Steering Brace

[TFaoro]

Mine does but it takes a decent amount of turning, which is hard to do with the engine off

[dorkweed]

I put the same product on my '04.5, and it made a big difference in steering response.

 

The OEM problem is that the steering box is only mounted on 1 frame member;  and when you turn the steering wheel, there is some deflection/flex in that member.   This flex will be much more noticeable with larger tires and lifts too.  The steering box brace essentially connects both frame member together via the pitman shaft;  thus greatly decreasing the flex in the frame and tightening up the steering response.  This should be an OEM part IMHO!!!

[JAG1]

I put the same product on my '04.5, and it made a big difference in steering response.

 

The OEM problem is that the steering box is only mounted on 1 frame member;  and when you turn the steering wheel, there is some deflection/flex in that member.   This flex will be much more noticeable with larger tires and lifts too.  The steering box brace essentially connects both frame member together via the pitman shaft;  thus greatly decreasing the flex in the frame and tightening up the steering response.  This should be an OEM part IMHO!!!

I agree because putting on the steering stabilizer at just 29,000 miles, still a new truck in my book and hardly ever worked, made a noticeable difference.

 

If you have the wife move the wheel back and forth (not running) while under the truck, you can see the frame flex under the steer box like Dorkweed is  talking about.

 

Remember, Mopar Michael Nelson is used to driving tired ole water trucks for the fire Dept.

[Wild and Free]

Remember this will do little at highway speeds where steering effort is extremely low as compared to very slow speed turns and especially on dry pavement or concrete where this would be of more use where steering effort and frame flex as a result is the greatest. So to say this takes the wander away at highway speeds to any measurable degree is doubtful from the 3 I have installed on my own rigs I can say it did nothing for the wander on the highway, setting the caster to the positive most adjustment "Free" and a 3.3 turn gear box did the best of anything.

[flagmanruss]

I refuse to accept that it needs a low ratio steering box.  I want my truck to drive like it did new...  and it didn't have any such when new.   The wander got noticeable around 45-50,000 miles.  Yes, I still have the factory optional 265 tire size. 

Logically, SOMETHING has to have worn in those miles.  We ought to be able to find what it is & fix it.   

Edited February 26, 2015 by flagmanruss

[Wild and Free]

I was never aiming to make mine like new, if I add parts its because I want it improved better than new. The reason for a faster gear box is to make it way better than the 2nd gens ever were as new even. Nature of any beast with wheels and tires is the steering components will all eventually wear out.

 

Like an old timer once told me about parts and equipment and brand name arguments, if there were anything built that was perfect we would all be out of work.

 

I have driven many brand new vehicles that wander just as bad as some old 50's and 60's cars that were worn out with bald bias ply tires, I find 90% or more of wander issues are tire and road related. I have done tire swaps on many vehicles where I went from no wander to not being able to drive a straight line unless I had a few brews in me and visa versa. Even as little as 5 psi or less difference in front tires makes a huge difference with this as well.

 

My 05 is like this fronts at 50 psi and I can't keep it between the lines, 55 psi perfect, 60 psi and it rattles the teeth out of my skull.

[Mopar1973Man]

My 05 is like this fronts at 50 psi and I can't keep it between the lines, 55 psi perfect, 60 psi and it rattles the teeth out of my skull.

 

Funny. Mine calculates out at 58.3 PSI for my front axle weight. I might actually try going down and seeing what happens.

[dorkweed]

 

 

My 05 is like this fronts at 50 psi and I can't keep it between the lines, 55 psi perfect, 60 psi and it rattles the teeth out of my skull.

 

 

My '04.5 feels "squishy" on the front end on anything less than 65psi.  I run 70psi on all four corners and get normal tire wear and handling.

[Wild and Free]

Funny. Mine calculates out at 58.3 PSI for my front axle weight. I might actually try going down and seeing what happens.

 

My '04.5 feels "squishy" on the front end on anything less than 65psi.  I run 70psi on all four corners and get normal tire wear and handling.

 

I have never gone by any formulas on fronts it is always by feel, handling and tire wear and the last several sets on both the 02 and 05 like 55 psi the best and I had / have full replacement ranch hand bumpers on each as well. Rear is totally dependent on load 60 empty 75 loaded depending on ambient temps.

[flagmanruss]

I've never owned a vehicle that wandered like this. 

68 Plymouth Roadrunner with 140K...  rock solid at speeds beyond the speedometer.  64 Chrysler 300...  rock solid throughout ownership.  79 Chevy C30 ran like a bear & tracked fine when I bought the Dodge in 01.  Chevy S10 throughout out's life... 80 VW rabbit tracked fine until the timing belt failed.  1989 GMC C15 during the several years I owned it.  

