What's new
By:
Filters

TTB Van????

DMG said:
If you would measure it and take a few pics that would be awesome. What year and model?
Click to expand...

1990 Bronco. Front end is in the air and tires are off, soon as I get home (~30 minutes) the bumper comes off and I start dismantling the front end. Lemme know what you want and I can get it
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMG
Toreadorranger said:
Why are you cursing your TTB?
Click to expand...
It's an unnecessarily complicated design.
Ford trying to be different.

My past 4WD rigs:
'99.5 F-350 <---tried-and-trued straight axle/leaf sprung
'93 4Runner <---tried-and-trued IFS
'89 Toyota truck <---tried-and-true IFS

Lifted all three with no chronic issues, like the TTB tie rod design.
 
CDA 455 II said:
It's an unnecessarily complicated design.
Ford trying to be different.

My past 4WD rigs:
'99.5 F-350 <---tried-and-trued straight axle/leaf sprung
'93 4Runner <---tried-and-trued IFS
'89 Toyota truck <---tried-and-true IFS

Lifted all three with no chronic issues, like the TTB tie rod design.
Click to expand...
Complicated? It's just two large A arms that the pivots happen to overlap. It could be argued that TTB is simpler than IFS. There is a reason desert guys beam swap stuff.

Different? Ford has only been doing I beams since like 1964.

DMG I haven't read these threads on other forums completely, but they may have some useful info.

Expedition Portal TTB E350

Sportsmobile Dana 50 TTB Conversion
 
CDA 455 II said:
It's an unnecessarily complicated design.
Ford trying to be different.

My past 4WD rigs:
'99.5 F-350 <---tried-and-trued straight axle/leaf sprung
'93 4Runner <---tried-and-trued IFS
'89 Toyota truck <---tried-and-true IFS

Lifted all three with no chronic issues, like the TTB tie rod design.
Click to expand...
TTB debuted in 1980. How was Ford supposed to know about "tried and true" IFS 6+ years in the future? :flipoff2:
 
Toreadorranger said:
TTB debuted in 1980. How was Ford supposed to know about "tried and true" IFS 6+ years in the future? :flipoff2:
Click to expand...
He isn’t totally wrong. TTB has some real steering, alignment and tire wear issues. Most of which can be worked out.
 
665.0coupe said:
Complicated? It's just two large A arms that the pivots happen to overlap. It could be argued that TTB is simpler than IFS. There is a reason desert guys beam swap stuff.

Different? Ford has only been doing I beams since like 1964.

DMG I haven't read these threads on other forums completely, but they may have some useful info.

Expedition Portal TTB E350

Sportsmobile Dana 50 TTB Conversion
Click to expand...
Yes; different.
Name a car company that has copied and used Ford's TTB design in their production vehicles?

The IFS has been in use since at least the '40s by most major car manufacturers.

DMG's assessment of TTB with the van (down by the river:flipoff2:) is probably the only set up I can think of where the TTB has use because it'll be in stock/factory set up.
Yet it's still a compromise set up.

Here's my answer to the Sportsmobile:
1662568515087.png


I'd cut the ass off between the last two windows.

BTW; I've known of Quigley 4WD vans since at least the mid/late-'90s.
Researching them is when I learned vans are not trucks.
 
DMG said:
He isn’t totally wrong. TTB has some real steering, alignment and tire wear issues. Most of which can be worked out.
Click to expand...
All of which are just the OEM being cheap and can be recitied far less invasivelyt and expensively than getting the same travel out of ANY oem a-arm suspension.

CDA 455 II said:
Yes; different.
Name a car company that has copied and used Ford's TTB design in their production vehicles?

The IFS has been in use since at least the '40s by most major car manufacturers.

DMG's assessment of TTB with the van (down by the river/https://data.irate4x4.com/assets/smilies/thefinger.gif) is probably the only set up I can think of where the TTB has use because it'll be in stock/factory set up.
Click to expand...
Stop being an idiot.

The stock factory setup is the worst way to use the TTB.

You rectify literally anything about it and it becomes leaps and bounds better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMG
Man this derailed quickly :flipoff2:
I like the TTB in my daily driver, it rides nice and doesnt wear my 35s funny, but it took some tinkering to get it that way.



Back on topic:
DMG said:
If you would measure it and take a few pics that would be awesome. What year and model?
Click to expand...
019.jpg


TTB is down, brackets coming off tomorrow as long as its not raining. If theres any weird pics or measurements you want let me know. Hell, if you want the brackets, let me know. . Youre somewhere in PA right? Do you want the whole TTB? Its just scrap metal to me.
 
In for the tech. I have a 1990 e350 motor home I would like to convert to 4x, keeping the ttb for the lower ride height.
I use the mh year round, 4x4 would help in the heavy rain and snow.
 
arse_sidewards said:
All of which are just the OEM being cheap and can be recitied far less invasivelyt and expensively than getting the same travel out of ANY oem a-arm suspension.

Stop being an idiot.

The stock factory setup is the worst way to use the TTB.

