Golden Spike compressed into 24 pictures...







Pictures taken October 1, 2002.

Golden Crack almost had the X for lunch! (At least it sure looks that way, I would be screaming...)

Leslie screamed a bit (she was filming). The truck sat on the slider, it held up well.

We had to cheat again (tire in the crack) from that point to get over.

The only damage for the trail was a plastic bumper insert on Mosi's Discovery.

No shit! Looks pretty hairy!

Ian,

Thank you for documenting the trail in so few pictures. I can show people parts that I so vividly remember.

Hope you guy's had a great time. I am looking forward to going back and playing with non stock truck.

Todd

montage, I recall the first ~ 4 to be on the poison spider mesa trail leading up the spike.

A bit surprised that Mosi’s built Disco did'nt get across the crack cleanly either, what about from much higher up where Daisy supposedly crossed? Do you think its possible with either of your vehicles?

BTW did any other vehicles make the run/pictures?

golden crack . . .
golden stairs . . .
golden wall . . .
gold bar rim . . .

At least they called the first one waterfall instead of golden shower . . .

Where'd you hear that ?
Mosi drove straight across easily.

Daisy and Pikachu and I and Mosi and you guys at goneMOAB all went across the same place. There is no where else to get across it without a seriously built vehicle.

Mosi and I were the only people on Golden Spike except for one Jeep at the crack. It was a nice casual, stress free 3 days of wheeling.

Glad to hear that

I guess I misunderstood your "we had to cheat again (tire in the crack) & plastic bumper damage on Mosi's Discovery" comments.

To me Daisy's crossing looks like a different spot higher up?

Damn that looks like fun...

Ian, isn't Pikachu the X with 35" tires? I'm curious as to how his X did on your run.

He wasn't with us, he was there 2 years ago.

Ian, do you feel that solid axle would have made "golden crack" and easier obstacle? It seems that the IFS was the cause of that tip up.... When Mosi hit this in the disco, was his tip as severe, or is it apples to oranges because of how you both are built up etc... Not trying to start a flame up.

Pika has 36" bias ply Swampers. When he did the Crack 2 years ago, he had 32" SSR radials.

CD actually had an easier time at the Crack (went with Pika) with his 31" BFG Muds because they allowed him to flex a bit more.

Without a doubt, solid gets through that spot without as much tip.

I just checked the video, and the body on Mosi's Disco was pretty much level all the way across.

IFS sucks plain and simple. It always has, and always will.

What's funny is the public wants IFS because they believe it offers a better ride and handling. It doesn't.

Yes, I've often wondered why F1 cars don't have solid axles.

Whoa you back?. I was looking forward to hooking up with you and Disco Mosi next week.

We are heading out Wedensday and are back Monday. 6 trucks.

Looked like a good time...was the weather with you?. More pics please !

Claus

Funny you mention that. Most of my friends who don't offroad and ask me about it always say, "those rockcrawlers are sweet with their independent suspensions and all, that's the best thing to have, right?"

Uhh, well....no. "See it's like this...."

An F1 race car isn't really a truck now is it ?

Then what about Trophy Trucks? Even good quality radio controlled race cars and trucks have independent suspension. Why is that? To further perpetuate the myth? And why is it different on a truck? In on-road situations independent suspension is far superior for cars or for trucks. It's ridiculous to suggest that it's a myth that somehow the public has been swayed into believing. It doesn't take more than a tiny bit of common sense to understand the advantages of independent suspension for comfort and handling. There are disadvantages--design costs are high, manufacturing costs are high, it's less durable, far more moving parts, and worse off-road (where articulation is a concern.) If common sense doesn't shed enough light, Drive a Cherokee over some washboards and then drive, dare I say, a new Explorer. The difference will be obvious.

And why would a truck need that ?
Why would I want that ?

I have a WRX and it handles great. My Xterra on the other hand handles like shit compared to it.
I would never want an SUV to handle like my WRX.

Sadly, most of America is uneducated, and feel that they need an SUV to be safe, because it's big and bulky. What they fail to realize is that it is not safer than a car, when it is driven like a car.

So the manufacturers cave in to the demands of the public and continue to make the common SUV practically useless off-road, but more refined on road.

Watch as this continues over the next 10 years as we come full circle back to the station wagon.

BTW, Mosi had no trouble keeping up with me on some 60MPH stretches of desert road and washboard in his Discovery, which is solid front and rear.

PS: Desert trucks use independant suspension up front because they are 2WD. They still all use a solid axle in the rear.

A couple of things by the way of truck racing evolutions.

CORR runs 2 and 4wd drive and what is generally regarded as the top class is the 4s.

In SCORE the top classes are generaly going to 4wd trucks since it offers better tracton and handling at speed. Before they avoided 4wd to cut back costs and they were primarily going with i-beam suspension in the front and cost are out of controll anyways.

But for some reason now they are going with an a-arm suspension that is more compatible with 4wd.

On the flip side if that there is the big controversy in the extreme crawling camp now that some guys are selling of their straight axle buggies and fabbing new ones using a-arm and IFS technology.

True, but that has nothing to do with my point. Which is that independent suspension has huge advantages for on-road handling and comfort over rough surfaces.

True, but again has nothing to do with my point. In fact, you say they're more refined on road, so I guess you agree that there are advantages independent suspension.

OK, that claim at best is extremely subjective. For one thing, you have rather oversized tires and a lift kit. And who's to say how close either of you were to the envelope? And they're two completely different trucks to start with.

What does being 2WD have to do with anything? They could still use a solid axle up front if it offered any advantages, but it doesn't. In fact, the indepenent suspension on the front of those trucks no doubt greatly improves handling. As for a reason not to use them on the rear, I would guess it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to harness that kind of power, with that kind of travel, and still be durable enough to last a race.

I'm certainly not saying that all trucks should have independent suspension, or that there's any advantage in situations where articulation is part of the equation. But given that most trucks (including Discos, and Cherokees) never see dirt, you can't blame the manufacturers for trying to make them as comfortable, and good handling as they can to make them appeal to the market who buys them... which is simply 99% street going folks. It's all about the dollars. Why make something that appeals to 1% of a potential market when you can make something that appeals to 99%? It's just good business sense. People who don't like it modify the hell out of their trucks. That's part of the fun anyway.

Yeah, but I'll still take my Cherokee over an Explorer any day of the week. I for one don't hate IFS, but it does not fit my style of driving. I am a right laner so on road, solid feels pretty much the same to me, and offroad, I have seen a couple of instances, plus been in a couple where solid definitely won out of IFS. For the level of offroading that I am at now, IFS/Solid doesn't make a differenc, but as I get more comfortable, I am finding that the harder obstacles are more fun, and less dangerous in a rig that is solid front and rear.....