Ford Power Stroke Nation banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey all,
I've had a ECLB F250 7.3 for 5 years or so, the truck has had a shot ttb front end since i bought it and have always planned a D60 swap, have already had one bj D60 to swap in but never got around to it and had to sell the D60 while moving. Today I picked up a '94 F350 Gasser (460) with 140K. Truck runs/drives good, has 3.55s, and I am now determined to swap in the D60 to my F250 (extra time, online school, coronavirus quarantine etc). Im planning on replacing some of the steering components, using new Ubolts, Ujoints, etc. The f250 has a zf5, the f350 is an auto so will have to shorten the cardone shaft if I want to use it. I know this subject has been beaten dead in the forums but if you have any advice, tips, etc please drop them, I have never done a D60 or really any serious driveline work on a truck. Also, let me know what you think of the f350 parts rig, paid $900 for it.
201139
201138
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,346 Posts
if i remember correctly the 94 still had wedge lock calipers, and the 96 has bolt on calipers. and the two do not interchange.
otherwise it is pretty much a bolt in deal. just use ALL the F350 parts under the 250.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
It'd probably be a LOT cheaper & quicker to just fix the original axle. I'm changing a U-joint & a wheel bearing on mine right now.

(phone app link)


(phone app link)
 

·
Project Shamu
Joined
·
2,725 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Anyone who understands the benefits of long-arm IFS. There's a reason new trucks are moving toward IFS, and a reason that off-road race trucks have used Ford's TIB/TTB design for decades.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,964 Posts
True, and most of those are using coil springs instead of leaf springs like ours. A poor design choice by Ford in our case. Cheers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Ive serviced my TTBs in the past and I prefer the usability, service life, and function of the D60. I was planning on just using the '94 brakes as they are in good order and the calipers are not interchangeable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
A poor design choice by Ford in our case.
That choice was made in the late 70s, and it was a groundbreaking industry-leading one, which advanced the comfort & utility of pickup trucks toward where they are now. Calling it "poor" by modern standards is taking it out of context. Was the 7.3L engine a "poor" design because it doesn't match modern diesel performance? If so - does that mean you should pull the one out of your truck, and replace it with a 6.9L? That's essentially what jaiuppa is planning; but with the axle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,964 Posts
Not what I'm saying at all! Obviously not 4wd, but the 2wd, (and basically similar setup) like my 94 DRW had coil springs, OBS Broncos had coil springs, and the new ones have coil springs. Why Ford decided to use leafs on an IFS, I don't know, Negative-arch leaf springs aren't made for the twist that happens with the TTB and the shackles and bushings pay for it dearly. Cheers!
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,346 Posts
ifs is perfectly fine for cars. but for a hard working 4X4 truck that gets the snot beat out of it, you need a solid front axle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
193 Posts
Looks like your thread is getting turned into a IFS vs Solid Axle debate OP, lol

Which I have no shame in participating in lol. The IFS has less unsprung weight, which is why it rides better than a solid axle. And the Ford TTB can take a beating better than most solid axles, especially for higher speed off roading. I keep my D50 because my truck sees pretty high speeds in the desert (high speeds for a 7,600 pounder that is). I took it down to the Baja 250 a few years ago and ran about 75% of the course (playing, not racing). I also take it to the imperial sand dunes, frequently. The D50 gives a much better ride and typically has more suspension travel (that travel is what made it so popular in Baja racing). The solid axle is the way to go if you rock crawl.

The leaf springs + TTB is a bad idea, I cannot argue that. They severely limit the potential of the TTB and its travel. The binding is insane and bushings do not last long. They are also a PITA to get aligned. A lot of shops just do not have the skills to do it.

As for strength, the D50s have the same end components of a D60. So it is just as strong there. I would have to see some definitive evidence to believe that the D60 is noticeably stronger than the D50, other than the fact that it does have a bigger ring gear.

$900 for a parts truck like that is a steal! Worth it just for the axles and components, not to mention all the small bits. Hope you post up the axle swap as you go, I'd love to how it comes out.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,346 Posts
my problem with the ifs front axle is the thin axle housing that likes to crack/snap at the spring perch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
I've only seen that happen once.

And it takes some effort & patience to align a TTB, but it's not actually harder than anything else. In some ways, it's much easier than most IFSs because the 4 adjustment points (the 2 tie rod sleeves, & the 2 camber cams) are very easy to put tools on.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,346 Posts
in the past two years over at FTE there have been at least 6 documented cases of 4X4 ifs axles cracking and causing severe alignment issues due to the axle housing spreading at the spring perch.
 

·
Project Shamu
Joined
·
2,725 Posts
I beg to differ than the TTB is "just as strong" as a D60. Try getting any kind of stronger axle shaft for the TTB, they're almost non-existent, and even if you do, they're expensive as sh*t! There is a 100% reason why TTB and Ibeam suspension is no longer in production. They had terrible alignment problems, poor handling characteristics with terrible camber change through the suspension cycle.

