What width bumper?
I am looking at front bumpers and see that many of you have gone with the Stubby or mid width bumpers. What do you gain with these when running 35's? I don't have any clearance issues with 35's and the stock front bumper. Is it to avoid rick damage? If so, has anyone with full bumpers had an issue with either clearance or rock damage to the corners of a full width bumper?
I ask all this because I prefer the look of a full width bumper, but don't want to create issues for myself on rock covered trails.
I ask all this because I prefer the look of a full width bumper, but don't want to create issues for myself on rock covered trails.
Here's my limited experience take on this (and being the proud owner of a mid-width bumper): If you approach an incline (or exit a decline) at a small angle so as to have first one tire contact, then the other, you can improve your approach angle (the angle of the slope you're preparing to mount versus the angle of the place you're currently driving on) by having a bumper that doesn't get in the way. Look at some full-width bumpers and you'll see that at the ends they slope up. This allows for this improvement in approach angle without sacrificing much in the way of protection of the front end. Mid-widths and stubbies just take that to a further extreme, sacrificing more protection for improved approach angle. As I said, I opted for the mid-width up front, and am opting for a full-width in the back (my theory being I can see what not to hit up front, but may need the extra protection in back where visibility is more limited).
Bottom line: Middies and stubbies look really, really cool ...
Photo by Highrlr ...

Bottom line: Middies and stubbies look really, really cool ...
Photo by Highrlr ...

I know I have been in situations where the stubby has been way better. I knocked my stock bumper several times on steep approaches. In some tighter trails, it is better to have the stubby so you aren't banging into things. I've even noticed the difference on steep separture angles as well. If the departure is slightly off-camber and it has you pointed straight down, the stubby is nice to avoid any worries.
That being said, many full width aftermarket bumpers are heavy duty enough to take hits and not suffer any damage. Its basically only an issue with the stock bumpers because you hit one thing and they crumble like paper.
For me, I decided to go stubby after several times of knocking into things on tight trails. My stock one just looked rough.
That being said, many full width aftermarket bumpers are heavy duty enough to take hits and not suffer any damage. Its basically only an issue with the stock bumpers because you hit one thing and they crumble like paper.
For me, I decided to go stubby after several times of knocking into things on tight trails. My stock one just looked rough.
Here's my limited experience take on this (and being the proud owner of a mid-width bumper): If you approach an incline (or exit a decline) at a small angle so as to have first one tire contact, then the other, you can improve your approach angle (the angle of the slope you're preparing to mount versus the angle of the place you're currently driving on) by having a bumper that doesn't get in the way. Look at some full-width bumpers and you'll see that at the ends they slope up. This allows for this improvement in approach angle without sacrificing much in the way of protection of the front end. Mid-widths and stubbies just take that to a further extreme, sacrificing more protection for improved approach angle. As I said, I opted for the mid-width up front, and am opting for a full-width in the back (my theory being I can see what not to hit up front, but may need the extra protection in back where visibility is more limited).
Bottom line: Middies and stubbies look really, really cool ...
Photo by Highrlr ...


Bottom line: Middies and stubbies look really, really cool ...
Photo by Highrlr ...


Beat me to the punch. And I forgot, stubbies look bad ass, too!






