# ifs chevy owners



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

how many of you guys and gals run a chevy ifs truck.

do you use the truck to plow?

have you tried using timbrens?

does the front end still feel weak for a plow??

does anyone wish you could firm up the front end with out wearing out parts.


what kind of parts have you tried to stiffen your front ends up?


----------



## BigLou80 (Feb 25, 2008)

bogginboy;869179 said:


> how many of you guys and gals run a chevy ifs truck.


1 I can only be sure of me, maybe some one else will be better at counting



bogginboy;869179 said:


> do you use the truck to plow?


yes



bogginboy;869179 said:


> have you tried using timbrens?


yes



bogginboy;869179 said:


> does the front end still feel weak for a plow??


no but I have no frame of reference



bogginboy;869179 said:


> does anyone wish you could firm up the front end with out wearing out parts.


after 168K and 7 years the only front end parts that have worn out are break pads and wheel barings both were easily changed



bogginboy;869179 said:


> what kind of parts have you tried to stiffen your front ends up?


other then timbrens none. my truck seems to do fine holding up the plow as long as I have enough ballast


----------



## caddytruck89 (Oct 12, 2008)

I guess i dont really understand why everone questions IFS and solid axles?? The spring/torsion bar is what holds the weight. I have a 2007 silverado (coilovers) . It plows fine!! 7.5 western midweight on it. Dodge and ford solid axle use colisprings to hold the weight. The spring rate is what holds the weight.


----------



## GMC Sierra (Nov 10, 2009)

Why is the Chevy IFS so controversial? I have a 1997 K1500...love the truck. Holds a 7.5 Meyer very well with no additional equipment (i.e timbrens). I have not messed with my t-bars either. IFS is the way to go....better ride, durable, T- bars are stout, virtually no maintenance. Ever see a 1997 Ford 1/2 ton with a plow an no mods on the front end, you can see the coil springs"grunting" and the tires towed out big time. If that does not convince you IFS is the way to go, I am not sure what will. T bars are no maintenance, and vey few failures from my research/reading. Long live the IFS and T-bars.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

I've ran IFS for years. Under rated trucks with way too heavy of plows and never an issue. Barely any squat. Timbrens on 1 truck but namely b/s its 2wd, and I had them on the shelf. Other than that I don't worry about it and barely get any sag whatsoever when I pick the blades up. Trucks that get loaded up day after day and husled every time out, for multiple hours at a time.

Agreed on the "questionable" IFS. It's for the Ford and Dodge guys to have something to say b/c its not a SFA. They have no problems and yet get a bad rap. 88-current, I'd say if it was such a poor design, it would have been changed by now. Not to mention Ford jumped on the wagon with their half ton trucks 9 years later. 

It's as if SD Ford hubs, tie rod assy's, ball joints, brakes, etc don't go bad WAY too often, and don't even get me started about Dodges sweet front ends, especially on plow trucks. Every Dodge I buy to flip needs the front end gone through to tighten it up (and that track bar and tie rod assy isn't cheap), or to even get the wheels to sit straight up and down. Lets not forget the trusty Dodge front diff actuator.......vacuum?!?!?!? Come on. Same goes with Ford hubs and front u-joints.


----------



## Jack33 (Sep 7, 2008)

I have a 1/2 ton

Yes, 7.5 ft Fisher

I have them in the rear. Does that count?

Doesn't feel weak, but they do sit too low compared to the other 2. Its a cushy ride but feels like a Caddy after driving my 3/4 Dodge.

All front ends eventually wear out with a plow.

I haven't tried to upgrade anything, I'll worry about them when they break.


----------



## TLB (Jan 19, 2007)

Jack33;869723 said:


> All front ends eventually wear out with a plow.
> 
> I haven't tried to upgrade anything, I'll worry about them when they break.


I agree. Why spend the money if you don't need too.


