Savvy off-road sold? (the unofficial Savvy customer support and Savvy rant thread)
- Thread starter Gollywomper
- Start date
The prices need a redesign, $1250 for a rear bumper is wild…
Again, this is where some kind of specific behavior ought to be identified with a proposed design change to address that behavior.
An interesting thing about shocks is that even with the fairly recent integration of DSC reservoirs into an already very nicely tuned set of Foxes, the function and purpose of the mid arm does not change. All that happens is a reinforcement of the existing argument that many people are looking at control arm geometry to solve what is really a shock problem.
Which is possibly where they're going with their new LJ build. I am unsure how I've not been clear about that? They're running all new products obviously with a different philosophy of some sort, maybe their change in design for the midarm is following that philosophy.
I'm not arguing for or against Savvy, I am just abstaining from shitting on a product that isn't released because I don't want things to change.
For sure, though I do think they go hand in hand. Dynamic anti squat and other geometries can affect how you need to tune the shocks to handle the body/axle movement.
A well designed and built Jeep is going to have an overall sense of integration and harmony where the various systems compliment and augment each other. Some of these systems permiate deeper into the overall build than others. Good shocks that function properly will define the character of a Jeep far more than the midarm ever will.
It has long been argued that if given a choice of just one, shocks ought to take priority over a midarm.
Whatever this change in philosophy is, it has thus far been shown as being incoherent and confused where design and performance are concerned.
Savvy is doing this to itself, separate from any arguing for or against what they are doing.
Correct, so if they do small design changes, then it won't matter in the end because people who want that harmony are going to adjust and manipulate everything anyways. Disregarding the price changes.
I mean, for all we know they could just change the arm material to be chromoly instead of aluminum and there be no real big design change. Do I personally believe that's what'll happen, no, but I'm not going to say their redesigned product sucks ass before we even see what the hell it is.
I can agree based on hypotheticals, but that's the point I'm making. We've been discussing constantly the hypothetical function of each part and I haven't really seen any real world application of it.
I would like to hear why you say it's confused where design and performance are concerned, though, because I have no experience with their new stuff.
We are long past hypotheticals at this point. We already tore apart the redesigned front and rear bumpers as demonstrating in full view that new Savvy does not understand how to design in the unique way that made the original TJ product line special.
Care to share so we can all be on the same ground? This could have gone for far less time if so.
It occurred within this very thread not very long ago.
Only thing I see is the discussion of the rear flange being not 90° for the sturdiest area moment of inertia reaction. Of which I kick-started the conversation for. I don't see any talking about the inner guards that are supposedly on the new bumper as per Savvy's response to the questions I posted.
How is this clearance robbing design an "improvement"?
https://wranglertjforum.com/threads...port-and-savvy-rant-thread.68187/post-1615342
We are also ignoring what the very guy who designed the thing does with the midarm kit when he stretches the wheelbase. The arms don't change and the entire suspension assembly moves together as a unit with the frame arches.
Never said it was. I was replying to a post saying that there was posting of tearing down the front and rear bumpers and discussing the faults thereof. I see pictures of a cad drawing from what you've posted. Yes I agree that's a downgrade in that aspect. Only thing I seen from any conversation of an actual teardown is the one I've referenced. However, that discussion never lead to an answer of real testing that the new rear flange on the front bumper is realistically worse. If the flange works enough for it's purpose, why would it need to be changed to 90°?
FWIW, this is what they said when asked what changes they were making to the midarm.
