Weldtec Design 2WD Bent I-Beam Lift for E350 (E series vans)

[mgmetalworks]

https://www.fleet.ford.com/truckbbas/non-html/Q172.pdf


I guess I remembered something wrong... the CoG of the vehicle is the key factor, not the CoG of a particular module.

 

[Mwilliamshs]

Does anyone know what the CoG would be, for a wagon, that should not be exceeded? I couldn't find it in the Body Builders Advisory Service pubs (thanks MGMetalworks, though... That's a lot of good info).
I'd be surprised if a 4-5 inch lift exceeded it... But maybe.

CoG (center of gravity) is a place, not a measurement or number, so it can't be exceeded per se. I think what you mean is what's the maximum distance the Center of Gravity can me moved from where it is originally. Do we know where it is originally? Since it would move or change depending on cargo, fuel level, passenger occupancy, attitude, etc I doubt it's location is measured directly (automated Etcha-Sketch?) but more likely the steering angle, roll angle (degree of lean left or right), wheel speeds, vehicle speed, etc are measured and compared to some standard table of values to determine whether things are under control or not. Changing things enough that one or more of these values is consitently outside the normal range is what would upset the RSC programming, like the way changing cities without reprogramming your radio presets can disrupt reception but instead of static you get an error code, warning light, etc. I don't know anything at all about RSC but too much about metrology.

 

[mgmetalworks]

Someone will eventually come on here and say that they've got a lifted RSC van and they have no problems. I have a lifted RSC van and I've experienced no ill-effects except for an occasional engagement of the system on certain twisty corners. The point I think most people miss is that the RSC system was designed to work a certain way within a certain set of conditions. If you change those conditions, the system may still function but the effectiveness of its ability to prevent a roll over may be drastically reduced. Conversely, it may over-react and cause some weird driveability issues. You won't know....you can't know what the effects of lifting the vehicle will have (or not have) on the RSC without either going through the math that Ford engineers used to design the system and/or extensive experimentation. At best you can say that lifting the van doesn't cause any MILs.

I know that Ujoint has driven lifted RSC vans hard. I'm not arguing that you can't lift a van with RSC. I'm saying that lifting a van changes how RSC behaves and no one really knows to what extent.

 

[Skinny]

That .pdf sounds like a CYA document. Since these trucks come in a C+C model, I wouldn't be surprised if a technician with a factory scanner couldn't get in and turn that system off for that particular scenario. Be interested to hear anyone that knows first hand what an ambulance or bus company does after completing a vehicle if they are reflashing the ECM or manipulating the RSC system with a programmer.

At the end of the day I would think most people would just want it to work correctly. I'm assuming that if a fault occurred in one of the sensors pertaining to RSC and not ABS, the system would go into limp but still have proper braking action with all of the assorted Christmas tree lights telling you there is a problem.

I think worst case you could always swap a master cylinder and/or booster to eliminate the entire thing but these things are fairly new and not sure if you want to start getting that deep into it. Anything can be made to work...how deep are your pockets and patience

I agree, unless you are swapping to a steering box with a different ratio or putting some stupid soft springs in it with no sway bar....I would just build it and see what it does.

 

[mgmetalworks]

That .pdf sounds like a CYA document...

It most certainly is...

Since these trucks come in a C+C model, I wouldn't be surprised if a technician with a factory scanner couldn't get in and turn that system off for that particular scenario. Be interested to hear anyone that knows first hand what an ambulance or bus company does after completing a vehicle if they are reflashing the ECM or manipulating the RSC system with a programmer...

I have a factory scanner and software and I've not seen this functionality in the tool. The modules are different between RSC vans and non-RSC vans so it isn't a matter of turning things off. Replacing parts is the only way I've found to eliminate RSC. The trick is finding the right combination of modules to work in your van and get them all set up correctly. The software really isn't designed for this level of customization so I'm trying to figure out a way to get this done that isn't a huge pain in the butt.

 

[Skinny]

I say this as I am no Ford van expert...

What about interchangeability across the higher GVW van series like an E550? I know they make coaches, RV's, and bucket trucks out of them. I would think a bucket truck has a much higher COG than an E350 does. Since they have the same body/engine/trans, would the modules possibly swap?

Plan A: lift it and see what happens
Plan B: swap master cylinder and remove LED's from cluster

 

[ujoint]

I know that Ujoint has driven lifted RSC vans hard. I'm not arguing that you can't lift a van with RSC. I'm saying that lifting a van changes how RSC behaves and no one really knows to what extent.

Just for the record, V5 had the RSC disconnected for my handling video, could never drive it that hard with the RSC trying to do its thing

I say this as I am no Ford van expert...

