EPDM Coatings
rvupgradestore.com Composet Products Custom Yacht Interiors

Author Topic: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER  (Read 78286 times)

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2012, 04:06:37 PM »
Hello.. Great Info Harvard,   Just want to Confirm that You used #59400 on an E450..  Ingall does not list this as a Valid part for an E450, only up to the E350..    thx!...jp

Yes, my 2004 E450 has Ingall #59400 installed. I went for the max available +CASTER and just accepted the resulting camber.

mylo

  • ---
  • Posts: 220
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2012, 07:16:25 PM »
OK, so I know this thread is all about some Ford Class Cs, and their squirreliness on the highway. My rig is on a Chevy, but I assume the setup is similar.

Well, my first 2 hour trip on the highway in my rig (see sig) was "unsettling" at best. My son and I just went for a weekend trip down to Tucson. We didn't pack much at all, and we didn't use the bathroom. I did have about 160 pounds stored back in the bathroom (used whiskey barrels), that I was delivering. The bathroom on my rig is all the way in the back, so all of that weight was behind the axle. On a more typical trip, I expect much of that weight to be located farther forward, as luggage. Still... 160 pounds shouldn't make that much of a difference...

Anyway, the trip down was seriously white knuckled. I would feel EVERY vehicle that passed - with the possible exception of motorcycles. Depending on how fast they passed, and how big a vehicle it was - the effect was amplified accordingly. I got passed by a few big rigs that were flying past - and it seriously pushed and pulled me around. I was tense and exhausted from this little short trip. I am seriously considering taking it to an alignment shop and getting some more positive caster dialed in. I talked with a few buddies in Tucson, and they said that most RVs that they drove had the same problems. I guess it is something that you have to get used to - but I am hoping that by having this work done, it will be a little more pleasurable to drive.

Will those same (or similar) sleeves work on a Chevy?


Mylo
1990 Fleetwood Jamboree Searcher (Class C)
Chevy G30 Chassis

Alfa38User

  • ---
  • Posts: 5967
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #32 on: October 31, 2012, 07:16:39 AM »
First cheap repair; Check the tire pressures using only enough air to satisfy the load tables provided for your particular tire brand.
Stu
Montréal, Canada 🍁
Snowbird, Naples Florida
Alfa Gold 38 (2000) 5ver (parked!)

"Of course I talk to myself, sometimes I need expert advise!!!"

mylo

  • ---
  • Posts: 220
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #33 on: October 31, 2012, 11:21:56 AM »
First cheap repair; Check the tire pressures using only enough air to satisfy the load tables provided for your particular tire brand.

I sort of did that... Brand new tires. Discount said to run them at 80 fully loaded. I ran them at 70. I can't seem to find a load chart for Dunlop E rating...


Mylo
1990 Fleetwood Jamboree Searcher (Class C)
Chevy G30 Chassis

Alfa38User

  • ---
  • Posts: 5967
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #34 on: October 31, 2012, 03:42:26 PM »
But.... did you weigh the vehicle so you know where you stand, at least partially anyway??? Not all manufacturers seem to publish charts it seems, especially for car/truck sizes.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2012, 03:45:52 PM by Alfa38User »
Stu
Montréal, Canada 🍁
Snowbird, Naples Florida
Alfa Gold 38 (2000) 5ver (parked!)

"Of course I talk to myself, sometimes I need expert advise!!!"

jmagic

  • ---
  • Posts: 5
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #35 on: November 13, 2012, 03:57:04 PM »
Just purchased a '09 Sunseeker 2300 with only 15k miles on it. After front end alignment it was much better, but then came windy days. It would almost change lanes on its own, that was a exciting experience! Took it back to the truck shop and discussed +castor and Harvard's suggestion. Before I could finish, he rattled off the part number of the bushing needed.
I just picked up the unit last night - Unbelievable, fantastic, drives like and SUV.

Thank you Harvard! This information saved the day. We are going to Colorado in the Spring and there was no way I would have driven the unit the way it was. Thanks again Harvard and thanks Fleet Pride of So. Deerfield, MA.

mylo

  • ---
  • Posts: 220
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #36 on: November 14, 2012, 10:35:18 AM »
First cheap repair; Check the tire pressures using only enough air to satisfy the load tables provided for your particular tire brand.