OK, there was one...  my ex stripped out the steering box on my Jap built 80 Dodge Challenger.  The lash adjustment was stripped (how I got it returned in the settlement).  I stupidly believed the dealer / stealer that it couldn't be repaired.  I was pretty nieve then.  I should have taken it somewhere else to get it fixed, even if it took a while.   Ex was a drunk & probably drove it off the road.  Heard she wrecked the C15 within the year but not my problem any longer.   

If this truck drove like this NEW, none of you would have bought them.  So there is something happening after they are built OR a weakness in the build.  If it's a weak spot in the frame / mount, then it should be possible to reinforce it.   If it's not possible to correct the fault, then logically I should dump this truck an buy a different product withoutthe flaw.

Edited February 26, 2015 by flagmanruss

[dorkweed]

I've never owned a vehicle that wandered like this. 

68 Plymouth Roadrunner with 140K...  rock solid at speeds beyond the speedometer.  64 Chrysler 300...  rock solid throughout ownership.  79 Chevy C30 ran like a bear & tracked fine when I bought the Dodge in 01.  Chevy S10 throughout out's life... 80 VW rabbit tracked fine until the timing belt failed.  1989 GMC C15 during the several years I owned it.  

OK, there was one...  my ex stripped out the steering box on my Jap built 80 Dodge Challenger.  The lash adjustment was stripped (how I got it returned in the settlement).  I stupidly believed the dealer / stealer that it couldn't be repaired.  I was pretty nieve then.  I should have taken it somewhere else to get it fixed, even if it took a while.   Ex was a drunk & probably drove it off the road.  Heard she wrecked the C15 within the year but not my problem any longer.   

If this truck drove like this NEW, none of you would have bought them.  So there is something happening after they are built OR a weakness in the build.  If it's a weak spot in the frame / mount, then it should be possible to reinforce it.   If it's not possible to correct the fault, then logically I should dump this truck an buy a different product withoutthe flaw.

 

 

Sure it's not your "track bar" Russ????

[flagmanruss]

Already replaced track bar with 3rd gen upgrade kit.  When I have it in the shop next, I'll have the whole front suspension (including the front bushings) inspected for play.       

Edited February 26, 2015 by flagmanruss

[Mopar1973Man]

Remember, Mopar Michael Nelson is used to driving tired ole water trucks for the fire Dept.

 

Who Me? Driving Tired Trucks?

[AGPTurbo]

Looks like the cast of "cars"

[JAG1]

Who Me? Driving Tired Trucks?

Ill take the one to the far right. Looks like nuts and bolts not much electrical.

 

Mike, I'll let you drive my truck. It steers tight and straight. Not like this->

[Mopar1973Man]

Mine is tight still too. I check the steering box adjustment off and on and adjust as needed during the inspections. But I don't have the flex that people seem to have the require the steering brace. The 1996 is so darn touchy just breathe on the steering wheel it darts the direction you steered. 2002 is a bit more relaxed and not as touchy.

[flagmanruss]

If the frame is flexing / working, and there's no cracking...  there's a lot of folks "missing" the changes while in motion.  It could actually be.  The area might just be under constructed...  a little give here, a little give there...  with no fixtures to measure the movement, who's going to see it with their naked eye?   

[AGPTurbo]

Update:

So I've had the brace for a few days, and its made tremendous improvements on any road but the freeway.  Back roads and local cruising, It feels like a different vehicle.  On the freeway, like WildandFree mentioned, it doesn't do a heck of a lot., due to the speed of the vehicle.  I'm planning on getting under there this weekend and cranking the castor and I'll update again after that.  

[Mopar1973Man]

I have never gone by any formulas on fronts it is always by feel, handling and tire wear and the last several sets on both the 02 and 05 like 55 psi the best and I had / have full replacement ranch hand bumpers on each as well. Rear is totally dependent on load 60 empty 75 loaded depending on ambient temps.

 

So I tried it and liked it. I dropped from the calculated 58 PSI in the front to 53 PSI which is -5 from calc'ed. Then dropped the rear the same -5 from calc'ed I think its at 39 PSI and it tracks very well now. I like it! Thanks Bill!

 

Front axle weight 4,410

Rear Axle weight 3,340

Total 7,750

[AGPTurbo]

Aaaannnnddddd snapped the adjuster bolt in seconds.  Heated, sprayed, and SNAP.  So hope I can find this adjuster bolt somewhere, and hope I can get the saw in there to cut off the old bolt.  Then I need to see if I can press out the old bushing.  What an adventure so far.