Sometimes I wish that I had greater 4x4 knowledge that I could deem as sufficient enough to be able to engage in such a discussion, even among friends, without embarrassing myself - but alas, I do not.
I'm relatively new to trucks and even more new to 4x4s. The vast majority of my prior experience is with automobile repair (driveability) and drag racing. I was A.S.E brakes, suspension, and steering however, so it's not
as-if I speak from my ass
ONLY.
Membership on THIS site has proven, and continues to, be extremely valuable. And at these prices? It's a STEAL.
That said, I do not feel sufficiently qualified, nor experienced, to engage in discussions about the ins and outs of track widths of 4x4s.
Certainly I feel that I am able to contribute of
some benefit to the pool -and the users - but my primary desire upon joining this site was
to learn about squarebody trucks. 4x4s were very much an afterthought. Never owned one before the '75K5.
I imagine the difference in track width stems , as previously stated, from the need for tire clearance in the front - read: improved turning radius - and so that the front and rear axles do NOT follow /ride in the other axle's tracks, thus improving traction by default. Stability I do not believe is worthy of consideration here as that seems too....obvious. No offense intended sir.
I would like to be able to speak of articulation but cannot.
I do NOT know enough about the actual mechanics of vintage GM 4x4 parts to dare begin.
Hell, i've got to go study up on whatever angle ol' bucket was talkin about cause i never even heard of it.
I simply wanted to make a point. If the General made it that way, it was FOR A REASON. Maybe best not to be changing it?
I for one, don't know what would happen and I only imagine unintended consequence will follow.
Wouldn't something terrible happen LIKE different size tires front to back or axles with different ratios? I don't know enough about it...
I'm here to learn.
As you were.