So... from what I gathered, the rig originally came with D rated LT tires. The sticker on the driver jamb says 60 PSI. The previous owner told me that fully loaded to spec that I'd be at the upper end of the D rating, and should therefore get the E rated ones. Discount Tire filled them to 80 PSI. I can't seem to find tables for these new Dunlop E rated tires. I am assuming that 80 is the max they should be filled to, and that 70 will give me a little better ride, at the expense of a little load. I'm kinda flying blind here.

Anyway, as I mentioned, I have a Chevy G30 chassis. Ingall doesn't seem to make bushings for a Chevy. Any other suggestions?


Mylo
1990 Fleetwood Jamboree Searcher (Class C)
Chevy G30 Chassis

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #37 on: November 16, 2012, 12:27:04 PM »
So... from what I gathered, the rig originally came with D rated LT tires. The sticker on the driver jamb says 60 PSI. The previous owner told me that fully loaded to spec that I'd be at the upper end of the D rating, and should therefore get the E rated ones. Discount Tire filled them to 80 PSI. I can't seem to find tables for these new Dunlop E rated tires. I am assuming that 80 is the max they should be filled to, and that 70 will give me a little better ride, at the expense of a little load. I'm kinda flying blind here.

Anyway, as I mentioned, I have a Chevy G30 chassis. Ingall doesn't seem to make bushings for a Chevy. Any other suggestions?


Mylo

You need to consult an alignment shop, your Chevy most likely has a means of adjusting caster. These Ingall bushings are just a Ford E350/E450 means of adjusting CASTER and CAMBER.


For example: http://www.streetperformance.com/auto/chevrolet-g30/alignment-castercamber-kit/47-450-5549mmc/

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #38 on: December 07, 2012, 10:52:10 AM »
Great post! This problem affects many other rigs. My truck is a miserable drive on the highway, due to factory specs that just don't get it right.
The good vs average alignment shop: The average shop sees a number in that factory range and they are done. " It's within specifications" they will say, and charge you and out the door.  A good shop will drive and see what is going on.

I may have stumbled across a possible reason why some alignment shops end up with what I think is too little +Caster. It appears some shops may adjust the adjustable parameter to be in the middle of the specified range, as is noted in this link:

http://www.rvforum.net/miscfiles/MH_Steering_Handling_%20Primer.pdf

"Each chassis will have detailed specs for these three things and it is crucial that they all be as close as possible to dead center on the target numbers."

To me, that certainly makes sense for Camber and Toe but I am not so sure it should apply to +Caster. IMHO.

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2013, 10:59:49 AM »
Here is another good reference for readers of this thread, it may be a Jeep but caster is caster even if it is on a bicycle.

http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f8/why-your-steering-wanders-seems-loose-445430/

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #40 on: May 28, 2013, 07:39:24 PM »
Something to report about the 3rd chart (for E350/E450) on the cheat sheet for the Ingalls 594 sleeves. http://www.ingallseng.com/Instructions/59400.pdf

1. Driver Side Caster at +1.0 and Camber at -1.5 reads B/K, it should read K/B.

and

2. Drivers Side Caster at -1.25 the Camber at -1.0 and -0.25, they both read T/A. The Camber at -1.0 should read H/R instead of T/A.

Harvard.

thomastonct

  • Posts: 1
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2013, 11:51:52 AM »
I have a 2004 E350 Superduty that I usually drive empty. I load it up and pull a trailer twice a year to go camping. I never noticed any shimmy for the first 140K miles. In winter I switch to Firestone Winterforce studded snow tires, which are lower load rated tires, and I assume lighter weight than 2,600 lb tires. The factory tires were Michelin, which I replaced at 140K miles. That was when my problems started. Before that, there was no noticeable shimmy with the Michelins or the lighter load rated studded Firestone snow tires. I got Dunlop Rovers to replace the worn out Michelins, then had shimmy problems. Replaced lower ball joints, all the tie rod ends, did the road force balance according to TSB 05-24-8, installed hydraulic steering shimmy damper, replaced I-beam pivot bushings, sway bar end bushings (which help tie the I-beams together through the sway bar), got new aftermarket wheels with new Hancook tires, added Centramatic balancers, then recently replaced all the ball joints at the same time. For two years this was a problem with the summer high load range tires, not with the Firestone snow tires.

