I know this is kind of a dumb question but I just cant find the answer. does a 1990 F150 have a straight front axle or IFS?

thanks

 

neither. its got ttb

 

Whoops--Blue Rebel, wouldn't you say that, technically-speaking, the "Twin I-Beam suspension" is an independent front suspension? As is the "Twin Tractor Beam" or whatever the "TTB" stands for?

I mean, in theory, one wheel can move independently from the other, which is not possible with a straight axle, right? (Whether they are as efficient at that as other, more-widely-recognized IFS setups is a matter of some debate, I grant you, but it is not a "straight" front axle, and does allow for mostly "independent" movement. On the other hand, if you jack up one side of a straight axle, you definitely change the angle of the wheel at the other end of that straight axle....)

Not trying to bust *****, but if we don't maintain the integrity of our definitions and terms, I know I'm not smart enough to keep up. I have a hard enough time when I DO know what the words mean--LOL.

Historical Note: Blue Rebel, before your time (as I remember you said you're only 23), the 2x4, IFS suspension on Ford trucks was called the "Twin I-Beam Suspension. That is what it says on my 1972 F-100 shorty stepside. I thought (but am not sure) that the "TTB" we use today stands for "Twin Tractor Beam" only when it was a 4x4 with the IFS, but I could be wrong. But IF TTB IS for 4x4's, what does Ford call the IFS in 2x4 trucks, in the '87-'96 model years, if not "Twin I-Beam"-anyone?

BigSix

 

lol, heres something i do know. the 2wd front suspension from 80-96 was still referred to as the twin I beam suspension. this is due to the fact that the front axle is actually made up of 2 "I" beams, crossing each other and connecting to the vehicle on the opposite side of the tire they connect to.
The 4x4 version, ttb, stands for Twin TRACTION Beam. same concept as whats under your 72, but they added all the 4wd parts, and shortened the length of the beams considerably.
As far as is it a real IFS or not... Thats up for debate. in traditional IFS, the front diff is mounted solid on the truck, and the tire ends are what flex up and down. But on the TTB the diff is still solid mounted to the drivers side wheel end.... so maybe its 1/2 an IFS? Plus on normal IFS, the ball joints are where the majority of the suspension articulation occurs. (other than at the other end of the A arms) but on the TTB, the ball joints really only help to allow the tires to still turn while articulating. People been arguing weather ttb is ifs or some sort of solid axle hybrid since it came out. Dont really matter, one way or the other. That was one of my last posts of the night before i went to bed last nite, and i fired it off quick.

EDIT: LOL just noticed youve got a truck "functioning as a shed." Thats hilarious!!!

 

yeah i'm actually late to work lol but to be short they SUCK anything bigger than a 35in tire and your busting parts every other weekend or if you have 35in boggers i would expect the same thing, just look at the size of the ring gear and you'll understand why it's the most puny thing i have ever seen

 

Why do you keep saying "look at the size of the ring gear?" Its 8.5" Your rear axle's ring gear is only 8.8" Not much difference there. Plenty stout enough for what came stock on those trucks, for handling the rated payloads. Why beef up a truck that was not designed to be really worked? After 1979 ford geared their 1/2 tons to the weekend warriors. Left the real work for the F2 & 350s. Nothing on the 1/2 tons drivetrain is ment to handle 35s. Small transmissions, small ujoints, small axles. You want beefy? Get a bigger truck.

 

As far as I`m concerned the TTB is an IFS.The 2 front wheels work independent from each other and that by deffinition is IFS.

 

Yes TTB is IFS. It's just that Ford was the first to come out with it, and that's what they called it. Now that other manufactures use it, they can't call it TTB, and their design is different, but they all suck in my opinion.
Now reguarding an 8.8 rearend. Well it's only1/6 inch smaller than a 9". Everybody from drag racers to rock crawlers use a 9" for it strenght and easy of working on them. Really there's no need to replace an 8.8 for virtually no gain in strenght.

 

The reason they swap the 8.8 for the 9'' is because

1. The 9'' has a huge amount of parts in the aftermarket and are cheap (The 8.8 is catching up tho)

2. You can pull the entire pumpkin out of the front of the 9'' and rebuild it on your shop table which makes it much easier.

3. The 8.8 has C-clips that hold the axles in, and under abuse can fail, and your entire axle, hub, tire and all will fly away.

I'm iffy on calling a TTB an IFS. Its IFS in the independent motion sense, but at the same time its parts are much more closer to a solid axle than the typical twin A frame IFS.

The debate is really close to the engine vs. motor debate.


NOTE: I am not trying to offend anyone at all, but those kinds arguements are like running in the Special Olympics, even if ya win, you're still retarded.


Again, I mean no offense to the Special Olympics, I have a huge amount of respect for everyone associated with them, I would much rather watch the Special Olympics than the "real" Olympics.

 

^^^^ Agreed. all correct