What about interchangeability across the higher GVW van series like an E550? I know they make coaches, RV's, and bucket trucks out of them. I would think a bucket truck has a much higher COG than an E350 does. Since they have the same body/engine/trans, would the modules possibly swap?

Plan A: lift it and see what happens
Plan B: swap master cylinder and remove LED's from cluster

The 550's haven't been around for a long time, 03 I think. But, think you're talking about the 450's anyway and they never got the RSC system.

 

[mgmetalworks]

I say this as I am no Ford van expert...

What about interchangeability across the higher GVW van series like an E550? I know they make coaches, RV's, and bucket trucks out of them. I would think a bucket truck has a much higher COG than an E350 does. Since they have the same body/engine/trans, would the modules possibly swap?

Plan A: lift it and see what happens
Plan B: swap master cylinder and remove LED's from cluster

You don't even need to go as high as the E550 and in many cases not even the E450. These vans can be configured a number of different ways and they share lots of parts...at least in the 2009+ vans, you can have as few as 3 and as many as 11 modules in the vehicle. Chances are there is a VIN# out there that has the configuration you want. I've got a bunch of VIN#s for configurations that will work ok with my Cummins swap. I'm going a step further though to see if I can force a configuration on the module network that may not exist from the factory. For instance, stripped down cargo vans are the most likely candidates for no RSC and no traction control but many of those don't have the trailer brake controller or parking aide module or power locks or remote start... I think we can have our cake and eat it too. At least that's what I'm going for.

ok...that's enough thread derailment from me.

 

[radorsch]

We can keep the derailment going a bit. I love the precision of the discussion and the theory! And thanks for the data, MGMetalworks.
So it looks like Ford's magic number is 39.2" for CoG not upsetting the RSC.
Practically speaking, Agile and Camburg are both modifying vans, resulting in about 4-5" lift, without causing RSC errors or significant problems with drivability (reported/noted by people posting here or on SMBforum, or by the company). Ujoint and Action Van seem to have included some modifications with their products that account for RSC and prevent errors or problems with drivability - in the 4-6" lift range (and it sounds like Chris has 8" working, but it is a little trickier).
So, if one were considering a lift in this range, it appears that the bent Ibeam or TTB D50 setup maintains RSC "error-free" without modifications - just practically speaking. I'm making no statement about whether RSC is working optimally, as designed.
Theoretically speaking, if we know one needs to keep the final CoG below 39.2" to keep the RSC within Ford's tolerances, one should be able to estimate how much lift you could put on a given rig, and keep CoG under 39.2", if you know the CoG you're starting with. I understand the CoG is going to change with load, fuel, weight of modifications to the suspension, and distribution of cargo/passengers. But, if you know the vertical CoG of your unloaded, stock van is X", one could theoretically lift the van approximately 39.2-X" and still be within the RSC parameters - maybe to be safe you start with the CoG with an empty fuel tank. One would need to take into account where cargo/load is placed, of course - any mass above the CoG will increase it, and anything below should decrease it. However, most of the added mass (excluding unsprung suspension components, like axles, that may be added in a conversion), whether it is passengers or cargo or even Tcase or fuel, are within a few feet of the floor (ie. just below for fuel and sitting on top for passengers and cargo). Thus, one should be able to guestimate the effect of loading up the van if one knows the level of the floor in relation to the van's CoG.
I guess I'm just saying (in a very long winded way) that if you know the van's original vertical CoG and how its going to be loaded and that the maximum CoG is 39.2", you should be able to estimate how much lift could be applied. I'm also saying that in practical terms, mild lift heights of 4" or so seem to not cause problems, but may need some modifications (depending on the setup).

 

[Skinny]

I think Ford is referencing the CoG as if the suspension height and spring rates remain the same but you are shifting weight around due to alterations. Essentially the CoG as I see it will go up if you increase ride height but the van's yaw/roll/pitch will be altered if you are going to change the shocks, springs, and sway bars. I think you can go higher without adverse effect if you firm up the suspension a bit.