Increasing the caster made the problem go away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Do not pay attention to anyone who posts "too much caster causes shimmy" or that there is a Ford truck TSB that says to decrease caster to eliminate shimmy.

I do not know what the alignment was set at for most of this time because the mechanic set the caster bushings with the slots toward the inside when replacing the ball joints, which was just recently at 195K miles. The bushings that were in it were 1-1/2 degree bushings and with the slots to the inside the caster is set to the middle of the range and camber is the most negative. A Firestone shop measured the alignment with this setting and it was like this:
left caster   2.2       left camber    -.5
right caster 3.4       right camber -1.2

I told them to adjust the caster to as high as it could go while keeping the camber within spec and they said the factory original bushings are not adjustable and wanted to sell me bushing-in-bushing kits with the numbers on them for several hundred dollars. So I had to adjust the nonadjustable bushings myself.

I went home and set the left one for the most caster it would do, with the slot facing back and drove it for a week while I ordered new bushings. That made it like this and it still shimmied:
left caster   3.7       left camber    1
right caster 3.4       right camber -1.2

I got a 3-1/2 bushing for the left and a 2-1/2 for the right from NAPA, Moog bushings for about $20 each.
Now it is at:
left caster   5.7       left camber    .7
right caster 5.9       right camber .7
Shimmy is gone and with nearly equal caster on each side it goes straight. I guess the factory setup is to have 1/2 degree less caster on the driver's side so that it pulls left to counter road crown on a two lane road. Most of my driving is on the highway in the left lane so the crown is to my right. The bushing replacement is easy, but you need to have an alignment first and keep track of the angle of the bushing that is installed so you can adjust from there.

Thanks Harvard for starting this post. Now I love my van again. 195K miles, alternator just went, and #7 spark plug boot have been the only problems other than this shimmy after replacing the factory tires.

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2013, 05:42:02 PM »
Quote
Thomastonct:
Increasing the caster made the problem go away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Do not pay attention to anyone who posts "too much caster causes shimmy" or that there is a Ford truck TSB that says to decrease caster to eliminate shimmy.

Almost every one has had a bad experience with the caster wheels on a shopping cart, right?  We all know that as "shimmy".

Well, it turns out that the shopping cart caster wheel has a "Caster Trail" only, it has no "Caster Angle".

Our vehicles have both, a "Caster Angle" which creates a "Caster Trail". The "Caster Trail" is the distance from where the "pivot point" protrudes to the floor/road to the point that the wheel patch makes contact with the floor/road.

Having both a "Caster Angle" and a "Caster Trail" creates two stabilizing forces. The Caster Angle causes the vehicle to be lifted when the wheel is turned R or L from center so it is the weight of the vehicle that serves as a "spring" to return the steering to center.

Then force number 2 is a force that increases as speed/velocity increases. This 2nd force is the Caster Trail that wants the wheel patch to drag behind the pivot point just as a "wind vane" always points into the wind.

Edit: Fixed quote tags.


« Last Edit: June 23, 2013, 10:01:41 PM by Tom »

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #43 on: July 14, 2013, 10:23:34 AM »
OP here. One of our forum member just had a very bad $$$ experience with the parts and logic required for this alignment.

First, be very suspicious of parts that indicate an adjustment range of 0 to 4 degrees. The only part I have personal experience with is the Ingalls 59400 (AKA Ingalls 594). As best as I can determine (NO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE) the NAPA part number is NCP 2641988. These both indicate an adjustment range of +/- 2.0 degrees.

Secondly, if you find that your RV CASTER is ALREADY above +5.0 then DO NOT ORDER ANY PARTS, they will not help you beyond where you are now sitting !!!!

Thirdly, the CROSS CASTER = LH - RH should be in the range of -1.5 to +0.5 with a mean value of about -0.5 degrees.