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

the reason i asked is cause i have a new fix in the works. im not stranger to working trucks, plowing or wheeling. ive had them al except fords. my shock supplier and i have been working on getting a shock to take the place of the stock shock. the shock that is going in will be fully adjustable in terms of oil levels and weights, nitrogen levels and ride height. the main thing to remember is that ifs trucks when cranked will wear out front end parts. pitmen arms ball joints, tires, and the list goes on plus its not a tuneable ride. the shock that we are working with is designed to be used to hold the weight of a truck up by its self. no need for torsion bars or coil springs. the PRO of this is that you can fine tune the ride with around 5 minutes of work between each shock. you can have a firm ride in the winter so that it will ride like a factory truck with the plow on, take some air out in the summer and it will like a factory truck again. the big key point is it can lift the front end of a truck by it self so i cant stress enough it is complete tuneable.


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

TLB;869745 said:


> I agree. Why spend the money if you don't need too.


i spend the money cause there is no time for broken parts in the field. when you are out working and something goes to hell thats lost money and potential a contract. why take the chances. also it is preventaive maitness. why let things go to the point that they break. please be sure to send me a pm so i wont have to worry about buying your used and abused trucks in the future. with that being said why change the oil and filter. i dont think that it has to be changed. its all to have less problems down the road right. i for one dont like the rake of a factory truck. ya i use my trucks but it spends more times unloaded then loaded lately. i can deal with the aft rake when its working. you need to find a balance point and go from there.


----------



## ABES (Jun 10, 2007)

Love my IFS chevy. Holds the plow great actually I get just under 1/2" front end drop when I raise the plow. Front end has 165,000 on it and the only parts gone bad are 1 CV shaft (torn boot) 1 pitman arm and 1 wheel bearing assy. Upgrading the torsion bars are a great option if you plan on running a large plow.


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

no offence but most people who have replied are running half ton trucks. personaly i run a duramax. plus a 8 foot plow. i also have had 9.2 v plows and it sinks the front end to much. the weight of the duramax and the plow are far more then the home owner model plows. no offence at all. wait till some of the deisel owns pop in here. there is also another member that i have talked with that said he would be very very interested in these so he could run the duramax again. the plows are just to much for these trucks ( or so the factory says)



i personly like to maintain my trucks and the factory ride quality with the plow on as some of my past accounts are across town.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

Did you not read my sig or my post? I've been running the same setup since Dmaxes came out. My 01 with 254k has been a plow truck its entire life.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

And the shock thing has been done, both nitrogen and air. The air bag ones are slick, but not worth the $$ and leak eventually, and the reason I didn't mention them. Its also not a factory load bearing point on the frame so I'd imagine long term would result in stress cracks.


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

bogginboy;869747 said:


> the reason i asked is cause i have a new fix in the works.
> 
> Wish I could say I didn't see that coming.
> 
> ...


Sounds like an adjustable Torsion Bar suspension system to me. All the GM IFS trucks already have this.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

And drivibility for going across town? I wish I had that luxury!!!

And offence=offense 

And finally, you asked about the IFS system in general, and that's the crowd that came to help. You didn't reuqest a specific year, make, or model. The earlier model half ton guys are simply stressing the amount of weight they can take and still handle weight well with a half ton truck, and for years without consiquences. I personally can't count the amount of 88-98 trucks I've beaten to death, plows up front, and sold the trucks with high miles and all original suspension parts.


----------



## Philbilly2 (Aug 25, 2007)

Looks like you got this one covered Bill!!!

As for plowing with a duramax with a blade, just in the group of trucks that we are running around with I can count:

1- Extended cab with 8 foot western
1- Crew cab with 8 foot western
1- Regular Cab with 8.6 foot western
2- Extended Cab with 8.6 foot western
2- Crew Cab with 8.6 foot western
2- Crew Cab with 9 foot western
1- Crew Cab with western wideout

As for front end parts, stick you head into the truck pulling circuit. You can alot about how to make a Chevy front end handle ALOT. My trucks get cognito braces and tie rod sleeves in the summer for sled pulling to keep the wheels stright in 4wd. Turns out that these same braces have caused my trucks to never go through front end parts carrying a large plow blade around all winter long.
http://hendersonslineup.com/uncategorized/idler-pitman-brace-kit/

All I can say is if replacing a idler or pitman arm, or a ball joint every few years is the worst that happens, I will take it.

