[ziaholic]

I've done some searching and came up with a "core question" regarding steering upgrades.

I'd like to know more about the pro's & con's of the geometry of the stock "inverted Y" setup (stock, currie, ...) versus the Crossover systems (U-turn, Toys by Troy, ...)

They can both be made burly, so I don't really want to argue about who's TRE's or drag-links are beefier than who's.

Some kits require mods to the hubs, and some just bolt right on, or have add-on brackets ... this can be important if it adversely affects the best geometry, or the ability to carry spare parts ...

I know there will be a lot of answers like " I've been running the XXXYYYZZZ for years and love it!!! " ... that's fine ... but what I'd really like to see is some discussions regarding why one geometry is better than the other ...

[edit] I should note, I'm runnin' 35's with a 5.5" LA kit ... as the sizes differ among our lifts, one geometry might win out over the other ... just food for thought ...

[Tumble]

Here we go...

[o2tj]

thinking the same thing!

[Jerry Bransford]

There may be strength reasons for abandoning the inverted Y, if you need more than the Currie for strength that is, but geometry-wise, I don't see the need. The TJ's steering geometry is pretty darned good as is, it doesn't even usually need a dropped Pitman arm until you're really pushing the envelope.

[ziaholic]

I am THIS CLOSE (putting my finger and thumb very close together) to just getting the Currie and being done with it. Tried and True. Plenty of backers. (This poll not withstanding)

You'd think that the Jeep designers would've thought about either solution and chose the inverted-Y after reems and reems of computations and engineering ... I guess I'm just fishing for some of the details that might have pushed them in that direction.

Does it handle maximum deflection better? Does it share some of the loads across the arms better? With the crossover system, the passenger hub is a critical point, as it deals with all of the steering and tie-rod forces, while the inverted Y shares those loads where the arms meet up ...

[jeepteejay]

I've been looking at it all too lately. As I've seen some issues with lifted TJs with stock style systems.
I've seen lifted TJs that if you droop the suspension and try to turn it will not let you turn to the maximum angle, and/or bind.
I'm looking into some type of HiSteer to see what will be best.
For me.

[ziaholic]

I did a search on High Steer on this site ... and all the hits were for Cherokee's and YJ's ... and a few for CJ's ...

It doesn't appear to be that popular or necessary among TJ's ... at least that's what I concluded from my searching.

[ytodd]

For me the reason for a knuckle to knuckle tie rod was easy. With AiROCK my suspension height changes, and with an inverted Y configuration my toe would change with each height change. I did not want that.....so crossover was the obvious choice.

[cincytj]

Originally Posted by ziaholic

I've done some searching and came up with a "core question" regarding steering upgrades.

I'd like to know more about the pro's & con's of the geometry of the stock "inverted Y" setup (stock, currie, ...) versus the Crossover systems (U-turn, Toys by Troy, ...)

They can both be made burly, so I don't really want to argue about who's TRE's or drag-links are beefier than who's.

Some kits require mods to the hubs, and some just bolt right on, or have add-on brackets ... this can be important if it adversely affects the best geometry, or the ability to carry spare parts ...

I know there will be a lot of answers like " I've been running the XXXYYYZZZ for years and love it!!! " ... that's fine ... but what I'd really like to see is some discussions regarding why one geometry is better than the other ...

[edit] I should note, I'm runnin' 35's with a 5.5" LA kit ... as the sizes differ among our lifts, one geometry might win out over the other ... just food for thought ...

do a search with Blaine as the poster. he has done some pretty indepth posts about the pros and cons of both systems. i have the curry for now, but when i go to the air rock i will most likely chage to the highsteer with crane knuckles, for the same reason mentioned by ytodd

[tommaho]

Crossover links are simple and cheap to fabricate if you DIY, it smooths the move to hydro assist and full hydro for the hardcore DIYer, and makes it a whole lot simpler to move your steering linkage with aftermarket axles or knuckle mods.

As you see rigs moving away from stock suspensions and axles, you see few make a special effort to stay with the y setup. That doesn't mean it doesn't work well, just that for the reasons above it may not be worth making a special effort to hang on to.

Tom

[ziaholic]

That's the best argument so far ... to deal with adjustable ride-height, the crossover system is better ... since it wouldn't affect the toe-in.

But how often do you adjust ride-height while OFF the trail? Couldn't you simply select the off-trail height and tweak the inverted Y to that setting? Do you find yourself changing ride-height often?

Good ... now we're getting somewhere ... off to search Mr Blaine's posts ...

[TJgreg]

Originally Posted by Jerry Bransford

There may be strength reasons for abandoning the inverted Y, if you need more than the Currie for strength that is, but geometry-wise, I don't see the need. The TJ's steering geometry is pretty darned good as is, it doesn't even usually need a dropped Pitman arm until you're really pushing the envelope.

I just installed the currie HD, and If i manage to break that thing, i have to be doing something wrong or stupid. Plenty good for me.

Might want to add a hydro assist option up there to for the big tire boys.

[cincytj]

Originally Posted by ziaholic

That's the best argument so far ... to deal with adjustable ride-height, the crossover system is better ... since it wouldn't affect the toe-in.

But how often do you adjust ride-height while OFF the trail? Couldn't you simply select the off-trail height and tweak the inverted Y to that setting? Do you find yourself changing ride-height often?

for me it is not so much the frequency as the amount, with airock i plan to move mine a good 4-5 inches and that would play heck with y-link geometry

[ytodd]

Originally Posted by ziaholic

That's the best argument so far ... to deal with adjustable ride-height, the crossover system is better ... since it wouldn't affect the toe-in.

But how often do you adjust ride-height while OFF the trail? Couldn't you simply select the off-trail height and tweak the inverted Y to that setting? Do you find yourself changing ride-height often?

Let me clarify a bit.

When you calibrate the AiROCK system one of the final steps is to pick a preset on-road height. This is the height the rig will move to when you go into Active mode, or anytime you hit the check mark button with on-road as the default.

This is the height you adjust your pinion angle, drag link and toe (if running an inverted Y steering to) setting trackbar length, etc. This is because this is the height your rig will be at a majority of the time.

Also during the calibration you select your off-road height preset. Typically people set their off road height higher than their on-road height. Mine is about 1.5 inches higher, some choose a height much higher. While 1.5 inches won't change toe a considerable amount.....I don't want to drive around scrubbing my expensive Krawlers if not needed.

With an inverted Y steering setup anytime you move from on road to off road height the toe will change and directly affect how the rig handles. Granted the steering wheel is no longer centered with either setup, but with the knuckle to knuckle tie rod the toe remains exactly the same.

Height changes on or off road are really dependent on the particular driver. I don't personally change anything unless I feel I need to. IE: nose down for a steep climb to counteract the front end unloading and to provide better weight transfer for traction, or rocking the rig to one side for a nasty off camber section.

The comment about tweaking the inverted Y for off road would require a basic alignment, then another when you are done and go back to the on-road setting.

[ytodd]

Originally Posted by cincytj

for me it is not so much the frequency as the amount, with airock i plan to move mine a good 4-5 inches and that would play heck with y-link geometry

Are you planning on the 4 or 6 inch version of AiROCK?

You realize that 4-5 inches of difference from on road to off road height is a ton right?