Well this will probably take me years to get all together and it isn't as if I don't have other projects that need done too.
So for now it's just a General dreaming post.
I plan on trying to drop a Supra front diff in the front of my '82, so not really long travel but something more than what I have now. Custom A arms and all the mounts. Plan is to make a unique diff mount that will also have all the a arm mounts in it. Stuffing this baby up close to the RZ pan which will give me more clearance at ride height than the solid axle pumpkin does. But hey plans can change and who knows how this will end up, yes crazy, and yes crazy, did I already say that?

LOL, Kinda but better. Ha ha. Didn't know he was doing that. I don't want to use stock a arms and I want the mounts to have more ground clearance. So longer a arms that pivot closer to the CV, no tube steel frame below the diff. some creative use of gusseted sheet/plate instead.

Why not just link it?

More ground clearance to the diff. and I wan the lower a arms to have more trail clearance. All theory until it's built.
But I am looking at a linked rear using trailing arms for the lowers. Unless I do IRS! Bwaaaahaaaahaaaa

Are you going to convert the SA frame to IFS, or are you going to start with an IFS frame? 

Have you wheeled IFS before?  The higher ground clearance for the diff may not be worth the loss of articulation, or the added cost in replacing steering components when wheeling tires bigger than 33's in the rocks.

the link i posted is with a center mount diff and modified stock arms to be 3+ inches longer each side. basically a center mount with long travel arms
not trying to stop you. i wheel my long travel IFS for a few years now.
mounting point for the arms closer to the diff wont necessarily give you more ground clearance

I've probably wheeled the most IFS's on this board and all I have is one word..... WHY!

For me I can deal with an IFS rig if it is what I have, but I would never go from a straight axle to IFS, just doesn't make sense. Of course if you are planning on making a go-fast desert racer then yeah go IFS but still you don't convert to IFS with all the IFS rigs out there.

Well, whatever you do, keep us in the loop with alot of pictures.   

If you had a rooty, rocky trail would you think IFS would work better? If I was crawling huge boulders then maybe links and solid axles but in the 30's years of wheelin I still haven't seen a huge benefit to a solid front axle. No I don't, haven't or probably never wheel in the Southwest. My first 4x4 was a bought new and tricked out 1982 Dodge Ram 50, it would spank any other mini truck of the day in the desert and stay with the Jeeps my buddies all had when in the mountains. The wheelin hasn't changed. All the good ole' days.................

I can cite a few advantages: strength of the axles, better articulation, stronger suspension, less moving parts in the suspension, clearance stays the same at all times as the suspension travels up, just for starts. I'm not saying IFS doesn't work well, I have wheeled them to the extreme and they do very good. I'm just saying the benefits of a straight axle far exceed those of an IFS in most cases. I've done more 3 wheelin' in IFS rigs than I can remember, actually I can remember.    

I guess you've never seen an IFS rig twist the frame due to the forces that bottoming out causes? A stock straight axle truck does not have the added sections that an IFS rig has to try to prevent the twisting action that is caused by this leverage. Sure you can add cross members to attempt to prevent it from happening but then the suspension mounts will also need additional beef to keep from being ripped off the frame. So in order to really do it right the cost of building an IFS rig far exceeds building a straight axle and the straight axle will still have the edge on travel and body roll. As always the terrain is always a factor on which will work better in a certain situation, if you find that an IFS rig works better in you area then go for it. Even Humvee's/Hummer's tend to run around on three wheels offroad more than a stock straight axle rig, been there done that for sure including the H1 and H3. So do these pictures show that I can squeeze out as much travel that an IFS in mostly the stock configuration? In some of the other shots it shows how very little is also needed to have the same rig lift a tire and not even hit down on the bumpstops on the fronts. It is a mixed bag on an IFS.

your going to fast if your bottoming out while rock crawler or that your suspension is way to soft. 
IFS has its disadvantages but the challenges it has on the trails makes it much funner experience.

i really like to see what R.DesJardin comes up with.

All good points to be brought up. Of course I'll be adding a IFS mount/crossmember unit it's part of the design. Definitely no torsion bars for me.
Too many comparisons get made with stock IFS and flexy SAS suspensions. Question is why does everyone do 63's and RUF, or links? Stock sucks so they say. The question I don't hear ask much is why are many of the Ultra 4 cars running IFS? Seems like they need both flex and stability, just like most of us, well at least that's what I want to have from a suspension.
Oh, yeah, I like designing and building too, go figure.

Don't wanna flood your page with my crap to show that IFs works and that my mild LT build has been great. 3 wheeling isht a problem when locked. I gotten over some big rocks on 3 wheels. I was gonna say ultra 4 has started going more IFS now and I do see it as the future of wheeling.

Leaf to links and now its ifs turn to rule haha

Preaching to the choir. The input is fine. You have  a link to your build and IFS mods?

There was a company that made a bracket that went between the rear lower a-arm mount.  Like a extra cross member for the front end. 
 

I think that was Downey

I too, and waiting to see what comes out from this. 

 
Me too
 
 

All good points to be brought up. Of course I'll be adding a IFS mount/crossmember unit it's part of the design. Definitely no torsion bars for me.
Too many comparisons get made with stock IFS and flexy SAS suspensions. Question is why does everyone do 63's and RUF, or links? Stock sucks so they say. The question I don't hear ask much is why are many of the Ultra 4 cars running IFS? Seems like they need both flex and stability, just like most of us, well at least that's what I want to have from a suspension.
Oh, yeah, I like designing and building too, go figure.

most ultra 4 cars are running 15-20k dollar IFS setups and it is still a compromise.