Harvard.

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #44 on: July 30, 2013, 12:00:02 PM »
OP here.

Another possibility that may be playing a part to the mystries as to what might work and what might not work.  To this end, the front axel weight may be playing a role.

For the record, the 2004 E450 that I  have weighs in about 4400# (max 4600#) and that is with with 2 occupants, 35 gallons of water and 55 gallons of fuel ALL AFT of the rear axel. My toad is 4 down so it does not have a weight effect.

jimpat

  • Posts: 1
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #45 on: August 31, 2013, 01:13:30 PM »
we have a 99 club van E 350 and a 88 cabriolet E350 that we use for towing the race cars.
Both handle terribly, wonder all over the place. The 99 more than the 88.
All new parts and aligned by supposedly good shop (?)...twice and my suggestion about more caster was laughed at. In my drag race days we learned the value of caster!!!
We tried to move the race cars back on the trailer to lose tongue weight to no avail. I see that the kit INGALLS 594 Camber/Caster sleeves will work on the 99 but what do I do for the 88?
thanks
jim
Patelli motor sports
jp800@verizon.net

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #46 on: December 06, 2013, 10:31:26 AM »
Increasing the caster made the problem go away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Do not pay attention to anyone who posts "too much caster causes shimmy" or that there is a Ford truck TSB that says to decrease caster to eliminate shimmy.

OP here, and on the topic of caster I would prefer to be the first to present an opposing view:

Here is a link to a tire authority who proclaims, "Some vehicle manufacturer's specify a lot of caster. My experience is that this sometimes makes the car prone to shimmy problems".
http://www.barrystiretech.com/alignmentrecommendation.html

In addition to the Class C E450, I own and drive an additional 3 vehicles. The 1996 Jeep Cherokee that has +5.5 caster, a 2007 Civic is +6.8 and a 2010 RAV4 has +5 Degrees.

Some how I have to believe in the "law of the jungle". The law of the jungle states that "if I as a poster start a thread such as I have done here, and someone has a bad experience with the advice, then it would be only fair to the jungle that said thread be bombbarded with the details of the said bad experience". To date this thread has received just about 11,000 hits and so far no one has reported a negative experience with the suggested caster settings.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2013, 04:20:09 PM by Harvard »

Lcstanl

  • ---
  • Posts: 6
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #47 on: February 27, 2014, 05:02:40 PM »
Harvard,
 I  picked up my new 2014 Winnebago Aspect 32J last month in January.   I'm loading it up for a cross country trip the end of March (VA to WA).   I have read all your threads regarding alignment with great interest.  I checked out the Ingalls 594 to purchase before my appointment w/ the alignment shop.  Ingalls doesn't indicate that the 594 will work w/ a 2013 E450.....thoughts?   Thanks much!  Laura
Laura
2014 Aspect 30J
Honda Fit

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #48 on: February 27, 2014, 09:21:27 PM »
Harvard,
 I  picked up my new 2014 Winnebago Aspect 32J last month in January.   I'm loading it up for a cross country trip the end of March (VA to WA).   I have read all your threads regarding alignment with great interest.  I checked out the Ingalls 594 to purchase before my appointment w/ the alignment shop.  Ingalls doesn't indicate that the 594 will work w/ a 2013 E450.....thoughts?   Thanks much!  Laura

Since the documentation I have (59400.pdf) only mentions 1992 to 1998 E350 Vans and I know they work on my 2004 E450 my best guess they are still relevant for current model years.

If you were able to post a picture of the top of the upper ball joint I might be able to be more certain. No need to remove the wheel and it might be easier to crank the steering to full left to help get a better view of the drivers side top of the upper ball joint.


Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #49 on: June 05, 2014, 02:14:21 PM »
We now have it on good authority that Hendersons' Lineup of Grants Pass OR routinely set the E350/E450 Caster to 5 Degrees.

http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/27746515/srt/pa/pging/1/page/1.cfm

See the post by j-d 06/03/14 06:02am, Quote:

"But I have personally been to The Mountain. Visited the Mecca of RV suspension tuning. Hendersons' Line-Up in Grants Pass OR a couple weeks ago. I mentioned Harvard's 5* caster and John said "Sure. I worked in the shop 25 years and did lots of alignments. That's what we do." That settles the debate far as I'm concerned."
« Last Edit: June 05, 2014, 02:17:41 PM by Harvard »

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #50 on: June 08, 2014, 10:18:59 PM »
Harvard,
 I  picked up my new 2014 Winnebago Aspect 32J last month in January.   I'm loading it up for a cross country trip the end of March (VA to WA).   I have read all your threads regarding alignment with great interest.  I checked out the Ingalls 594 to purchase before my appointment w/ the alignment shop.  Ingalls doesn't indicate that the 594 will work w/ a 2013 E450.....thoughts?   Thanks much!  Laura

I have just learned of the SPC794 (SPC PN 24180) which is equivalent to the Ingalls 594. Page 2 Chart #3 of the SPC794 instruction sheet states "1992-2012 E250, E350 and E450 2WD".  In all likelihood the document was printed before 2013s were on the market. Chart #3 also confirms an adjustment range of -2.0 to +2.0  and NOT the -2.5 to +2.5 adjustment range of Chart #1.

I also would like to reiterate, my 2004 E450 has rear airbags that I set to 80PSI that give my MH a nose down attitude. My front axel is about 4300# and my rear axel is about 8825#. The airbags also serve to prevent any sway problems that could possibly mask symptoms that I am not aware of and there for have no experience.

bryansshort

  • Posts: 2
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #51 on: July 05, 2014, 01:55:33 PM »
Hi,
I've got a 1991 7.3 Diesel E350 based Born Free 24' RB and it drives like a camel on stilts!

I've read everything on here and elsewhere and have come to the conclusion that I want to increase Caster. I have bought the Ingalls 59400 bushes but they do not have instructions that relate to my vehicle.

I do not seem to have pinch bolts, what holds the bushes in place and stops them twisting round at random?

On all the charts max caster without altering camber shows M over G so I have lined up M with the slot in the outer bush, the bushes are identical and it would appear that M should be to the front of the vehicle in order to increase caster without affecting camber on both sides of the vehicle. What is the relevance of G? On the drivers side G would be to the right ie inboard and on the passengers side also to the right ie outboard.

Any help gratefully received.

clwood

  • Posts: 1
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #52 on: August 02, 2014, 11:13:42 AM »
First timer on RV forum. Fairly new RVer. And know nothing about cars. Was researching front end and alignment issues on E350 and found that e350s are known to be a bit squirrelly and heard everything from "find good alignment shop" to "save your troubles and go for the Ingalls 594 first." Wanted to hear y'all's opinion.  My 2003 BT Cruiser began pulling to left and shimmied at about 60. Yesterday, a reputable alignment shop said I needed to replace upper and lower ball joints and inner and outer tie rods. W balance and alignment, it's $1515. They did say and showed me the movement of the ball joints and said there was quite a bit of movement and that is causing the shimmying and that it was unsafe. My question is "do you think it's likely if I replace ball joints and tie rods and balance and align that I will still have shimmying and veering issues?" Also "do you think I should order the Ingals 594 and have them install that first to see if that does the trick" Finally, "if there is movement in the ball joint, is it really unsafe and something to fix ASAP?" Thanks!

dave61

  • ---
  • Posts: 438
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #53 on: August 06, 2014, 08:41:21 PM »
Clwood, your post may have been better if you started a new thread, this one is a little old. It is hard to say about the wear and how severe it might be but the symptoms you have do seem consistent. You could always take it to another shop to get another opinion.

I have a similar unit and have no problems and in fact, have always thought it drove very well. We get pushed around on windy days but most everybody does.
2004 B Touring Cruiser 27
Ford E450 V-10
Tampa Bay FL

bryansshort

  • Posts: 2
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #54 on: October 06, 2014, 09:50:21 AM »
Yes, I also have the same suspension, and so does every E350/E450. The top mount of your upper ball joints are shipped from the factory with fixed non adjustable sleeves that need to be replaced.