If the modules are the same part numbers with different software, I would think you could find a good donor VIN to grab the flash which would eliminate any issues with RSC. Nothing gets easier

 

[radorsch]

Visit to Weldtec Designs Shop

Well, I finally made it over to check out the shop and the shop van. Definitely a good vibe. The shop was clean, for a busy shop, with several cool Bronco and Jeep projects in the works. The fabrication work on these looked really nice to my admittedly very untrained eye. Jeremy spent a bunch of time answering questions for me and I checked out his van.
His van looks good, particularly for being abused for 10 years. Ride is definitely better than stock, even on 10 year old shocks and springs. He had national spring remove the overload leaf and add a couple lighter leaves for a more progressive rear spring pack, which seems to work nicely (even with some heavy welding equipment in the back. He says that alignment doesn't seem to be a problem, but gets some mild cupping on the tires (which he admits to no regularly rotating and generally abusing). The current tires look about 40% worn and I couldn't notice any significant unevenness in the wear or significant cupping.
I am still a little concerned about RSC, although he hasn't had a problem and it sounds like Ramsey's projects have also been fine (from his earlier post). From significant scouring of the web, it seems that problems develop with drop bracket lifts, particularly with alterations in the pitman arm - although there are MANY fewer reports from people with bent beam vans. I still don't know if the RSC will work properly, but at least it doesn't interfere with driving. It also sounds like people have not had a problem with the Camburg bent beams, although I may contact them to confirm that they don't do anything special for RSC in their lifts.
The other interesting thing is Jeremy has 267/70/16s on his van and gets a little rubbing at the back of the front fenders with articulation (eg. big dip or steep driveway). Camburg recommends 285/75/16 with their kits and a similar lift height. I'm wondering why this is? Can/does one have the ability to push the wheels a little farther forward with a slightly longer radius arm to give more tire clearance? I'd love to run a 285/75/16, but I don't want rubbing and I'm not keen on getting into trimming at this point.

 

[radorsch]

So, right now I'm thinking that I'll give Weldtec Designs a shot. I tried getting a hold of Agile Offroad to see if Ramsey would be interested in a partial conversion or possibly helping me with custom valved fox shocks and/or springs, but I can't get in touch. National spring did a nice job on the rear leaf springs and I like that route WAY better than blocks for lifting the back. I'll probably go for about 4-5" - I'm worried about getting too high for both the RSC and just general usability/comfort/wife being able to climb in. Although, I do want to figure out the tire issue first because I'd like to comfortably run a bigger than stock tire... that one of the biggest reason for the lift.

 

[mgmetalworks]

One way to keep from having issues with RSC is to limit the number of quick changes in direction. No track days in the lifted van, ok?

 

[radorsch]

One way to keep from having issues with RSC is to limit the number of quick changes in direction. No track days in the lifted van, ok?

That is going to be a major problem. I'm still looking for that perfect camper/rock crawler/building supply hauler/track car/drag racing combo vehicle.

 

[radorsch]

Initial impressions of Weldtec lift

Well, I pulled the trigger on the Weldtec lift. Got it finished in mid March. Since, I've driven it around town and took an approximately 2000 mi spring break road trip all along the CA coast. Overall, I'm very happy. I'll post more review as I drive it more and as I have time.
The work took about 1week. It would have been shorter, but we changed plans part way through - I initially didn't want to go over about 4" lift, but when that was done it didn't even really level the van out so he had to order different springs to get me to about 5.5".
After the lift, I trimmed the plastic bumper a bit and put 285/75/16 tires on. They work well, but they rub the radius arms a tiny bit at full turn, but it isn't bothersome to me. I have not noticed any unusual wear on the tires. One more tire issue, however - the spare does not quite fit under the van properly. Its a bit too big with my trailer hitch there and I'll need to find a better permanent home - you'll notice the angle it droops at in the photos.
Overall, the ride is improved. It is much smoother over concrete highways and rutted roads and speed bumps. I have about 12" of travel in the front, including about 8" to the bump stops (estimate - I haven't measured yet). I hit some speed bumps, a curb and some pretty rutted dirt roads and potholes and never got it to bottom out. The rear end has a slightly softer spring pack with about 1.5" more travel, so it is also improved, but not as much as the front. I did not change out the rear shocks, as they were relatively new. However, in hind sight, I think I should have as the Bilstines up front are pretty nice.
I have a little tighter turning radius. It handles a little better at low speeds, about the same at moderate speeds, but there is a little play in the steering at higher highway speeds. However, it is still no problem for me (or the wife) to drive on long highway trips. I still drive with one hand, but it feels like I need to make more slight adjustments more frequently. However, there is no increased roll when cornering (at any speed) and the van feels just as stable (if not more so) than before.
I was worried about how the RSC would react, but it has been a non-issue... and we were on some pretty windy roads going up the 1 and 101 on our spring break road trip.
Overall, it isn't as slick appearing as the Camburg components. I haven't driven another lift brand in a van, so I don't have a good comparison, but I'm pleased with the handling and ride results for what I expected (and paid).

Van before the lift

Van after the lift and tires - sorry, poor pic, but the closest direct comparison


Radius arms and installed lift



Van in action