are sue happy. This goes along the lines of beadlock wheels we were discussing. Are they illegal to drive on the roads, technically no but if something happens (bolts flying off) you're responsible. Also tire shops won't put these on your truck and let you drive off their lot with them for liability reasons. What you do after you leave is on you.

 

[landiscarrier]

I leveled for looks and ride improvement. Went with Eibach's all the way around. Personally I couldn't stand the raked look. But again...personally.

 

[Dgc333]

No. The tires will increase your clearance, the lift/level is irrelevant to clearance.

That is not exactly true. A lift/level on a Ranger will increase the clearance of anything that is attached to the frame. The clearance to the differential, front cross member, skid plates all increase when raise the front end by putting a spacer between the coil over and it's attaching point on the frame. The minimum clearance at the lower ball joint will not change but you will start to gain additional clearance on the lower control arms as you move towards the frame attaching point. This additional clearance could mean the difference between clearing an obstacle between the tires and getting hung up or scraping the bottom of the truck.

 

[JACKSMYDOG]

That is not exactly true. A lift/level on a Ranger will increase the clearance of anything that is attached to the frame. The clearance to the differential, front cross member, skid plates all increase when raise the front end by putting a spacer between the coil over and it's attaching point on the frame. The minimum clearance at the lower ball joint will not change but you will start to gain additional clearance on the lower control arms as you move towards the frame attaching point. This additional clearance could mean the difference between clearing an obstacle between the tires and getting hung up or scraping the bottom of the truck.

Clearance is a specific measurement from level ground to the lowest part of your vehicle.

Lift and level can increase approach angle, departure angle, cross over and maneuverability, but unless it raises the rear diff, will not change your clearance.

Clearance isn't if this or that gets more room, or if you can climb a hill you weren't able to before. It is specifically level ground clearance to the lowest point of your vehicle.

Edit for type-os bolded.

Sponsored