I like the ride of a Chevy you dodge and ford guys can have your lumber wagons.


----------



## Jack33 (Sep 7, 2008)

bogginboy;869775 said:


> no offence but most people who have replied are running half ton trucks. personaly i run a duramax. plus a 8 foot plow. i also have had 9.2 v plows and it sinks the front end to much. the weight of the duramax and the plow are far more then the home owner model plows. no offence at all. wait till some of the deisel owns pop in here. there is also another member that i have talked with that said he would be very very interested in these so he could run the duramax again. the plows are just to much for these trucks ( or so the factory says)
> 
> i personly like to maintain my trucks and the factory ride quality with the plow on as some of my past accounts are across town.


Sorry, you should have stated that only the Dmax guys need to reply. Most of us maintain our trucks. But, myself and most others do not replace parts needlessly.


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

no i asked for all. to me the gm ifs system is far under the straight axle trucks. i to enjoy a good riding truck but i cannt ask for much climbing into a 3.4 ton truck. the duramax comment was cause the engine is so damn heavy.


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

bogginboy;870232 said:


> no i asked for all. to me* the gm ifs system is far under the straight axle *trucks. i to enjoy a good riding truck but i cannt ask for much climbing into a 3.4 ton truck. the duramax comment was cause the engine is so damn heavy.


I thought the axle hung lower on the SFA trucks....


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

sorry i should of worded that differently. i mean the straight front axle trucks imo are far superior to the ifs.

but the ifs does ride ahell of alot better then the sa trucks,
.


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

bogginboy;870472 said:


> i mean the straight front axle trucks imo are far superior to the ifs.


In what ways_ in your opinion_? Please be detailed.


----------



## Philbilly2 (Aug 25, 2007)

Come on B&B, lets count togther!

Well, lets see,...

motor... nope,...

trans...nope,

ride quality...nope

interior comfort...nope

cab quietness... nope

LOL but they got a stright front axle... *JUNK* :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

got-h2o;869621 said:


> Not to mention Ford jumped on the wagon with their half ton trucks 9 years later.


I dont know what year your talking but i had a 89 f-250 with IFS. Ford in the f-250s had IFS from i think 87 to 97. Only on the 250 the 350s had SFA. Then in 99 when the superduty came out all 250s and up had SFA. So if IFS is so good why did ford go back to the SFA???

As far as work and taking a beating the SFA has it all over the IFS. Ever been to a truck pulls. Look at the chevys when they pull they are knowed to brake tie rod ends and all kinda of stuff. Also i see alot of guys swamp out the IFS for SFA. Just giving my 2cents thats all,


----------



## carl b (Dec 28, 2006)

bogginboy;870472 said:


> sorry i should of worded that differently. i mean the straight front axle trucks imo are far superior to the ifs.
> 
> but the ifs does ride ahell of alot better then the sa trucks,
> .





B&B;870476 said:


> In what ways_ in your opinion_? Please be detailed.


B&B Thank you,

I have 300 K on my old 94 . she has never had anything go wrong up front . held a 7.5 wings . for 15 years now I still would plow with her any day .

Now, If you said I have a fix for the front frame I would be happy to hear that. I have seen lots of the 88 - 99 Chevy rott the front frames out .


----------



## Philbilly2 (Aug 25, 2007)

Mackman;870556 said:


> I dont know what year your talking but i had a 89 f-250 with IFS. Ford in the f-250s had IFS from i think 87 to 97. Only on the 250 the 350s had SFA. Then in 99 when the superduty came out all 250s and up had SFA. So if IFS is so good why did ford go back to the SFA???
> 
> As far as work and taking a beating the SFA has it all over the IFS. Ever been to a truck pulls. Look at the chevys when they pull they are knowed to brake tie rod ends and all kinda of stuff. Also i see alot of guys swamp out the IFS for SFA. Just giving my 2cents thats all,


You know why you get to see the solid front axle trucks pull... becuse they actually go slow enough to watch them! :salute: Notice how the chevy transmissions stay togther... and oh yeah... how about head studs???


