How to SAS a NON-SAS badlands

[michelle227]

Wow, 11 mpg? I’m a stock MY25 BadSas with 35s and I’d say my mileage is 18-20. Better on the HWY.

Concur...I didn't even get that low towing a trailer the other day...and got a true 22+ for the ~670 miles from north Houston back to Dalhart on Tuesday running mostly 90/91 ethanol free gas (Houston area has 91 but Wichita Falls was 90 and Amarillo 91 to go with 86 availability).

Sponsored

 

[heathw101]

I see you have a Badlands non-sasquatch. I can tell you what I did and it has worked great although it is not a true like for like with sasquatch.

I put a 1 in leveling kit on the front and installed 35 x 11.50 x 17 on the stock wheels. I did not remove the crash bars. Everything works just like I wanted it to ... they are only 11.50 wide vs 12.50 wide. That is largely the biggest difference other than the 4.46 vs 4.70 gearing. I have found 4.46 gearing to be just fine even pulling a 3000 lb RV. I think it actually looks better than the 12.50 wide tires but each to his own

I think if I had forgone the leveling kit I might have interference issues with the crash bars. Even with the 1 inch leveling kit the 12.50 in wide tires will not work without removing the crash bars and would also likely require at least a 1/2 in wheel spacer. I like my crash bars and do not like wheel spacers on my vehicles.

Do you have any pictures of this setup. I am thinking this might be the way to go.

 

[JaredH790]

Here ya go ...

Edit ... accidentally attached the zip file ... if you can open them let me know. I run them at 34psi and mine actually measure 34.5 inches in OD. They all vary from 34.5 to an actual 35 inch. However, I have never gotten close to rubbing and if you went with a true 35 inch I suspect you would be fine assuming you had the leveling kit installed as well. Good luck!

 

[Jmanly]

I looked through threads and I am sure it here but, I was wanting to know if theres more to sas'ing a non sas badlands than just removing crashbars and adding the 35's. I would have a hard time believing that no lift is required and I am aware that mine has 4.4 gearing and a sas has 4.7. Im just thinking of swapping when I do a dedicated offroad weekend and then swapping back when I am daily driving. Please point me to the right thread, im sure it exists

I put 35 10.50 17 Kenda Klevers on my non SAS Badlands. Modified the crash bars a little. Put Bilstein 6100 shock- lifted 1 in. Who needs SAS?

 

[Altitude]

I put 35 10.50 17 Kenda Klevers on my non SAS Badlands. Modified the crash bars a little. Put Bilstein 6100 shock- lifted 1 in. Who needs SAS?

I'm looking to do the 6100s on my non-SAS Badlands here soon with a 315/70/17 sized tire. It seems like its all over the board on what groove gives what lift. I planned on doing the lowest level in rear and 3 or 4 up front to get a lift / level while retaining a little bit of rake. Where did you set yours at and do you have a side pic? TIA.

 

[Jmanly]

I'm looking to do the 6100s on my non-SAS Badlands here soon with a 315/70/17 sized tire. It seems like its all over the board on what groove gives what lift. I planned on doing the lowest level in rear and 3 or 4 up front to get a lift / level while retaining a little bit of rake. Where did you set yours at and do you have a side pic? TIA.

Rear was lower setting, front 1 set higher.

 

[23OBX2.7]

I put 35 10.50 17 Kenda Klevers on my non SAS Badlands. Modified the crash bars a little. Put Bilstein 6100 shock- lifted 1 in. Who needs SAS?

Hows rhe ride of high frequency chop and sharp holes at low speeds <40

 

[Jmanly]

The ride is great. Way better all around than the stock

 

[MEAT_GOD]

Auto has a torque converter too, so that makes it doubly easier than a manual. The 3.73 Auto can turn 37" tires if you want to without too much trouble.

Yo, what??? The 3.73 can run 37"'s? And nobody crucified you for saying that?

 

[ejpaul1]

Im cautious to mess with fords extensive engineering,,, was thinking about putting 35's on my Non sas badlands but am uneasy as the rear end being a 4.46 and not a 4.7 makes me thinking I am playing with fire. I have a buddy that put 37's on his everglades and has gone through 1 rear end and a transfer case. He SWEARS it has nothing to do with it but I beg to differ. As an engineer, safety factors are designed in for occasional excessive use, not for constant use. taking something like a transfer case, rear end, transmission etc. and subjecting them to larger loads and stresses on a constant basis starts asking for problems.

Now, do I think running 35's on a non sas badlands is noticeably detrimental? Probably not but 37's is a whole different story. the leverage of larger tires and all the other added stresses are likely exponential and not linear. the problem is I dont know what that is, i didnt design this vehicle.

