Huh....what's all more exposed with the bent-style lower arms? Nothing on the 100-series. Nothing on the 80-series. The lower shock mounts are well tucked away on these trucks. The drive shaft is a bit more of a target though that gets addressed two ways.
1. With only the drive shaft to worry about clearance-wise, picking the right line is easier. With the bent arms one doesn't need to worry about placement hardly ever.
2. Put on a heavier tubed rear drive shaft...which I have for both vehicles.
You have never hung on an arm? Dear Lord....the folks in the 80 forum would wonder what trails you're running.
Also keep in mind here we're talking in the FJC forum where these guys are experts at arm hangin'. I don't want my arms lifting the axle over rocks and ledges as you've pointed out. I want my TIRE to lift the axle up and over. The picture of the ice chest above illustrates the merits of this.
I had the larger steel on my '93's arms along with the larger stock arms that the 93-94 had over the 95+. Bent those as well.
Tell you what....I stand by the merits of these angled arms. On the trail I have no more worries. They clear the stuff just like 4WD Toy Mag reported on the Rubicon.
I wish I had them when I was here. Climbing three ledges at 4 of the wheels at once, fully locked, hopping, and you can see the DS arm mount is cleared while I'm hopping on the arm which stops my progress. With the new arms I'd a driven right up as nothing would have hit.
. The only thing that hit was the front tie-down rings on an 80 who took the tallest part of that step straight on - after beating the rock a couple of times
.