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

Philbilly2;870574 said:


> You know why you get to see the solid front axle trucks pull... becuse they actually go slow enough to watch them! :salute: Notice how the chevy transmissions stay togther... and oh yeah... how about head studs???


I thought this was about front axles??? Have nothing to say about your great IFS??:laughing:


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

Mackman;870556 said:


> As far as work and taking a beating the SFA has it all over the IFS. Ever been to a truck pulls. Look at the chevys when they pull they are knowed to brake tie rod ends and all kinda of stuff. Just giving my 2cents thats all,


What does a tie rod have to do with suspension? Haven't seen a solid axle truck yet that didn't have tie rods either. Did GM run an undersized for the job tie rod? Yep they sure did but has nothing to do with the suspension design being IFS.

I've broken plenty of tie rods on a solid axle truck too.


----------



## tuna (Nov 2, 2002)

Jack33;869723 said:


> I have a 1/2 ton
> 
> Yes, 7.5 ft Fisher
> 
> ...


I don`t think you have torsion bars in the rear,if you do you have one special truck.


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

B&B;870587 said:


> What does a tie rod have to do with suspension? Haven't seen a solid axle truck yet that didn't have tie rods either. Did GM run an undersized for the job tie rod? Yep they sure did but has nothing to do with the suspension design being IFS.
> 
> I've broken plenty of tie rods on a solid axle truck too.


Im no experet on IFS. But besides the ride what is better??


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

tuna;870597 said:


> I don`t think you have torsion bars in the rear,if you do you have one special truck.


Timbrens not T-bars.


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

Mackman;870599 said:


> Im no experet on IFS. But besides the ride what is better??


Beside ride quality (and easy adjustability) and good turning radius who said it was better?


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

tuna;870597 said:


> I don`t think you have torsion bars in the rear,if you do you have one special truck.


Timbrens are also available for leaf spring setups, which he would have out back for stock suspension.


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

B&B;870604 said:


> Beside ride quality (and easy adjustability) and good turning radius who said it was better?


Well chevy must think it is better then a SFA. Ford and dodge must think a SFA is better then IFS. So one has to be better lol.


----------



## tuna (Nov 2, 2002)

B&B;870600 said:


> Timbrens not T-bars.


Sorry ,I missunderstood the post.


----------



## BigLou80 (Feb 25, 2008)

B&B;870604 said:


> Beside ride quality (and easy adjustability) and good turning radius who said it was better?


you forgot it lets the truck sit lower, which allows better visibility. I can actually see parts of my plow when its down


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

Mackman;870615 said:


> Well chevy must think it is better then a SFA. Ford and dodge must think a SFA is better then IFS. So one has to be better lol.


For good ride quality, easy adjustably and good turning radius they do. And hence why they went to and stuck with it.


----------



## cubicinches (Oct 19, 2008)

Mackman;870556 said:


> I dont know what year your talking but i had a 89 f-250 with IFS. Ford in the f-250s had IFS from i think 87 to 97. Only on the 250 the 350s had SFA. Then in 99 when the superduty came out all 250s and up had SFA. So if IFS is so good why did ford go back to the SFA???


I would have to say that Ford went back to a straight axle because even THEY realized that their own twin I beam IFS was a piss poor excuse for a truck suspension. There was nothing good about Ford's twin I beam IFS... nothing.


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

cubicinches;870652 said:


> I would have to say that Ford went back to a straight axle because even THEY realized that their own twin I beam IFS was a piss poor excuse for a truck suspension. There was nothing good about Ford's twin I beam IFS... nothing.


I agree 110%


----------



## cubicinches (Oct 19, 2008)

Mackman;870556 said:


> As far as work and taking a beating the SFA has it all over the IFS.


I always get a kick out of that logic. I have one Dodge in my fleet. It is a good truck, but I've put more money into repairs on that "big tough" front end than I've put into every one of my Chevy front ends combined. That's not an exaggeration. GM CV axles typically outlast the whole rest of the truck. Let's not even talk about the axle joints in straight axle trucks. 

Now that's just the durability part... to say nothing of the superior traction of the IFS.


