Back to the subject at hand, I have great experience with Bronco Raptor parts specifically the suspension parts because I'm using all of them on a regular Bronco. As stated in other threads the BRaptor is 3" wide per side at the wheel mounting surface. This means that in the front, the tie rods are longer the CV shafts are longer, both upper and lower arms are longer, and of course the rear axle is wider as well.
To answer the OPs question, yes you can use RRaptor parts to make your Bronco wider. However, I have run into many, many issues and don't suggest this for people looking for a bolt on solution unless you choose the ranger Raptor parts. The ranger Raptor parts are completely compatible with the Broncos and will bolt on directly with no modifications except for the lower shock mount.
As far as wheel spacers go, at the four-wheel drive shop I used to work at some guys would run these elaborate oversized 5-in wide spacers so they could run sand paddle tires... (the axles that failed has nothing to do with lift kits), just the leverage that the extra length of the spacer puts on the semi float AXLE SHAFTS themselves, not the wheel bearing., caused deflection. When a cylinderic shaft is rotated at a high speed like an axle or Driveline is , the center point wants to wobble out side of the Centerline by nature. Add some additional leverage at the end of the shaft and you can see how that the middle of the axle shaft will do the high-speed oscillation/deflection at greater degree., than with a smaller leveraged load. Eventually adding to the reason the axle shaft broke in the first place. Obviously a full floating axle situation would completely eliminate this issue.
This why spicer and other manufacturers agree that on a semi float axle, 40-in tires are the maximum not because of the wheel bearing itself but because of the axle deflection inside of the rear tube especially under load.
I have been running 2-in wide spacers in the front ( to matche ultimate 60 rear) for the past year while finalizing my BRaptor front suspension parts build. I can't wait to get them off soon enough, not because that I risk the wheel bearings or something breaking but because of the ridiculous scrub radius that they add.
To answer the OPs question, yes you can use RRaptor parts to make your Bronco wider. However, I have run into many, many issues and don't suggest this for people looking for a bolt on solution unless you choose the ranger Raptor parts. The ranger Raptor parts are completely compatible with the Broncos and will bolt on directly with no modifications except for the lower shock mount.
As far as wheel spacers go, at the four-wheel drive shop I used to work at some guys would run these elaborate oversized 5-in wide spacers so they could run sand paddle tires... (the axles that failed has nothing to do with lift kits), just the leverage that the extra length of the spacer puts on the semi float AXLE SHAFTS themselves, not the wheel bearing., caused deflection. When a cylinderic shaft is rotated at a high speed like an axle or Driveline is , the center point wants to wobble out side of the Centerline by nature. Add some additional leverage at the end of the shaft and you can see how that the middle of the axle shaft will do the high-speed oscillation/deflection at greater degree., than with a smaller leveraged load. Eventually adding to the reason the axle shaft broke in the first place. Obviously a full floating axle situation would completely eliminate this issue.
This why spicer and other manufacturers agree that on a semi float axle, 40-in tires are the maximum not because of the wheel bearing itself but because of the axle deflection inside of the rear tube especially under load.
I have been running 2-in wide spacers in the front ( to matche ultimate 60 rear) for the past year while finalizing my BRaptor front suspension parts build. I can't wait to get them off soon enough, not because that I risk the wheel bearings or something breaking but because of the ridiculous scrub radius that they add.
Sponsored
Last edited:
But my guess is your non-scientific results hold enough validity that it isn't necessary. Considering how few vehicles, percentage-wise, have spacers, you likely saw a far higher failure rate than expected for such a low percentage of vehicles with them installed. In layman's terms, if 1% of vehicles have them installed but 50% of the failures are with vehicles with spacers, that suggests a substantially higher failure rate attributable to the use of spacers. (Statistics made up to illustrate a point.)
