Swaybar end link, are they shorter on SAS VS non SAS badlands?

[ejpaul1]

So, the suspension travel on a Sasquatch 4 door bronco is front/rear 9.1/9.9 inches and on a badlands NON SAS is 9.4/10.3

The snip below is from the ford website and consequential PDF 2025 Bronco Tech Specs

The question is if this small difference is a function of shorter swaybar end links or bigger bump stops on the SAS shocks. The difference is SMALL, 3/10th of an inch so its not appreciable but its more or less curiosity as to how they do this.

Any ideas?

Sponsored

 

[Smocaine]

IIRC the difference is achieved by an internal bumpstop on the Sasquatch shocks that prevents the 35" tire from stuffing into the fender. The Badlands omits this to let the 33" tire travel further.

 

[ejpaul1]

I haven't measured the difference but I cant see Ford spending money on a separate swaybar end link when a chunk of rubber is much cheaper. By the way, this isnt some argument that a non sas is better or anything like it, the sas has more ground clearance and its better offroad

 

[derichio02]

The badlands SAS vs non-SAS does have a bit of difference. If you notice, the shocks are inverted on one vs the other. The resi is either at the top or the bottom. While they are the same family of shock the badlands non-sas is a bit different allowing more travel.

To tell the difference visually Non-SAS Badlands shocks have the reservoir pointed down (closer to the skid plates), while SAS Badlands shocks are generally appearing with reservoirs pointed up or simply riding higher.

Sponsored