Badlands.... Do I need the Sasquatch Upgrade (Newbie)

[EasternSierra]

SAS is not just tire size, it's also different differentials, suspension and tires. The M210's are (according to this forum's contributors) notably stronger than the M190's. So while it doesn't sound like you'd be able to take advantage of the SAS package, a salesman saying it's just tires doesn't know what s/he's selling. You still get locking diffs in the Badlands. The last thing of note, and somehow the most significant and least significant at the same time is tires. Badlands without SAS comes with K02's, do SAS still come with MT's? You may never note the difference if you're not pushing through a lot of terrain, but these are also the easiest things to change.

Just to make sure this is clear to the OP, the Badlands non-Sas does have the M210s. This difference in axles only matters for lower trims where Sas upgrades the axles over non-Sas.

Sponsored

 

[BroncoT]

Owned a non-SAS 2022 Badlands until recently. Here is my take:

Need? Absolutely not. Very capable and maybe even better in some ways (more clearance from top of tire to wheel well). SAS is still superior due to suspension, clearance and gearing.

Want? I came to regret not going SAS. Converting was a pain and I decided to ride out the wear life of the 33s, which takes years. My advice, if you kinda want 35s for any reason then just go SAS. Zero chance of regret. Non-SAS, some chance. Honestly, it’s the fun decision if you’re on the fence.

 

[23OBX2.7]

Unless you are advanced extreme terrain driver anticipating $10- 20K in breakage it's not gonna make a difference except looks which are easily and cheaply changed with higher model take offs and aftermarket.

 

[Karsa]

I have a standard Badlands. The 33’s were awesome off road, nothing ever stopped them.

But you’re going get an itch someday and you’ll want 35’s, trust me

35’s with the 4:46 gearing means A) a 1.5 mpg drop, B) a noticeable drop off in acceleration - especially at highway speeds, C) flashcal or forscan to fix the speedometer ( mine was 5 kph different, flashcal was quick and easy, but a couple hundred bucks )

I wish I had went with the Sasquatch package, if for no other reason than 35x12.5r17 are common to all tire brands, the 35x11.5r17’s are limited.

Just my two cents, but it’s your dollar, you gotta be happy with it!

 

[Brian_B]

SAS is not just tire size, it's also different differentials, suspension and tires. The M210's are (according to this forum's contributors) notably stronger than the M190's. So while it doesn't sound like you'd be able to take advantage of the SAS package, a salesman saying it's just tires doesn't know what s/he's selling. You still get locking diffs in the Badlands. The last thing of note, and somehow the most significant and least significant at the same time is tires. Badlands without SAS comes with K02's, do SAS still come with MT's? You may never note the difference if you're not pushing through a lot of terrain, but these are also the easiest things to change.

You get all of that other stuff with Badlands though. Its literally just the tires and gear ratio

 

[hellahella]

IMO if you’re going 7spd MT, stick with non-sas and save the money to upgrade later (bilstein 6100 + 35 tires). If you’re going 10spd auto, maybe go with SAS. You would want that extra 4.7 gearing down the road

 

[Br0nc0_Badlands_Sasquatch]

You get all of that other stuff with Badlands though. Its literally just the tires and gear ratio

non SAS badlands have more flex though too, as someone else mentioned in this thread

 

[Neps]

Nope, you don't need SAS.

 

[PolyTect]

I'd spend a moment on YT and other sources to get an understanding of the exact trails/areas you plan to go. That will help guide whether you need the extra tire, gearing (if going auto) and suspension. I went with sas, but have intent on doing trails that suggest I'll be better with those things. I'd like to hit the Rubicon at some point. Also new to it all, I figured I'd pay to get from factory as close as I can to the build I need to start and upgrade as I learn. The gearing is the biggest crux of the decision as its the most costly to change later and will affect tire size in the future. Tires are consumables as well as factory suspension and rims fankly aren't that expensive.

 

[Area51BS]

There is nothing wrong with the non SAS and nothing wrong with getting the SAS. The problem is that it just a money grab by Ford. The non SAS already comes with the yellow shocks. They just change the bump stop basically and small lift. Vehicle already has gears. It already has tires and rims. So just what is Ford giving you for the upcharge? Nothing. Just slightly different.

 

[VirginiaHeritage]

Not what you asked about, but since you’re new, your biggest chance at regret might not be SAS vs non-SAS but the roof you pick.

Since you want to overland, you’ll want lots of roof rack options, so obviously a hard top. I strongly recommend you get a painted top, not a MIC top to avoid problems with cracks and delamination.

If I was getting a Badlands on a budget, I would spend the money for a painted top before I spent it on SAS.

 

[Dr Dan]

Just to make sure this is clear to the OP, the Badlands non-Sas does have the M210s. This difference in axles only matters for lower trims where Sas does upgrade the axles over non-Sas.

Ah, you are correct. I mistakenly thought that M210's were Sasquatch-specific.

 

[OEB0122]

Not what you asked about, but since you’re new, your biggest chance at regret might not be SAS vs non-SAS but the roof you pick.

Since you want to overland, you’ll want lots of roof rack options, so obviously a hard top. I strongly recommend you get a painted top, not a MIC top to avoid problems with cracks and delamination.

If I was getting a Badlands on a budget, I would spend the money for a painted top before I spent it on SAS.

Ha ha - more confusion for the OP...but, if/when you choose painted hardtop, also make sure you measuring the mounting point on the specific Bronco you are looking at. If the slot is less than 1" deep....you lose some roof rack options (like TrailRax).

 

[BroncoT]

One additional point if you plan to upgrade to 35s at some point, know yourself. Some guys buy takeoffs that are plastered all over Facebook Marketplace for around $2k. They sell their 33s for around $1k and drive on their way comfortable with lower gear ratios, tight front wheel clearance, mildly undersized shocks, and a speedometer slightly off. Done, happy, saved money. Take off crash bars. Smart.

I just can’t do that. I’d need to do a 1” level, reprogram the speedometer. I also get squishy about spending the time and money to do this without just swapping the wheels to something of my choice. What’s another $1500. But then maybe I wait for the 33s to wear out. Ok, but that’s taking forever so maybe I’ll pull them at 35k miles and do the overhaul then. But that’s holiday season and I’d rather spend the money on a trip. On and on.

If you think you’ll want 35s some day, as most Bronco owners eventually do, which guy are you?

 

[cgskipper]

I always love these discussions! No right answer of course...depending who you ask

I have a '24 Badlands non-SAS with the 2.7L and AT, and purposely chose it that way. Like the OP, I'm not planning to extreme off-road but the BL non-SAS is plenty capable, especially with all the other upgrades built into the BL package (locking diffs, axles, steering rack, etc.). I've always compared the BL non-SAS to the "normal" Rubicon that comes with 33's and has run the Rubicon trail in stock form. My off-roading has so far consisted of sand dunes, forest roads, and pretty heavily rutted and muddy trails with some low-key rocks, and my ride has not had any issue. I also appreciate the 33's on a daily basis when I'm on pavement.

I would say check out some YT videos of both in action and test drive both to see how they perform on the road. Good luck!

Sponsored