Spent all day driving 50mph over the biggest, nastiest holes on dirt and gravel roads. Some of the most fun I've ever had. Just playing with my new suspension, 5.5'' Deaver coils in the front, unknown brand of 6'' leafs with overloads removed. I don't know of any stock vehicle that could have kept up. There was no shortage of ramping, uneven roads, etcetera. Just flat out abused my Bronco.

Anyways, the TTB. I noticed that even with softer springs in the rear than the front that I had a ton more of that flexy control in the front end. When I hit a bump, it didn't twist my body and frame. The body in the rear would twist, move out from underneath me, etc. The front end would stay level and in control no matter what I'd do. I kept having to correct for the rear hitting holes, bumps and hills but didn't have to for the front.

Even when I was going slow through tight trails I was so much more sure of what my front tires were going to be doing than my back tires. When I hit a small hill or try to crawl over a large rock with one rear tire, it changes the position of the whole truck, it doesn't do this with the front end.

I DEFINITELY understand why prerunners prefer the TTB, but, I don't understand why people general offroading through trails, etc don't love them? The only place I feel a solid axle would help is maybe through deep mud. Even in rock crawling your front is going to stay more level with tires where you want them to be with a TTB vs. a solid axle.

I think it all comes from poser shots having one rear tire bottomed into your body. Physically, this is tougher to show off in a TTB, I guess?

 

Sounds great, its nice to hear that we dont have to do a SAS just to have a good off-road truck. What about your truck tho? What sizes tires were you running, brand/type of lift. Thx, I'd love to make mine into a bit of a pre-runner but autofab is a bit expensive for me. Nice to hear that the TTB isn't garbage like people would have you believe.

 

Most folks don't like what they don't understand especially if it is even the slightest bit more complicated. Most argue that the solid axle is "stronger" but then I have YET to hear ANY tales of woe about the poor guy who took his TTB-equipped truck off-roading and mangled it so badly it wouldn't drive home. Nope haven't heard 'em and doubt I will unless we have a smart-*** who decides to dream one up as a result of this post.

I have always attributed the TTB nay-sayer's line of $#!% to the same phenomenon that made people dislike and toss aside the old Rochester Quadra-jet carburetors. They were designed differently, they didn't work just like every other carburetor in the day, so there was a learning to curve maintaining and tuning them. People didn't want to learn and actually took offense that something BETTER could even be made, so rather than take the steps to make it work for them (sit down and learn how), they went backwards and tossed them in favor of old-school junk. (BTW the Q-jet was originally a Rochester design... NOT Edelbrock). The same can be said of those who would rather go backwards from fuel injection to carburation... EFI is more complex and people aren't willing to take the time to learn so they go back to struggling and tuning and tweaking every few months even though EFI and the electronic engine management systems will all but hand you the answers to the problems when they do arise on a silver tray. Which is a much less frequent occurrence than with carburated vehicles... sorry folks but the reliability factor is not a viable argument on this one.

Its stubbornness, obstinacy if you will, and even a lame attempt to save face when they don't wish to reveal their ignorance that makes people look at something new and yes BETTER and say, "but its got more moving parts and I don't understand it so it must be crap." Yes, TTB axles are more complex. Yes, suspension lifts create a different set of issues to deal with but they are just that... a DIFFERENT set of issues. And the idea that the TTB axles are somehow "weaker" stems from what? One additional universal join? C'mon, folks. Otherwise, the TTB is attached to the frame of the truck in more locations and if one side DOES break the other side is still attached... solid axles break a track bar or even one of the bolts that hold it in place and you are picking your way home at about 3 mph trying to keep it under the front of the truck... don't even try... I've watched this happen many times. I've driven my TTB with a broken axle pivot bracket (sheered in half) at 35-40 mph before I got the slightest indication that there was a problem.

ErrorS, my friend thank you for posting this. I haven't had a good rant in a while and your post was just the thing to wake me up. I'm right there with you (obviously) on the TTB assessment. If TTB is weaker, or inferior, I'm a Missourian...SHOW ME.

 

I have a stock suspension under my Bronco except for Billsteins at all four corners, and the front definitely rides better than the rear over bumps/potholes, etc. For what I use it for, the TTB is much better than a solid axle, but I can see where the SA guys are coming from. Solid axles are much easier to lift, and with longer travel setups keep camber change to a minimum throughout the range of travel, something much harder to accomplish with any IFS truck. Hang some weight on the front end (a plow for example) and the SA works far better (hence why solid axels come on Super Duties.) But for most conditions, I like the TTB better. To each his own.

 

The TTB weak? that thing took a big hit when my brother was side-ended by an 70's Dodge pick up. The hit was so hard the Dodge's engine and tranny fell off. The Bronco received very little cosmetic damage and limped home and to the body shop later (actually my chassis cracked, yet the TTB held itself together and was still capable of allowing the truck to move).

 

The TTB has its purpose but also its limitations. It allows for better road manners and for better offroading at higher speeds with the correct modifications. Its great for stock or mild applications. But once you start adding larger meats and higher gears you will run into problems. Its more complicated to lift a TTB truck than a SA truck, and the additional drop brackets required will put more stress on your frame.

There is no way a TTB will be comparable in strength to a D60 without a lot of money going into it.

Another thing with the SA is forced articulation. If one tire goes up the other is going down. Not so with the TTB so it wont flex as well.

Broken TTB pinion. 33s with stock gears.