You rectify literally anything about it and it becomes leaps and bounds better.
Click to expand...
Yeah; real good design;
Buy a rig that you have to immediately improve the front suspension before it begins to ride decent.....:lmao::lmao::homer:


YOUR VERY OWN WORDS re-enforce/reconfirm my points.:lmao::lmao:

Who's the idiot?!!:flipoff2::lmao: :homer:
 
reptillikus said:
Man this derailed quickly :flipoff2:
I like the TTB in my daily driver, it rides nice and doesnt wear my 35s funny, but it took some tinkering to get it that way.



Back on topic:

019.jpg


TTB is down, brackets coming off tomorrow as long as its not raining. If theres any weird pics or measurements you want let me know. Hell, if you want the brackets, let me know. . Youre somewhere in PA right? Do you want the whole TTB? Its just scrap metal to me.
Click to expand...
For sake of documentation it would be cool to know the mounting locations in relation to centerline between frame rails and the other direction centered in the wheel wells
 
CDA 455 II said:
Yeah; real good design;
Buy a rig that you have to immediately improve the front suspension before it begins to ride decent.....:lmao::lmao::homer:


YOUR VERY OWN WORDS re-enforce/reconfirm my points.:lmao::lmao:

Who's the idiot?!!:flipoff2::lmao: :homer:
Click to expand...
Stock vs stock it works better off road than ANY a-arm suspension the exception of the Raptor stuff.

Stock vs stock it works slightly worse on road than a-arm IFS, mostly because it uses a box and not a rack.

Go back to whatever dumpster full of soy you crawled out of.
 
arse_sidewards said:
Stock vs stock it works better off road than ANY a-arm suspension the exception of the Raptor stuff.

Stock vs stock it works slightly worse on road than a-arm IFS, mostly because it uses a box and not a rack.

Go back to whatever dumpster full of soy you crawled out of.
Click to expand...
Check; and mate.


Gee; still butthurt after your ban.......:laughing::homer:
 
reptillikus said:
Man this derailed quickly :flipoff2:
I like the TTB in my daily driver, it rides nice and doesnt wear my 35s funny, but it took some tinkering to get it that way.



Back on topic:

019.jpg


TTB is down, brackets coming off tomorrow as long as its not raining. If theres any weird pics or measurements you want let me know. Hell, if you want the brackets, let me know. . Youre somewhere in PA right? Do you want the whole TTB? Its just scrap metal to me.
Click to expand...
If you could measure the width of the swing arm pivots on the frame and where they are in relation to the shock mount that would be great. I am in PA. Where are you?
 
Last edited:
665.0coupe said:
There is a reason desert guys beam swap stuff.
Click to expand...

Reason #1 - They had a class just for TTB rigs.

Reason #2 - They either didn't have the money or the know how (or a combination of both) to design a long travel IFS.


Yotota said:
Ford was just being weird with TTB.
Click to expand...

Yep, it was Ford's better than live axle and cheaper than IFS solution and in stock form it really wasn't all that bad.

That said, think how popular the Ranger, Bronco II and Exploders would've been if they had a live axle from the factory.
 
Tech Tim said:
Reason #1 - They had a class just for TTB rigs.

Reason #2 - They either didn't have the money or the know how (or a combination of both) to design a long travel IFS.




Yep, it was Ford's better than live axle and cheaper than IFS solution and in stock form it really wasn't all that bad.

That said, think how popular the Ranger, Bronco II and Exploders would've been if they had a live axle from the factory.
Click to expand...
Also, it is really hard to make center hung long travel A arm Ifs. Transfer case output and motor location complicate that.
 
Tech Tim said:
Reason #2 - They either didn't have the money or the know how (or a combination of both) to design a long travel IFS.
Click to expand...
Or it's physically impossible to package a long travel two IFS with an upper and lower arm that doesn't suck without violating the other rules of the class
 
DMG said:
Also, it is really hard to make center hung long travel A arm Ifs. Transfer case output and motor location complicate that.
Click to expand...
Hence why the TTB is great for anything short of a car that's built from scratch starting with a pile of tube.
 
Tech Tim said:
Reason #1 - They had a class just for TTB rigs.

Reason #2 - They either didn't have the money or the know how (or a combination of both) to design a long travel IFS.




Yep, it was Ford's better than live axle and cheaper than IFS solution and in stock form it really wasn't all that bad.

That said, think how popular the Ranger, Bronco II and Exploders would've been if they had a live axle from the factory.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of build threads out there for I beam and TTB swaps into all other makes of trucks that are not built to race or to any class rules.

Think about how popular the Ranger, Bronco II and Explorer are because they have TTB. How many long travel Rangers are there compared to S10's and Dakota's? Toyotas start to come close but still not as many.

With a blank slate, sure IFS is better. How did we even get into this derail anyway? I wanna see a D50 TTB swapped van!!

vetteboy79 said:
I missed that memo somewhere along the way :laughing:
Click to expand...

Still one of my favorite builds. Just needs early Bronco skins instead of Jeep skins. :flipoff2:
 
DMG said:
If you could measure the width of the swing arm pivots on the frame and where they are in relation to the shock mount that would be great. I am in PA. Where are you?
Click to expand...
I'll get a bunch of measurements this morning after work. I'm eastern pa. Reading, 19604.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMG
Because it uses one joint for travel and a separate joint for steering you can have full steering and full articulation without compounding on the ball joints. I think for playing in the rocks that is a huge advantage. No compound steering angles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh