V-Drive Systems. Anyone remember these odd 4wd systems?

Squatch

Master Thread Derailer
Original poster
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2017
Messages
13,661
Location
Everett, Wash, United States
  • Like
Reactions: srimes and J R
I never knew about it until Dirt Every Day ended up with one and did an axle swap because nobody makes gears for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squatch
Well ain't that cool. A bit heavier to be sure, but it has its advantages. I sure do miss the twin I-beam front ends on the Fords - best IFS system ever made.
 
Well ain't that cool. A bit heavier to be sure, but it has its advantages. I sure do miss the twin I-beam front ends on the Fords - best IFS system ever made.
Haha Just goes to show that there's something for everyone. I personally always hated the twin I-beam suspension. Never liked it at all. My dad, on the other hand, was a huge fan of it. 🤷‍♂️
 
Haha Just goes to show that there's something for everyone. I personally always hated the twin I-beam suspension. Never liked it at all. My dad, on the other hand, was a huge fan of it. 🤷‍♂️
I was a huge fan of it as well. Simple, reliable, didn't get knocked outta whack nearly as easy, and didn't wear out in 50K miles like Chevys are noted for. Since Ford did away with it, they have the same crap front end as everybody else now with the same problems.
 
I was a huge fan of it as well. Simple, reliable, didn't get knocked outta whack nearly as easy, and didn't wear out in 50K miles like Chevys are noted for. Since Ford did away with it, they have the same crap front end as everybody else now with the same problems.

Agreed. Seems like they got a bad rap about rollovers but I'm not convinced they were any more prone than anything else in a time when SUVs were growing in popularity but people were still mostly used to sedans and wagons. I certainly didn't notice any excessive instability in any of mine, and like you pointed out, they were much tougher than modern IFS since they had much more in common with a solid axle.

I wasn't really modifying to the extent I do nowadays but I've wondered for a while what kind of travel numbers I could get with some big Johnny joints at the beam joint and the radius arm bushing. Or better yet, ditch the radius arm and try out a 4 link so you could have easier alignment adjustment at more lift height and travel range.
 
Agreed. Seems like they got a bad rap about rollovers but I'm not convinced they were any more prone than anything else in a time when SUVs were growing in popularity but people were still mostly used to sedans and wagons. I certainly didn't notice any excessive instability in any of mine, and like you pointed out, they were much tougher than modern IFS since they had much more in common with a solid axle.

I wasn't really modifying to the extent I do nowadays but I've wondered for a while what kind of travel numbers I could get with some big Johnny joints at the beam joint and the radius arm bushing. Or better yet, ditch the radius arm and try out a 4 link so you could have easier alignment adjustment at more lift height and travel range.
Wasn't the big knock against the twin beam all the camber changes that happened as the suspension traveled? It had to be set perfect, or it chewed through tires like crazy.

1635296988898.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squatch
I was a huge fan of it as well. Simple, reliable, didn't get knocked outta whack nearly as easy, and didn't wear out in 50K miles like Chevys are noted for. Since Ford did away with it, they have the same crap front end as everybody else now with the same problems.
Well from the other side of the table, the " twin traction beam" Ford started using in about 1980 was a total pile of crap in my opinion.
Driving paved mountain canyon roads would grind off a set of front tires in less than 5000 miles on a 4X4 F-250! Constant camber change and steering forces wallowed out all the pivot points, talk about slop !
Of course there is that additional U-joint in the center of the axle shaft.

But at least the trucks cornered like crap and had severe axle tramp in deep snow! :rolleyes:

It's good to have different perspectives among friends. :p
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Squatch
Between the Ranger, two Bronco IIs, a FS Bronco (6" lifted on 35" MTs) I've had, as well as the Explorer, another Ranger, and at least 3 F150s that my dad and brother had (my dad had a former coworker at the local Ford dealership), none of us saw any abnormal tire wear. 🤷

I can't speak to anything that might have been running above or below design ride height without corresponding mods to correct the geometry, but my thoughts on the camber thing are much the same as when someone says the TJ needs crossover steering to get rid of toe change. It just doesn't change that much during the normal range of motion and the times that the camber really is out of whack is either slow speed offroad or brief moments after a sudden bump or rut.
 
Twin I-beam discussions are SO much more civil than politics! ;)
So True Squatch ! :LOL:
I really hesitated sharing my experiences but thought what the heck.
Seems like Rocky Mountain roads are much harder on Fords than the flatlands.
Hey Squatch how is the job working out?
 
So True Squatch ! :LOL:
I really hesitated sharing my experiences but thought what the heck.
Seems like Rocky Mountain roads are much harder on Fords than the flatlands.
Hey Squatch how is the job working out?
The job is going well. I’m keeping farmers’ hours (up at 3:00am, and in bed by 7:30pm). Quite the adjustment, let me tell ya. Thanks for asking! 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: ColoJeep
  • Like
Reactions: Squatch