Seriously man, just quit. That's so uncalled for your not even a part of this discussion.
No, it wasn't as far out of line as you think. What was being said is that a solid-axle vehicle will undoubtedly go farther in snow than one equipped with an IFS drop bracket. The only evidence presented was that "There are more holes for snow to go through"
So, the extra ground clearance in the center over a solid-axle should be discounted? Because it's there. We should also ignore other things such as different gearing and possibly a locker. Let's also ignore the different style of suspension that these setups run that could contribute to the amount of traction. Solid axles are popular for a number or reasons, ease of lifting them, articulation, simplicity and strength. So they generally go into the more hardcore builds which makes them appear to be "superior".
In the example used of a 4" drop bracketed Ranger, vs a SAS Ranger, they're NOT going to be equal because in the real world, the SAS ranger is going to be built a lot more than the IFS one. Nobody just gets up one morning and does a SAS for funsies.
I'll keep debating trivial stuff in here for entertainment until this **** of a thread gets locked.
Hell, if I was to receive one of these kits in the mail I'd slap it on my truck just because it would offend everyone so terribly to "do something like that to a Raptor" We are starting to take each other way too seriously. I realize what my comments said earlier in this thread were and I retract them. I was wrong. The idea that there is an agreed upon formula to build a Raptor "correctly" is just ridiculous.
