Why Did Gm Do It?

[jro909]

i see alot of trucks come and go at work, and everybody i talk to says "solid axles are ment to work thats why i bought this truck" and yes i see the pros in solids axles but i don't see alot of cons...they seem pretty much bulletproof and yet i ask myself why did GM ditch them?

[tbhuge]

My guess is ride and comfort. IFS is going to have a softer ride. I don't have a problem with IFS on a 1/2 ton truck, but I think 3/4 and up should be solid axle or an option of either one. Solid axle is definitely better from a functional standpoint.

[TRCM]

My guess is ride and comfort. IFS is going to have a softer ride. I don't have a problem with IFS on a 1/2 ton truck, but I think 3/4 and up should be solid axle or an option of either one. Solid axle is definitely better from a functional standpoint.

 

 

Too many people want a truck that rides like a car - because they don't use it like a truck !

[dave_benn]

Stock vs. stock IFS is better, just as strong, more clearance, and rides better. Ford and Dodge both have problems with the front ends falling apart. Id take an IFS over solid axle IF i was to keep it stock forever and just drive the truck. If i was going to lift it and use it off-road then i would want the solid axle. Just my $.02

[Matt_]

Stock vs. stock IFS is better, just as strong, more clearance, and rides better. Ford and Dodge both have problems with the front ends falling apart. Id take an IFS over solid axle IF i was to keep it stock forever and just drive the truck. If i was going to lift it and use it off-road then i would want the solid axle. Just my $.02

 

x2

 

other than for purely off-road vehicles, IFS is far superior. Its not just ride comfort.... its also performance, handling, adjustability, etc. One quick (and easy to understand) example is how the camber changes as the suspension compresses; this is designed to give superior traction and handling while taking turns such as highway ramps. SFA does not have any camber control for different situations that need it.

 

Its a huge space and weight saver as well.

 

There's nothing wrong with IFS for 99.99% of vehicles out there. Complaining about IFS is like complaining about fuel injection. .....

[pm26]

My deuce and half has solid axles front and rear and leaf springs everywhere as well. The ride is well- on the firm side.

[Sierra6.0]

Have to agree with GMC-10. Growing up with an annual pilgramage to Moab, Utah has shown me that for off-roading, a properly set up solid axle is stronger, cheaper, and more reliable than a beefy IFS setup.

 

I'm not sure how many here intend to hard-core 4wd their 3/4 and 1 ton pickups, myself included, so part of my Chevy decision was the on-road advantages the IFS offers. Like the OP, I saw no "real" disadvantages for IFS on a dedicated towing 3/4 ton that may see some ocassional time a muddy road.

 

As for TRCM's comment, I'd like to expound on it, in that I would *LOVE* a solid-front option for 1/2 ton and smaller trucks.

 

A 1/2 ton chassis would be a great long wheel-base setup for some serious off-roading, but sadly every company demands an IFS on their lighter trucks.

 

Back when I first starting going to Moab with the family in the early 80s, you had Trucks, Jeeps, and SUVs of all makes and models. It was a lot of fun to see how the different brands performed.

 

By the end of the 90's 99% of all street-legal off-road vehicles in Moab were Jeep TJs. Why? All the older 4wd, tough, built vehicles either rusted away or were replaced by the fuel-injected jeep. And NO manufactuer offered a serious off-road vehicle with a solid front.

 

About the only modern IFS equipped vehicle I saw wheeling with much sucess was the Toyota Tacoma TRD. (The new Landcruiser is pertty cool, but like the Hummer H3, suffers from low window lines causing visibility to drop considerably and any off-road prowess is hindered by the requirement of a dedicated spotter to actually see what you are crawling over).

 

If my memory serves me correctly, the Chevy 1/2 tons pre-GMT-400 that had a solid front performed quite well in Moab.

 

GM has always had sweet power trains. Too bad Hummer is gone, a small Jeep-like competitor (H4) with GM's inline 5, a manual tranny, and solid front and rears would be a huge success. At here in the west.

[mike94silverado]

if you want old technology buy an old truck. IFS Is Superior. It rides better, and works as tough. when you go beyond designed use as in extreme off road situations that is where SFA will hold up better but, with less than 10% of new truck owners actually going off road it doesn't make sense to offer it. Just like the Diesels in the half tons that "everyone" online seems to want, I bet the actual take would not be enough to turn a profit for the big 3.

 

I had an 05 F350. took it once on an 8 hour trip. I felt it after the ride. I've done the same and longer in both my 02 Ram 1500 and my new Silverado without any discomfort.

[tyhuck]

Stock vs. stock IFS is better, just as strong, more clearance, and rides better. Ford and Dodge both have problems with the front ends falling apart. Id take an IFS over solid axle IF i was to keep it stock forever and just drive the truck. If i was going to lift it and use it off-road then i would want the solid axle. Just my $.02

 

x2

 

other than for purely off-road vehicles, IFS is far superior. Its not just ride comfort.... its also performance, handling, adjustability, etc. One quick (and easy to understand) example is how the camber changes as the suspension compresses; this is designed to give superior traction and handling while taking turns such as highway ramps. SFA does not have any camber control for different situations that need it.

 

Its a huge space and weight saver as well.

 

There's nothing wrong with IFS for 99.99% of vehicles out there. Complaining about IFS is like complaining about fuel injection. .....

 

 

 

x3

 

Dont forget, improved turning radius.