In my opinion, your best choice in adjustable sleeves are from Ingalls Engineering. They are clearly marked as INGALLS 594. They consist of two concentric sleeves that have 360/24 = 15 degrees indices labeled A through X. In order to set them you need a "cheat" sheet which is on the web as "59400.pdf". These sleeves will allow adjustment of both CAMBER and CASTER up to +/- 2.0 degrees each, in any combination of CASTER or CAMBER. All you need to do is, using the cheat sheet, is take the max adjustable + CASTER change which is +2.0 any you will see a black and white improvement.

Pre 1992 E350's inc my 1991 E350 'DO NOT HAVE BALL JOINTS' they have king pins and the INGALLS 59400 bushing can not be fitted. I have yet to find someone in the UK able to adjust the caster on my RV.

Sloop

  • ---
  • Posts: 264
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #55 on: October 06, 2014, 05:14:08 PM »
Quote
Pre 1992 E350's inc my 1991 E350 'DO NOT HAVE BALL JOINTS' they have king pins and the INGALLS 59400 bushing can not be fitted. I have yet to find someone in the UK able to adjust the caster on my RV.

Try this: http://www.northstarmfg.com/product/42-4412.html
1992 24' Fleetwood Class "C" Jamboree Rallye
Ford E350 Chassis
Toad - 1969 Volkswagen Baja Bug
San Marcos, CA

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #56 on: October 19, 2014, 05:02:35 PM »
Hi,
I've got a 1991 7.3 Diesel E350 based Born Free 24' RB and it drives like a camel on stilts!

I've read everything on here and elsewhere and have come to the conclusion that I want to increase Caster. I have bought the Ingalls 59400 bushes but they do not have instructions that relate to my vehicle.

I do not seem to have pinch bolts, what holds the bushes in place and stops them twisting round at random?

On all the charts max caster without altering camber shows M over G so I have lined up M with the slot in the outer bush, the bushes are identical and it would appear that M should be to the front of the vehicle in order to increase caster without affecting camber on both sides of the vehicle. What is the relevance of G? On the drivers side G would be to the right ie inboard and on the passengers side also to the right ie outboard.

Any help gratefully received.

In the pictures of the Drivers Side is M over G where M is at the rear and G is at the Pinch Bolt.
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv215/pb20091018/DriverSide.jpg

In the picture of the Passengers Side is M over S where M is also at the rear and S is at the Pinch Bolt.
http://i685.photobucket.com/albums/vv215/pb20091018/PassengerSide.jpg

If you consider both pictures at the same time, you will notice on both sides of the vehicle the sleeves are orientated in the same direction. On both sides, M points to the rear of the vehicle while G (on both sides) points to the Drivers Side and S (on both sides) points to the Passenger Side.



Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #57 on: January 20, 2015, 03:08:07 PM »
Here is a link to a method used to estimate the caster of a vehicle using a digital camera.

http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/28154264.cfm

The secret to using the camera are:

1. Line the lens up with the outside side of the wheel.
2. The camera is to be as parallel as possible to the vehicle. The vehicle need not be level but the skew between the camera and the vehicle needs to be a close to zero as possible.

« Last Edit: January 20, 2015, 03:15:57 PM by Harvard »

rebar

  • ---
  • Posts: 86
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #58 on: April 09, 2015, 09:45:20 AM »
This is a great thread.  I imagine if all econoline owners knew the cure, the roads would be safer..

I found a alignment shop who is familiar with, and willing to install the INGALLS 594

What if my ball joints is worn?  Will the kit help?    I assume the installer might say I need to replace them as well after getting the van on the lift..

Thanks!
1995 E350 6bt/nv4500, 2006 Featherlite 24' surv toyhauler, 2007 DRZ400s well farkled, 1985 Vmax stock, 1985 Vmax custom

Harvard

  • ---
  • Posts: 143
Re: E350/E450 Handling Problems are caused by too little + CASTER
« Reply #59 on: April 09, 2015, 02:18:10 PM »
The Ingnalls 594 sleeves do not replace the ball joints, they are concentric sleeves that provide the anchor for the top of the upper ball joint.

By increasing the caster it ONLY FEELS AS THOUGH you have tightened up the steering box to reduce the steering center free play area.

 

Hosted by Over The Network