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

I find that hard to believe. IFS has alot more to brake then a SFA. Maybe cuz its a dodge:laughing:


----------



## OhioPlower (Jan 13, 2004)

The 05+ super dutys have a turning radius comparable to IFS trucks


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

OhioPlower;870740 said:


> The 05+ super dutys have a turning radius comparable to IFS trucks


Shame it took them 17 years to do it.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

Mackman;870697 said:


> I find that hard to believe. * IFS has alot more to brake *then a SFA. Maybe cuz its a dodge:laughing:


Yet they don't................................and it's break, not brake 

You've apparantly never opened up the can of worms that is a Ford front end...........yet.


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

Mackman;870697 said:


> I find that hard to believe. IFS has alot more to brake then a SFA. Maybe cuz its a dodge:laughing:


Really? Let's compare -

Ball Joints - Both styles have two per side
Tie Rod Ends - Both styles have one at each end
Wheel Bearings - Both styles have one per side
Axle/CV Joints - One U-joint for SFA, One CV shaft for IFS

Before all you SFA "knuckle heads:laughing:" get fired up, I realize the IFS steering system is slightly more complex. Three additional pivot points, the idler arm and pitman arm. Center link equals out drag link. And I also realize the CV Shaft has TWO joints compared to the SFA single U-joint.


----------



## got-h2o (Sep 26, 2008)

And, why is it of all the pullers and drag racers, the CV assy's are the last thing that anyone worries about breaking?!?!? Imagine the torque to those baby's during a spooled 4wd launch. Stock shafts on every one I know of.


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

I have NEVER heard of anyone having a CV shaft complete failure.


----------



## mkwl (Jan 21, 2005)

got-h2o;869621 said:


> I've ran IFS for years. Under rated trucks with way too heavy of plows and never an issue. Barely any squat. Timbrens on 1 truck but namely b/s its 2wd, and I had them on the shelf. Other than that I don't worry about it and barely get any sag whatsoever when I pick the blades up. Trucks that get loaded up day after day and husled every time out, for multiple hours at a time.
> 
> Agreed on the "questionable" IFS. It's for the Ford and Dodge guys to have something to say b/c its not a SFA. They have no problems and yet get a bad rap. 88-current, I'd say if it was such a poor design, it would have been changed by now. Not to mention Ford jumped on the wagon with their half ton trucks 9 years later.
> 
> It's as if SD Ford hubs, tie rod assy's, ball joints, brakes, etc don't go bad WAY too often, and don't even get me started about Dodges sweet front ends, especially on plow trucks. Every Dodge I buy to flip needs the front end gone through to tighten it up (and that track bar and tie rod assy isn't cheap), or to even get the wheels to sit straight up and down. Lets not forget the trusty Dodge front diff actuator.......vacuum?!?!?!? Come on. Same goes with Ford hubs and front u-joints.


Very well put- my truck holds its plow jsut fine without Tibrens- T-bars cranked a bit, a little ballast and it doesn't drop much- holds a 800Lb plow with no issue. I've found that when you look at GM trucks versus Ford and Dodge- while the ford and dodge may "look" tough- sit taller than a GM truck, look deeper than that- their frames are lesser than the HD GM trucks- and as stated above- their front ends have issues as well. Not to mention Ford and Dodge's real "winner" auto trannies :laughing:

Go GM and don't look back!ussmileyflag


----------



## OhioPlower (Jan 13, 2004)

B&B;870747 said:


> Shame it took them 17 years to do it.


They still did it though, thats all that counts haha. I wasnt picking a side, just throwing that out there.


----------



## caddytruck89 (Oct 12, 2008)

Im still puzzled. What does the style of axle have to do with the ability to plow?? Doesn't the spring (in what ever form you choose) support the weight of the truck and it's components?? wouldnt a ifs 1ton "hold" a plow better than a 1/2 ton sfa with say coilsprings???


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

caddytruck89;870875 said:


> Im still puzzled. What does the style of axle have to do with the ability to plow?? Doesn't the spring (in what ever form you choose) support the weight of the truck and it's components?? wouldnt a ifs 1ton "hold" a plow better than a 1/2 ton sfa with say coilsprings???


