Passenger side front, odd bracket on frame.

[Zachanadandy]

Once you lift your vehicle, a ton of things change. It's silly to say that because you can lift a truck that Jeep shouldn't have put a safety device on there to start with. It had a function, regardless of you modifying your vehicle to the point of it being useless, and that function was to improve safety. Clearly, it does improve safety. That's what the bracket is for, end of story.

I'm happy for you that you don't care about it. I'm also happy for you that you don't care if your Jeep rolls over in a crash or not. That doesn't mean others shouldn't care or that you should be telling people that safety features are worthless. That's irresponsible.

If you actually read what I wrote, I said it's useless in the real world for me, and the thousands of others with lifted Jeeps. I never said they shouldn't have installed it. In fact I implied if they actually gave a damn it would be installed on the drivers side too. The fact that it isn't priced to me that it's not about safety it's about 1 specific crash test. You don't need to be an engineer to see that if you flip the offset test to the drivers side, that tire does the exact same thing as the passengers side. It pushed under the frame and increases the potential for a rollover.

Sponsored

 

[Zachanadandy]

During a crash with dynamic load and resistance, the drives side has the front driveshaft feeding back to the transfer case to absorb the impact, there is nothing on the passenger side. So that was the birth of the "Tire Deflector Bracket"

I'm not an engineer on that level, but as far as common sense goes.....it checks the box

A crash hard enough to bend the control arms is going to be absorbed by the driveshaft that has a telescoping joint in the middle? 100% I don't believe that for a second. Not going to go out and crash my truck to prove it, but I have broken many a driveshaft over the years. They aren't all that strong.

 

[Minty JL]

A crash hard enough to bend the control arms is going to be absorbed by the driveshaft that has a telescoping joint in the middle? 100% I don't believe that for a second. Not going to go out and crash my truck to prove it, but I have broken many a driveshaft over the years. They aren't all that strong.

Path of least resistance........someone determined it was needed/required.

Plenty of videos on YT to remove it if that tickles you pickle

 

[sharpsicle]

If you actually read what I wrote, I said it's useless in the real world for me, and the thousands of others with lifted Jeeps. I never said they shouldn't have installed it. In fact I implied if they actually gave a damn it would be installed on the drivers side too. The fact that it isn't priced to me that it's not about safety it's about 1 specific crash test. You don't need to be an engineer to see that if you flip the offset test to the drivers side, that tire does the exact same thing as the passengers side. It pushed under the frame and increases the potential for a rollover.

Would it maybe be better to leave the engineering of safety systems to the engineers then? It's clearly a useful safety addition. Not sure why you're being like this, trying to tear it apart and then saying you aren't. You're not really helping anyone here.

You can remove it if you want, nobody has said otherwise. But it serves a very real purpose for 90% of owners out there, so lets respect that, yes?

 

[Zachanadandy]

Would it maybe be better to leave the engineering of safety systems to the engineers then? It's clearly a useful safety addition. Not sure why you're being like this, trying to tear it apart and then saying you aren't. You're not really helping anyone here.

You can remove it if you want, nobody has said otherwise. But it serves a very real purpose for 90% of owners out there, so lets respect that, yes?

Again, I never said remove it? I never said it couldn't possibly help on a stock vehicle. On a lifted jeep it is useless. If it is effective on a stock vehicle, there should be one on the drivers side too in my opinion. I'd even go as far as to say that if jeep felt it was effective and necessary it would be welded to the frame not a bolt on bandaid for the offset crash test.

 

[sharpsicle]

Again, I never said remove it? I never said it couldn't possibly help on a stock vehicle. On a lifted jeep it is useless. If it is effective on a stock vehicle, there should be one on the drivers side too in my opinion. I'd even go as far as to say that if jeep felt it was effective and necessary it would be welded to the frame not a bolt on bandaid for the offset crash test.

You know that in many applications, bolting can actually be stronger than welding, right? The manner in which they attach it is not a reflection on the seriousness of the part. And as explained before, there's a real mechanical reason it's on one side and not the other.

You are of course entitled to your own opinion, even if it is uninformed. It's just unfortunate that you are unable to respect the need for safety equipment and are more interested in arguing against it.

Have a good one.

 

[Zachanadandy]

You know that in many applications, bolting can actually be stronger than welding, right? The manner in which they attach it is not a reflection on the seriousness of the part. And as explained before, there's a real mechanical reason it's on one side and not the other.

You are of course entitled to your own opinion, even if it is uninformed. It's just unfortunate that you are unable to respect the need for safety equipment and are more interested in arguing against it.

Have a good one.

Reading comprehension is rough? On a stock height vehicle I see is use. Anybody who thinks the telescoping drive shaft serves the same purpose is kidding themselves. If that worked, the control arms themselves would already do the job. It doesn't exist on that side because that's not the test they were trying to improve. Regardless of its intent, be it rollover prevention or keeping the tire out of the passenger compartment, the drive shaft isn't doing that.

