I think the arguement for tierod upgrade also needs to take into account the offset of the wheels on the spindle. Like a seesaw when the spindle is centered in the wheel (split 50/50) very little force is required to change its position. The further out you move the weight/force (70/30) the greater force is needed to affect the object or even keep it straight. Once the wheels move out from the center of the spindle the tierods inherit the load due to leverage. I dont think the stock tie rods could survive for long with the 15.50 tires on a heavily offset rim. They might be fine on a truck with taller tires that retain the factory offset though. I also would like to say that Phil saved me a ton of money when modifying my truck and is one of the most respectable and helpful business people I have met. He even shipped an expensive item before I paid for it because he knew I needed it quickly as the truck was in pieces on the mechanics lift.

LMAO!!!

Hey Neo,

What did you end up doing with your little Goldilocks braid you put in your pocket on LB?

Cool! I heard the H2 was awsome offroad but haven't really seen pictures. Any more I can find on this stuff? That's great work guys. Anyone who cuts their hair off for hummer sake must be hardcore.

I agree with phil that since the drivetrain and streering systems are separate, A stonger tie rod will not directly cause a CV shaft breakage. Most IFS CV shaft breakage I have seen was due to excess angles on the shafts (from improper lifts: a ZR2, or excessive throttle while flexed out: 2500 chevy). Both times tie rods were unaffected.

However, a stronget tierod could cause the center link to bend or break, but if you didnt have the stonger tie rod, the tie rod would have boken (under less strees) before the CL bends;

so IMO stonger tie rods = good for ALL IFS set ups.

Holy shiat, how did I miss all of this.

The GM IFS is junk because of the steering. A more stable steering system could be engineered for IFS but if it's not costing GM much money to have a current setup utilized in a new vehicle, why make a change? The tie-rods snap and bend on 2500 Sierra pickups all of the time doing normal construction duty. It's not some new problem that has just shown up on the H2. It's amplified for the H2 because we run a larger stock tire and are able to put lifts and more larger tires on and actually wheel the things.

Just imagine a straw with the ends at the tip of your two index fingers. If you push inward, it's not entirely easy to bend the straw until it gets out of alignment with itself. The strength of a column. But if there was a bend or kink in it, when you applied a little pressure it would easily bend. The front tires on the H2 are your finger tips. In certain situations, the tires are getting traction and are pulling themselves around the pivot of the spindle and applying more force than normal on the steering linkage (the straw). This is really dramatic in situations such as Alec's video where the traction control suddenly kicks in or when the truck is bouncing and the tire is spinning in the air and suddenly makes contact with the ground and gains traction.

The tie rods attach to the steering knuckle forward of the pivot point. If there was room and a way that the tie rods could have attached behind the pivot of the knuckle THIS problem would be as common. This problem gets exaggerated when the front suspension droops or compresses because it makes the "bend in the straw" even more severe.

With all that being said, it really is an asinine comment to suggest that by beefing up the tie rods you will therefore be damaging the "driveline." Personally I believe that more components of the steering could be a little less forgiving and "beefed up." About the only way you will apply force past the pitman arm is if the driver is forcing the steering wheel. If the centerlink was a bit more sturdy, I think, we would see less problems from the front end if the drivers did not force the steering to the point of popping a steering gear.

I will say this. I have 37" tires, the FT stabilizers and the Cognito supports and I've been to Moab, Tellico and a place in Alabama since (well, I didn't have the Cognitos for Moab) and still do not need an alignment.

Yes, the best demonstration of momentum is when you went up tipover.

Actually, I think when he had to change it on Golden Spike while the engine was running (for the simultaneous rear winching activity) and while the vehicle was slipping was the worst. "Come on, guys "

But you're right... The change-out on Metal Masher doesn't look like much fun:

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Adam was definitely valuable on this trip. All of us appreciated him working on all of those tie rods. I am a little worried about the photo shop mods to this picture though.

One important point about the Fabtech HD tie rods has been missed in this discussion.

They look cool.

Wow. I never thought about that.

Wow. I never thought about that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>rut ro

Now I would never be confused with a mechanic so this could be a dumb question but, could the fact that Neo and Bebe are running 35s have in any way contributed to what happened to their rigs?

Although anecdotal and perhaps an aberration, it would seem that CP’s mangling of the FT tie rod, while hurting nothing else (as far as we know) last month, is consistent with your idea that the HD rods aren’t the likely cause of driveline damage when it occurs.

I do it every day </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Does shaving really count as "cutting."

From the explanation of how it occured and the picture of the one ring gear I saw, I would say no. The trucks were apparently not moving, no spinning tires, so the tires were just "there" exerting no force. The only "extra" they probably added to that situation was a little more contact patch and the associated traction, but that could occur with any tire.

I'm guessing that this shows that the I-5 isn't all that weak after all.

From the explanation of how it occured and the picture of the one ring gear I saw, I would say no. The trucks were apparently not moving, no spinning tires, so the tires were just "there" exerting no force. The only "extra" they probably added to that situation was a little more contact patch and the associated traction, but that could occur with any tire.

I'm guessing that this shows that the I-5 isn't all that weak after all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks, that is what I figured the case was but wanted to check.