And to say that new trucks are moving "towards IFS" I would argue with as well. As far as the big 3, Chevy is the only one with an IFS under their 3/4 and 1 ton 4x4s, and even though they do ride nicer than the ford and dodge, they are complete crap.

My vote is Solid Axle, unless it involves a true IFS (A arms), that is built correctly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
The TTB is "true IFS", by definition. And since it's built the way it was designed to be built, it's built "correctly", by definition.

If you've designed a better IFS, tell us about it. But A-arms are NOT part of the definition of an independent suspension. And even if they were, each side of a TIB/TTB is a single A-arm (the beam plus the radius arm make the A).
 

·
Project Shamu
Joined
·
2,725 Posts
The TTB is "true IFS", by definition. And since it's built the way it was designed to be built, it's built "correctly", by definition.

If you've designed a better IFS, tell us about it. But A-arms are NOT part of the definition of an independent suspension. And even if they were, each side of a TIB/TTB is a single A-arm (the beam plus the radius arm make the A).
I guess putting the word "true" was the incorrect term i used. I retract that. But just because it was designed by Ford, does not mean its built "Correctly", there are numerous problems with the TTB and Ibeam suspension that Ford looked over (namely putting leaf springs on an IFS).

Oh I've built plenty better, in dozens of race-trucks and offroad vehicles. Putting them into something like this is completely impractical though. You could put a stronger solid axle in one of these trucks, build it to support 1000hp, and ride/handle very nicely on the street and offroad, for less than building a nicely setup IFS 4x4 setup.

Some pics of a couple things I've built, the 2 custom cars were made from scratch on our frame table. The RZR was my personal car that we built to take to shows.
CAM00208.jpg
20150512_195055.jpg
20151002_131535.jpg
20150918_151812.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Now, it's my turn to say I worded my post wrong... The topic of this thread, and what I'm talking about, is a suspension that would be an improvement on the TTB under a turbo-diesel in a 3/4-ton working, street-legal fullsize truck chassis.

I still don't know what "numerous problems" you're referring to. The only problems I've found with it are:
1) that it's so low-maintenance, and tolerant of worn parts, that most drivers neglect it entirely - even beyond when it's falling apart. They just keep driving. Can you design a FS truck suspension (or one for those toys) that is THAT fail-safe? One you can keep driving & working when the primary link is cracked more than 50% through? One that will still perform well enough to ignore when most of its pivot points are worn to 10x their original tolerance?
2) the pivot points' axes are not along the line between them. But I understand why Ford designed it that way: to limit droop, and to wear more-slowly within the normal travel limits.

I know that many people consider the difficulty of modifying the ride height to be a "problem" with the design, but it's not. It's only a problem with modifying the design, which is not a design consideration.
 

·
Project Shamu
Joined
·
2,725 Posts
Now, it's my turn to say I worded my post wrong... The topic of this thread, and what I'm talking about, is a suspension that would be an improvement on the TTB under a turbo-diesel in a 3/4-ton working, street-legal fullsize truck chassis.
I am so confused by this sentence.
I still don't know what "numerous problems" you're referring to. The only problems I've found with it are:
1) that it's so low-maintenance, and tolerant of worn parts, that most drivers neglect it entirely - even beyond when it's falling apart. They just keep driving. Can you design a FS truck suspension (or one for those toys) that is THAT fail-safe? One you can keep driving & working when the primary link is cracked more than 50% through? One that will still perform well enough to ignore when most of its pivot points are worn to 10x their original tolerance?
I would consider it high maintenance, since it wears out bushings/parts so far because its constantly binding them, and then constantly needs alignments because people ignore them.

Have you seen what these custom race trucks go through? In order of my pictures, the first 2 were of a Class 6100 truck, which is essentially a Spec- Trophy Truck, they get the snot beat out of them for 1000s of miles, and yes, they do crack and break all the time, while still finishing the race. If you have done any kind of race-prep on a truck after a race (or even after a season), you will see that all of the suspension components are worn beyond belief, its ridiculous.

2) the pivot points' axes are not along the line between them. But I understand why Ford designed it that way: to limit droop, and to wear more-slowly within the normal travel limits.
They used the leaf springs to limit droop? That sounds like a terrible idea, like I've been saying.

I know that many people consider the difficulty of modifying the ride height to be a "problem" with the design, but it's not. It's only a problem with modifying the design, which is not a design consideration.
There isnt any manufactures out there that consider the end user to be modifying it. So it doesn't matter what vehicle you buy, every lift kit/modification done, defies what the manufacture intended it to do, including Solid Axle suspensions.

I'm obviously not going to convince you otherwise though, and I in no way am saying that you dont know what you are talking about or anything, this is all just simply my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Ive had fun driving the parts truck around for several days and with gas at 1.29/gal here I am going to keep it together for now and enjoy it whole. Might just look for an axle for the 7.3 and keep this truck whole, at least for now. Kind of a shame to tear down a good running, low mileage one ton just for parts
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top