 

[Jmanly]

Im cautious to mess with fords extensive engineering,,, was thinking about putting 35's on my Non sas badlands but am uneasy as the rear end being a 4.46 and not a 4.7 makes me thinking I am playing with fire. I have a buddy that put 37's on his everglades and has gone through 1 rear end and a transfer case. He SWEARS it has nothing to do with it but I beg to differ. As an engineer, safety factors are designed in for occasional excessive use, not for constant use. taking something like a transfer case, rear end, transmission etc. and subjecting them to larger loads and stresses on a constant basis starts asking for problems.

Now, do I think running 35's on a non sas badlands is noticeably detrimental? Probably not but 37's is a whole different story. the leverage of larger tires and all the other added stresses are likely exponential and not linear. the problem is I dont know what that is, i didnt design this vehicle.

I have 35's on my nonSas Badlands. 80k miles. No problems

 

[Brian_B]

taking something like a transfer case, rear end, transmission etc. and subjecting them to larger loads and stresses on a constant basis starts asking for problems.

So here's a serious question:

The stress on the drive line -
Yeah, absolutely that heavier tires and more rotating mass, larger tires with bigger radius has more leverage, etc.

But for ~strength~ of the gearing - deeper gears have fewer, bigger teeth, doesn't that actually make them ~less~ strong for the stresses? I mean, people fret about the 5.38 pinion being a bit too small to make room for the gearing?

Deeper gears make it easier for the engine to turn things - but again, that also plays to "makes it easier to wreck things"

All of the rear gears are more or less stuck at 220mm overall (unless you jump to Dana 60), something about a Louis equation for gear tooth strength that I won't pretend to understand, but has to do with tooth width and pitch, that boils down to strength is proportional to overall gear tooth surface area and material hardness ... so for a given material wouldn't more teeth = more surface area = more strength? I mean, that's pretty much the only difference between the 29-spline standard CVs and the 32-spline "Extreme" CVs up front.

 

[ejpaul1]

So here's a serious question:

The stress on the drive line -
Yeah, absolutely that heavier tires and more rotating mass, larger tires with bigger radius has more leverage, etc.

But for ~strength~ of the gearing - deeper gears have fewer, bigger teeth, doesn't that actually make them ~less~ strong for the stresses? I mean, people fret about the 5.38 pinion being a bit too small to make room for the gearing?

Deeper gears make it easier for the engine to turn things - but again, that also plays to "makes it easier to wreck things"

All of the rear gears are more or less stuck at 220mm overall (unless you jump to Dana 60), something about a Louis equation for gear tooth strength that I won't pretend to understand, but has to do with tooth width and pitch, that boils down to strength is proportional to overall gear tooth surface area and material hardness ... so for a given material wouldn't more teeth = more surface area = more strength? I mean, that's pretty much the only difference between the 29-spline standard CVs and the 32-spline "Extreme" CVs up front.

youve nailed it and if you look at the Raptor version of this, they solve for that as your exactly right. the issue being on all the non raptor variants that gearing multiplies torque for higher ratio's but the reality of the mating surfaces is that lower ratio's have an issue with tooth count and surface area as it relates to pitch,,,,, Im a power plant engineer and my engineering license relfects as much so I am not going to try to convince you I know more about this than you, I dont at ALL but I do know a thing or two about materials, torque, surface areas,,,,,,

And, Im not here to piss in anyones cheerios, by all means do what you want, I wont make fun at all, I just need mine to last as long as possible as is

 

[ejpaul1]

So here's a serious question:

The stress on the drive line -
Yeah, absolutely that heavier tires and more rotating mass, larger tires with bigger radius has more leverage, etc.

But for ~strength~ of the gearing - deeper gears have fewer, bigger teeth, doesn't that actually make them ~less~ strong for the stresses? I mean, people fret about the 5.38 pinion being a bit too small to make room for the gearing?

Deeper gears make it easier for the engine to turn things - but again, that also plays to "makes it easier to wreck things"

All of the rear gears are more or less stuck at 220mm overall (unless you jump to Dana 60), something about a Louis equation for gear tooth strength that I won't pretend to understand, but has to do with tooth width and pitch, that boils down to strength is proportional to overall gear tooth surface area and material hardness ... so for a given material wouldn't more teeth = more surface area = more strength? I mean, that's pretty much the only difference between the 29-spline standard CVs and the 32-spline "Extreme" CVs up front.

proof of what your saying and my comment about pitch in the pudding:

 

[ejpaul1]

proof of what your saying and my comment about pitch in the pudding:

you can see that the diameter is larger on the raptor and its a dana 50.

Sponsored