We have a winner and a very intelligent person. :salute:


----------



## JD Dave (Mar 20, 2007)

B&B;870891 said:


> We have a winner and a very intelligent person. :salute:


Your on crack a SFA is 20x better then IFS.
















Need I say more. LOL


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

Them videos made my night LOL:laughing:


----------



## caddytruck89 (Oct 12, 2008)

Could i find some videos of u-joints on a s/a breaking ? Sure i could. Tie rod breaking??? Wow.... What does pulling a sled have to do with this post?? Are we not talking about pushing some snow? Which in my neck of the woods usually doesnt amount to more than a couple inches at a time. I dont think that anyone was disputing that pulling a sled in a "tractor" pull is better left to a truck with a solid front axle. Does that make it better???.............yeah at pulling a sled.


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

JD Dave;870907 said:


> Your on crack a SFA is 20x better then IFS.


Odd, didn't see any SUSPENSION component problems. All I see are weak tie rod issues...and we already covered that.


----------



## JD Dave (Mar 20, 2007)

caddytruck89;870921 said:


> Could i find some videos of u-joints on a s/a breaking ? Sure i could. Tie rod breaking??? Wow.... What does pulling a sled have to do with this post?? Are we not talking about pushing some snow? Which in my neck of the woods usually doesnt amount to more than a couple inches at a time.


I forgot this was a Plowsite and I was just showing some video's of the superior IFS suspension from GM. Feel free to post your vids and while your at it check out my sig.


----------



## JD Dave (Mar 20, 2007)

B&B;870924 said:


> Odd, didn't see any SUSPENSION component problems. All I see are weak tie rod issues...and we already covered that.


Damn you!! I guess I'll keep my GM's, I couldn't imagine driving or plowing with anything else.


----------



## caddytruck89 (Oct 12, 2008)

Does any one have any videos of ifs trucks jumping and hopping arround while plow snow, with pieces and parts flying out from under them?? LOL Isn't it amazing the kind of fight a man will put up for his truck!! His wife of 25yrs...............not so much


----------



## JD Dave (Mar 20, 2007)

caddytruck89;870931 said:


> Does any one have any videos of ifs trucks jumping and hopping arround while plow snow, with pieces and parts flying out from under them?? LOL Isn't it amazing the kind of fight a man will put up for his truck!! His wife of 25yrs...............not so much


If that's your wife in your avatar and you've been together 25 years, you deserve a medal.


----------



## B&B (Nov 4, 2006)

JD Dave;870927 said:


> Damn you!! I guess I'll keep my GM's, I couldn't imagine driving or plowing with anything else.


Was just at a truck pull a few weeks ago. Track was EXTREMELY sticky. You could tell who had the Cognito tie rods and braces on and who didn't but no carnage from it...they lifted first. Sissy's. 

Did see an '03-up Dodge break a left hand axle joint though. Oh wait that can't happen, they're SFA. Nope never saw a thing.


----------



## caddytruck89 (Oct 12, 2008)

JD Dave;870932 said:


> If that's your wife in your avatar and you've been together 25 years, you deserve a medal.


LOL Funny thats just a disturbing picture a buddy sent me a long time ago! Really....seriously.......ok it's me.


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

most gm guys would like to stiffen the front of their trucks up over not doing it.


----------



## Philbilly2 (Aug 25, 2007)

My turn! I don't see any front end problems here! Amazing what cognito braces and tie rod sleeves do!
















and the best shot


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

What we need here is someone with a different perspective. Perhaps a more refined wisdom about these older trucks. A guy who is aged enough to have purchased an SFA GM truck brand new......

Where's Basher?