 

[MPMB]

Again, I never said remove it? I never said it couldn't possibly help on a stock vehicle. On a lifted jeep it is useless. If it is effective on a stock vehicle, there should be one on the drivers side too in my opinion. I'd even go as far as to say that if jeep felt it was effective and necessary it would be welded to the frame not a bolt on bandaid for the offset crash test.

Symmetry is irrelevant to crush zones.

 

[Hootbro]

A lot of angst over a little bracket.

 

[Zachanadandy]

A lot of angst over a little bracket.

And a lot of people who believe is going to make their Jeep invincible. If it were that effective and/or that big of an issue there would be a recall to get one or on all those pre-2021 JLs and JTs, but there isn't. As far as effectiveness on a lifted jeep, the bracket is well above the center line of the tires now so it will act as a ramp for the tire to push under the jeep, which was allegedly what it was installed to avoid?

 

[whysoserious]

And a lot of people who believe is going to make their Jeep invincible. If it were that effective and/or that big of an issue there would be a recall to get one or on all those pre-2021 JLs and JTs, but there isn't. As far as effectiveness on a lifted jeep, the bracket is well above the center line of the tires now so it will act as a ramp for the tire to push under the jeep, which was allegedly what it was installed to avoid?

I've driven through Patterson before. There's not much there.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

. In fact I implied if they actually gave a damn it would be installed on the drivers side too.

And that's wrong, too, because of the other stuff over there - front driveshaft, pinion and so on.
It's fine when hit on the left, but wasn't on the right.
Have you watched all of the videos?

the bracket is well above the center line of the tires now so it will act as a ramp for the tire to push under the jeep, which was allegedly what it was installed to avoid?

When lifted, the tire going under isn't as likely to wedge under - there's more space.
If the Jeep is that high, there's space for the tire without lifting or rolling.

Ya'll aren't using good logic...... again.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Something not being considered.............
The left wheel is up close and personal to the differential housing - that big casting. The axle tube is solid between wheel and punkin. Nothing to break. It's short, there's little to no leverage, so the wheel and axle don't just snap off and roll under.
On the left, there's extremely little chance of a wheel going under the truck.
Not because of other stuff there, but because of how things are constructed, and the wheel proximity to the differential punkin/housing.
But on the right side there's that long tube with the FAD sitting there very close to the right wheel.
Ever seen the result of a FAD breaking? (stupid question, forum members here for any length of time have)
My bet is that it's there because when there's an impact on that corner, the fad breaks and the wheel goes under the right side, but on the left, there's no fad to break so nothing to come loose and roll under. The differential housing is right there, blocking any such breakage or actions.
It's likely due to how the fad snaps and then you have this wheel loose, not attached, shoving under the truck (or Wrangler for that matter, both our JT and our JLU have that bracket)

If it were that effective and/or that big of an issue there would be a recall to get one or on all those pre-2021 JLs and JTs, but there isn't

And it's not a recall thing because it's to help pass tests moving forward, not tests that prior model years have already failed. Logic. You can't retroactively make a change and say "retest, our 2021 will pass now". It's for subsequent years.

 

[Zachanadandy]

And that's wrong, too, because of the other stuff over there - front driveshaft, pinion and so on.
It's fine when hit on the left, but wasn't on the right.
Have you watched all of the videos?



When lifted, the tire going under isn't as likely to wedge under - there's more space.
If the Jeep is that high, there's space for the tire without lifting or rolling.

Ya'll aren't using good logic...... again.

You might want to go look at your Jeep? The bracket hangs downs. At stock height it could deflect the tire out. Lifted, the center line of the tire is below the bracket meaning it would deflect the tire down and not out. Being that the ground is there, deflecting the tire down means pushing the vehicle up which causes the rollover. The tire pushing under the frame is less likely to lift the vehicle on a lifted truck, but the bracket is significantly lower. If it was only put there to keep the tire out of the passenger compartment then that's a different conversation. If that's the case one could argue that the lift makes the tire likely to push under the body and not into the foot well even without the bracket though? Doesn't look like the driveshaft is doing anything to keep the tire out of the drivers foot well? This the poor rating. Couldn't find the gladiator small overlap test, but here's the JLU pricing my point about needing the bracket on both sides. The drivers got shattered legs and needs to crawl out of his rolled vehicle.
Bottom line watching all these crash test videos is the smaller the overlap the worse you and your vehicle will fair. If you can't swerve to avoid the impact, hit it head on.

 

[sharpsicle]

You might want to go look at your Jeep? The bracket hangs downs. At stock height it could deflect the tire out. Lifted, the center line of the tire is below the bracket meaning it would deflect the tire down and not out. Being that the ground is there, deflecting the tire down means pushing the vehicle up which causes the rollover.

I don't think you know what the bracket is for. It's not for deflecting anything down...

Again, maybe leave the engineering to the engineers? You're making a lot of uninformed statements and then carrying on like they're fact. It's like an episode of Ancient Aliens....

Sponsored