WK IFS Looks Familiar

fdezone · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:22 pm

You can't help but notice all the shared similarities. These pictures are of a WK outfitted with Superlift's Frame Integrated Technology (F.I.T.) Kit. What the hell, over?!

chemguy · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:37 pm

Too bad superlift basically flipped us the bird with this deal.

0311_DoC · **Posted:** Tue Jan 17, 2006 11:22 pm

fdezone wrote:

You can't help but notice all the shared similarities. These pictures are of a WK outfitted with Superlift's Frame Integrated Technology (F.I.T.) Kit. What the hell, over?!

<<<<< noob here. what is a WK?

chefdab · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:12 am

A WK is the new Grand cherokee. The biggest difference I have noticed though is that the upper a-arms on the WK and XK seem to run almost straight up and down, only following the curves of the wheel and tire. Our upper a-arms have a much more pronounced curve to them. I'm not a suspension expert, but I would think this would alter how you would build a lift for our particular IFS.

chemguy · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:22 am

What you are describing is the knuckle which you can see in these picks, not the upper A-arms. The upper a-arms are not visible in these pics.

jpzkj · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:34 am

There is also the small detail of NO ALUMINUM DIFF.

Iron Dana 44 center section for it and the Commander.

NU ARTY BOY · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:15 am

Would it be possible to use one of these D44 diffs in a KJ?

ManicMechanicJoe · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:33 pm

anything is possible if you have the time and money to do it. I am sure it could be fabbed in place on our KJ's. Then we need custom CV's for it. A straight axle conversion might be the best bet for us here.

Jeepjeepster · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:00 pm

Wow, a dana 44!?!

They also fixed the lower balljoint problem if you can see it in that pic. The balljoint is facing downward instead of upward.

2003KJ · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 5:13 pm

wow that does look freakishly similar.

Couldn't help but notice how FUN it would be to do any kind of tranny service on that thing....with the exhaust RIGHT there and all.... :idea:

JeepnJer · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:02 pm

Jeepjeepster wrote:

Wow, a dana 44!?!

They also fixed the lower balljoint problem if you can see it in that pic. The balljoint is facing downward instead of upward.

Yeah, definitely a better design inverting the LBJ on the WK. It's beyond me why the engineers would design the KJ's LBJ to have all the weight pulling down on the ball joint. If they would've designed the KJ like the WK, we would've had more ground clearance under the lower control arms too.

jpzkj · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 9:39 pm

JeepnJer wrote:

Jeepjeepster wrote:

Wow, a dana 44!?!

They also fixed the lower balljoint problem if you can see it in that pic. The balljoint is facing downward instead of upward.

Yeah, definitely a better design inverting the LBJ on the WK. It's beyond me why the engineers would design the KJ's LBJ to have all the weight pulling down on the ball joint. If they would've designed the KJ like the WK, we would've had more ground clearance under the lower control arms too.

Thats because.....they blew it !!

DaveKJ02 · **Posted:** Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:07 pm

This is the best explanation of why our joints fail I've seen. I'm no engineer but have taken a lot of college physics and the pictures and logic all make sense........

The Liberty ball joint issue affects bone stock vehicles just the same. From seeing several failures this is what I can come up with. First of, they are not greasable. The original recall had to do with heat from the rotor causing the dust boots to deteriorate. The heat is still there, and you still can't grease them. Secondly, the front suspension design is flawed. Look at how the knuckle and lower arm are setup. The ball joint is always under tension, the spring is pushing down on the lower arm while the weight of the vehicle is pulling the knuckle up. If and when the ball joint fails it just separates.

Compare the KJ front suspension to the WK front suspension. With the WK the lower ball joint is under compression, just like with a solid axle Jeep. If the ball joints wears out or is loose, the joint stays together due to the weight of the vehicle.

KJ Suspension

WK Suspension

LibertyCRD · **Posted:** Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:40 am

I can't believe they looped the exhaust around the driveshaft like that. You gotta' be kidding! So I guess if you lift the WK past a certain amount, the driveshaft will wipe out the exhaust??

2003KJ · **Posted:** Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:48 am

LibertyCRD wrote:

I can't believe they looped the exhaust around the driveshaft like that. You gotta' be kidding! So I guess if you lift the WK past a certain amount, the driveshaft will wipe out the exhaust??

either that or its gonna cost an arm and a leg to lift it, since you'll have to disconnect the exhaust, lift it, then find somewhere for the exhaust to be reconnected again.

krazz1e · **Posted:** Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:44 pm

don't matter who actually wheels them right? :roll:

Jeepjeepster · **Posted:** Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:39 pm

When you lift an ifs jeep, the driveshaft doesnt move. Just like our jeeps, but when they come out with a lift that lowers the entire front suspension, it will cost.

fdezone · **Posted:** Sat Jan 28, 2006 4:49 pm

Image of a WK with stock suspension. Looks like we may be able to borrow some components. I'm specifically eye-balling the swaybar link.

ManicMechanicJoe · **Posted:** Sun Jan 29, 2006 6:20 am

thats not a swaybar link-looks like a skid to me...

chemguy · **Posted:** Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:47 am

WK IFS Looks Familiar

Who is online