:laughing::laughing:


----------



## sweetk30 (Sep 3, 2006)

old time chevy solid axle fan here and full time auto mechanic also.

my few points on all this is ......

ifs = nice ride / more center truck ground clearence / can set ride hight and weight with adjustment bolt / full adjustment of caster/camber and toe. 

solid axle = lends it self better to much more weight holding ability from heaver springs / much stiffer and flex better off road / can be upgraded to super heavy duty shafts & ujoints / factory beefy solid bar stock tie rod ends and links / much bigger ring and pinions / lifts are much cheeper / last big huge bonus lockout hubs. 

most of this info if from my hobbys of off road play and recovery needs. 

as a mechanic full time i will say i have seen all major aspect of breakage and working abilitys from both solid axle and ifs front ends. 

the only major problem i see/here is gm torision bar front ends need more lift less sag and still ride good. but i think we know this already. 

and if you pick the right older truck with a dana 60 front axle you dont get ball joints. you get king pins thay last almost for ever. wesport

these are my veiws and opinions take them for what thay are and have fun .


----------



## cubicinches (Oct 19, 2008)

sweetk30;871171 said:


> and if you pick the right older truck with a dana 60 front axle you dont get ball joints. you get king pins thay last almost for ever. wesport


King pins on a 4 wheel drive?


----------



## sweetk30 (Sep 3, 2006)

not like the 2wd stuff. but the same idea

full blow up of parts and reman write up from 4x4 site.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/PR-Kingpin/index.html


----------



## cubicinches (Oct 19, 2008)

sweetk30;871202 said:


> not like the 2wd stuff. but the same idea
> 
> full blow up of parts and reman write up from 4x4 site.
> 
> http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/billavista/PR-Kingpin/index.html


Cool. Never seen that.

I think Yukon gear is manufactured by Randy's Ring and Pinion... maybe? I've ordered from Randy's before, and gotten Yukon brand.


----------



## sweetk30 (Sep 3, 2006)

lots of brand out there. but yukon is a good bang for the buck. 

you see how thay are called king pin fronts ? no ball joints just 2 pins. and tapered bearing bottom and replacable bushing/spring on top. can be swaped by them selfs if need be for around 20-30 bucks in parts.


----------



## cubicinches (Oct 19, 2008)

Actually, now that I think about it... I remember working on my buddy's 1981 Chevy K30, and it had that setup. That was a friggin long time ago. I guess I never really thought of them as king pins, I guess they are though.


----------



## 09dieselguy (Nov 18, 2007)

they are kingpins. i have replaced a few sets of toys.


----------



## bowtie_guy (Jan 1, 2004)

On my 06 i run a 8' boss with wings. t-bars are turned up a little. Truck has cognito pitmam and idler arm braces along with fabtech inner/outter tie rods. It doesn't have near the mileage others do but i havn't had any issues. It's been pushing snow, drag racing and a little sled pullin since new.


----------



## basher (Nov 13, 2004)

2COR517;871109 said:


> What we need here is someone with a different perspective. Perhaps a more refined wisdom about these older trucks. A guy who is aged enough to have purchased an SFA GM truck brand new......
> 
> Where's Basher?
> 
> :laughing::laughing:


I might have, you know a heater was an opinion is those days, as was a rear bumper, radio, and a few other things we all take for granted.


----------



## bru z71 (May 10, 2009)

*??*

I am the only one that thinks 3/4 and 1 ton should have a solid front axle i am a gm guy threw and threw but wtf my friend has a 2500 and when he picks his 8 1/2 it just sags


----------



## lilweeds (Aug 3, 2007)

Then he doesn't have enough ballast in the back. I agree to an extent with the SFA, but GM could build a truck with IFS and a higher FAWR.


----------



## caddytruck89 (Oct 12, 2008)

Every time I stop to check out this thread I reads another post about solid front axles. Doesn't everone understand that the axle has nothing !!! To do with the ability to carry weight. Its the springs!!! I think every one is in love with sfa because they usually have either leaf springs or coils.


----------



## Mackman (Nov 3, 2009)

caddytruck89;876982 said:


> I think every one is in love with sfa


I know i am LOL:laughing:


----------



## sweetk30 (Sep 3, 2006)

and we are in love with the solid axle option be cause you can only bandaid a ifs tbar setup so much before there is no more weight capacity left. :laughing:

coils or leafs can be made to hold much more and sit correctly and if you buy from the right place ride good also.


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

caddytruck89;876982 said:


> I think every one is in love with sfa because they usually have either leaf springs or coils.


And they do not understand how to make the IFS perform like they want.


----------

