FOX Steering Stabilizer kit for E_Series (WTD)

brianjwilson

Some sort of lost...
Is that a pressurized shock that you guys are using? I know some of the jeep guys had complaints with bilstein steering dampers causing pull because of that.

I was really happy with my fox ATS steering damper. No pressure on either end, adjustment screw on the bottom to adjust the stiffness and steering feel. Rod ends rather than bushings. I do agree that a properly adjusted setup doesn't NEED one and shouldn't be used as a bandaid. I spent some time setting up my JK axle to drive great without any damper, but adding it improved steering feel and made the front end feel much more solid on rough roads and washboard etc. Here is it on my JK. I would like to fit one to my future van project as well.
 

naterry

13 Cheeseburgers
I agree that perfect suspension geometry negates the need for a steering damper from a driving dynamics standpoint, but safety is also an important concern. We're taught in racing school to keeps our thumbs on or outside the steering wheel for this same reason. A track car hitting a curb or a truck hitting a large unseen rock on one side create the same situation. It's not fun, and will break a thumb like a toothpick. I'm all for anything that dampens that unexpected tangential acceleration of the steering wheel!
 

Mwilliamshs

Explorer
http://www.fordification.com/tech/images/Ibeam-bending02.jpg
This link is a pic from the 1967 ford service manual showing how caster is adjusted on king pin beams. Same rig is used to adjust camber as well...

Wrong beams. Old ones were forged differently and these procedures were for them. I managed to find one of these alignment jigs with the links and jack and whatnot but they're not to be used on the later axles. Mine doesn't even have the lugs to attach the alignment jig. The old guy with the alignment gear is very good and says he's never seen an axle of my vintage out of alignment with good kingpins, bushings, etc. If you think about, there's no real reason caster should need adjustments unless something is worn, bent, etc or modified out of range in which case springs, etc should also be changed.

Narrow rear track is nice for the tight city quarters where I spend way too much time. Can cut a sharper corner when you're not worried about the rear tire hopping the curb.
 
Last edited:

BajaSportsmobile

Baja Ironman
A wider track width being more stable shouldn't need explanation. Especially with your expertise.

It does need explanation for me. I don't really see it.

What was causing the instability, that the wider track width fixed?

Would it be more stable if the track width was, say 20 feet? What difference would that make?

I'm being serious, and speaking from my expertise.

Realize (eliminating tire side wall flex from the equation) that the axle is parallel to the road surface no matter how wide it is.

Regardless of track width, the leaf springs are mounted to the axle and chassis in the exact same place - this is where body roll occurs.

Something to think about...
 

Mwilliamshs

Explorer
It's the rear track width relative to the front. The narrower end acts as a pivot. Wider, less narrow, etc is less likely to oscillate.
 

tgreening

Expedition Leader
I dont know man. This sounds a bit like voodoo technology to me and I have to go with Baja on this one. Unless there's hard data to back this up, it goes right up there with the ButtDyno.
 

BajaSportsmobile

Baja Ironman
ButtDyno - I had to google that.

Too funny!

landscape-1426270890-derriere-deceit-final4-copy.jpg
 

jblaze5779

Observer
I replaced the old dampener I had on my 6" and it brought back the feel was looking for. I was also just looking for something to resist the wind and concrete grooves.
 

KYC

Adventurer
Might be a little off topic, but can that fox strut be used on the stock brackets?

I have a monroe one on order, but I would like to get the most stiffest stabilizer available.
 

brianjwilson

Some sort of lost...
It does need explanation for me. I don't really see it.

What was causing the instability, that the wider track width fixed?

Would it be more stable if the track width was, say 20 feet? What difference would that make?

I'm being serious, and speaking from my expertise.

Realize (eliminating tire side wall flex from the equation) that the axle is parallel to the road surface no matter how wide it is.

Regardless of track width, the leaf springs are mounted to the axle and chassis in the exact same place - this is where body roll occurs.

Something to think about...



I have always wondered the same thing. The chassis is carried by the leaf springs, and would rotate around the point where the leaf springs bolt to the axle. In theory the axle should remain parallel to the road, save any tire deformation. But I have always read that the e series vans handle so much better with rear wheel spacers too.

For what it's worth, the track width of the E series van is 2.8" wider in front, than the rear. It could be that the rear tires are fighting over which side is going to properly follow the track of the front tire, or try to stick to the same ruts in the highway.

I guess having a wider track width also means that the tires are sharing the load more equally, so in theory there would be less weight transfer to the outside tire. Maybe less tire deformation? Hard to believe that small amount would play a big part.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
188,641
Messages
2,908,236
Members
230,800
Latest member
Mcoleman
Top