And my D60 FTW

 

Lets compare apples and apples here... a Dana 60 is NOT a Dana 44. Period. No one is arguing the strength of a 3/4-1 ton axle over a half ton. Put anything bigger than 35's on even a solid D44 and you are going to start significantly shortening the lifespan of u-joints and gears. That's a given... its only a 1/2 ton axle and that much unsprung weight is going to take its toll. It boils down to the FACT that a Bronco is a 1/2 ton truck and if you are going to abuse it like a 3/4 or 1 ton vehicle, then you are going to need stronger axles. But the same is true of ANY vehicle so used/abused. Buy an F-250 if you want a 3/4 ton truck.

Lifting isn't more complicated, its different. It's only more complicated if you don't understand how or aren't willing to apply the necessary changes to lift it properly. There are plenty of ways to make a TTB axle work as well or better than a solid axle. Just ask the folks at AutoFab about it. And don't argue that their product is too expensive or too extreme because ripping the entire front suspension and driveline out from under a vehicle to go backwards with the applied technology is the pinnacle of too extreme and too expensive.

TTB flexes just fine... and physics don't dictate what the opposite wheel on that axle does either. It doesn't force the opposite wheel up into the wheel well when one drops... and to keep the truck on camber that's a far better scenario. You aren't going to high-center a TTB axle like you will a solid axle either. Dragging a diff. over rocks is not exactly pleasant nor is it good for the diff. housing. And no matter WHAT you do to a solid axle, the MAXIMUM clearance between the bottom of the differential housing and the ground is the measurement between the tire face and the bottom of the housing. If you air down off-road that clearance shrinks even further because you lose tire diameter. TTB axles have the distinct advantage of having the differential housing between a frame mount and a wheel which allows it to ride above many things that would normally cause a solid axle diff. housing to drag because the clearance between it and the ground changes as the camber on that wheel changes.

 

I personally need a truck like a Bronco. I have four kids and do alot of hunting. The Bronco is the perfect truck for the stuff I do...almost. I also do alot of towing, some heavy loads, and plow etc. with my rig. The Bronco in stock form is just not up to the challenge. A gasser sucks fuel like a drunk at a kegger and just can't pull like a heavier diesel truck. Therefore I built a truck to match my needs. Would I have liked to have F350 diesel 4x4, sure. But there is no way it would meet my needs. So if you are into hardcore off roading but still need the versatility of a Bronco the solid front is the thing to do. If not then keep the ttb, do what suits your needs.

 

There is no 1/2 ton IFS stronger than the TTB, it will take an incredible amount of abuse and direct contact on rocks without damage.. something you can't say about a wishbone system. Those beefy axle components do have a downside however with the greater unsprung weight producing much less gracefull bump absorption so ride quality on the street isn't as nice.
I saw a great demonstration of solid axle with leafs vs IFS one time with an all stock Jeep CJ and Geo Tracker doing some basic offroading. The Jeep got stuck simply turning around on a heavily rutted trail where the leaf spring suspension didn't allow enough flex and the Jeep put 2 tires in the air and lost all drive, but the IFS Tracker flexed enough to keep all 4 tires on the ground and made the manouver look easy.

 

Yeah, seriously, and what's the point of showing us tore up D44 gears? 78 Solid Axle or 1990 TTB, they're still both Dana44s and if I'm not mistaken have the exact same gears.

I also think people understate the strength of the D44 though, Jeep, Toyota and small SUV people swap D44s in to run 35s and 38s in rock crawlers all the time.. I've seen plenty of solid 44 housings break apart from jumping with 35'' tires, so I'm not sure that housing supporting all that weight is much better than a frame section in my Bronco (though I would love to reinforce mine), another bonus, we have huge TTB arms supporting the weight and the center pivot point is super strong, with the point in the frame being a cross-section that's easily reinforced.

I'd jump a TTB Dana44 long before I'd jump a solid axle 44.

if we're talking plowing through mud with 44'' gumbos and welded gears, no Dana44 is going to hold up to that, ever.

@Edgethis .. I'm using 33'' Cooper Discoverer STTs with 5.5'' Deavers in the front and unknown leafs in the back with some of the leafs removed. Was originally a Rancho lift but the front coils were a bit too stiff for me. The Deavers are still a bit stiffer than I was expecting, but any lighter and the Bronco would be undrivable.. honestly, I was going to go with 35s but I can bottom out my 33s in the front or rear, I'd have to cut fenders to feel completely safe with 35s. Also removed my swaybar, but I still feel safe enough to drive on the interstate.
Honestly, I can handle potholes and traintracks and uneven road at highway speed (50-70mph) better than any of the cars I drive, so in a lot of ways I feel safer on the interstate. It can be scary changing lanes though and making quick corrections would be suicide. On a highway here we have traintracks and you hit them going at 60, I've been using these to help benchmark how well my suspension is set up. When I first hit them when the Bronco was stock, it was terrifying. With the Rancho springs I would feel like I was bouncing sideways and would have to correct, right now I barely feel the tracks at all.

 

OK WHAT DOES A 96 BRONCO xlt have in the rear i know i have a dana 44 ttb but is the rear a dana 60 or an 8 or a 9??

 

8.8 in a 96

 

The 8.8 was stock in the rear from about 84 on if I am recalling correctly.

 

Love this thread - I am a huge TTB/TIB fan. It's what makes a Ford a Ford. I am still steaming over Ford dropping the TTB/TIB on the F150 and that was 14 model years ago.

Also a big fan of the Q-jet. Best carb ever IMO. No match for EFI, tho, I agree. But if you gotta have a carb, the Q-jet fits just about every need and they came on 301s and 455s alike, so lots of range there to choose from.

A shout-out to the 8.8, kinda in the same boat, when Ford stopped offering the 9-inch people howled, but I don't know the last time I saw a broke 8.8 - it's a worthy successor to the 9-inch.

 

you have to admit the appearance of the clamshell halved front diff of the TTB looks like *** though.