Journey with Confidence RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Take a Speed Test Free 7 Day Trial ×
 

Click Here to Login
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search Log in
View Single Post
Old 10-25-2017, 02:58 PM   #2
halfprice
Senior Member
 
halfprice's Avatar
 
Brand: Still Looking
Model: Renegade Valencia 38RB
State: California
Posts: 3,497
THOR #3156
Quote:
Originally Posted by USTraveler View Post
I have been looking at the CHF solutions and can't help but think that there is some reason the design engineers wanted the sway bar connections in the outside hole rather than the inside. I keep thinking if I move the connections to the inside hole I would be defeating some design/safety issue. That being said, the CHF on the front looks like it is a nonstarter with my chassis. In order to move the connections I would have to raise the ends of the sway bar and that would move the inside holes further away from the ends of the rods that drop down from the frame. It looks like those rods are just too short to make the connection to the inside holes on the sway bar. The rods are already located forward of the sway bar and are slanted towards the sway bar to make the connection at the outside holes. I think the connection rods would be an inch or two short of the inside holes. On the rear sway bar the CHF could be done but I would have to lower the sway bar ends in order to connect to the inside holes. It looks like that is certainly doable without causing any additional issues. That's where the nagging design issue thought come into play. Perhaps I am over thinking this but I can't help but wonder why the connections are in the outside holes to being with. I can understand why there are 2 holes in the sway bars, which is probably to make the bars fit different chassis. If anyone has any design insights I would certainly be interested in seeing them. On another issue I'm looking at rear track bars and I see some connect from the frame to the sway bar bracket that is welded to the axle and some are connected from the frame to bolts on the differential housing. I think the latter would put a lot of stress on those bolts. Does anyone have any thoughts on which is the better approach?
The design issue of inside/outside hole has been decussed on irv2.com at great lenght. Do a seatch there and you can read for days.

Very few people disliked the chf and have gone back to stock. The majority would never go back to stock.

Rear track bar: the 18k chassis is the only one that attaches the to sway bar bracket. All others to the differential pumkin. I havent heard about any problem to either design.

The rear track bar is probably the best handling mod ive done to my 29m

Jerry
__________________
https://www.thorforums.com/forums/f2...mods-4609.html
Jerry, Maria, and Sasha 6lb Yorkie
2022 Renegade Valencia 38RB "Five Deuces"
2016 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sport
FMCA # F464385
halfprice is offline   Reply With Quote
 
» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Disclaimer:

This website is not affiliated with or endorsed by Thor Industries or any of its affiliates. This is an independent, unofficial site.


Thor Motor Coach Forum - Crossroads RV Forum - Redwood RV Forum - Dutchmen Forum - Heartland RV Forum - Keystone RV Forum - Airstream Trailer Forum


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.