Double ended ram hydro assist

[AgitatedPancake]

Badass. Just a stock WJ box? or a different box? My buddy is looking into this for his tj

It’s a stock WJ box. They’re different than the saginaw boxes of years past (more closely related to JK boxes), but the concept is still the same and should be no prob on the TJ. If your buddies rig is lighter or smaller tire, I’d recommend the smaller ram to keep lock to lock times down

 

[DocRamsay]

It’s a stock WJ box. They’re different than the saginaw boxes of years past (more closely related to JK boxes), but the concept is still the same and should be no prob on the TJ. If your buddies rig is lighter or smaller tire, I’d recommend the smaller ram to keep lock to lock times down

And gear ratio. I think I’ve unlocked the problem that plagues other home builders the most and that’s standard ratio boxes. I’ve bragged that my brother and I have built many systems for other people that didn’t shake and on the first try without having to retune stuff to dial it out. Then we took on a job where the owner insisted on staying with a 16:1 box and no matter what we could not make it work. The owner would not budge on changing to a faster mechanical ratio so that the hydro wasn’t so easily able to outrun it. 12:1 is the slow end of being able to make it work but 8:1 or 6:1 are better.

As I'm figuring out suspension/steering design I figured I'd dig up an old thread and ask. With the current bracketry I have (TMR panhard bracket on an 05+ SD), mounting a DE would not play well with the panhard. Seems like I could bump the axle forward and do a 4 link instead. Is that going to fuck with the steering box/ram and see who wins in a bump steer match? I could also just relocate the panhard bracket, just afraid of fucking with uptravel/being lazy.

 

[JR4X]

As I'm figuring out suspension/steering design I figured I'd dig up an old thread and ask. With the current bracketry I have (TMR panhard bracket on an 05+ SD), mounting a DE would not play well with the panhard. Seems like I could bump the axle forward and do a 4 link instead. Is that going to fuck with the steering box/ram and see who wins in a bump steer match? I could also just relocate the panhard bracket, just afraid of fucking with uptravel/being lazy.

Gonna need more info before answering. Are you talking about a triangulated 4 link up front with a steering box? Because I would recommend against that.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Agreed, triangulated 4 links and mechanical steering don’t play nice due to bump steer.

If lazy is a factor as you noted, I’d just go single ended wherever it fits. The old tried and true method still works just fine and is definitely easier from a packaging perspective. It takes a good bit of effort to package a double ended hydro ram, panhard, and drag link without sacrificing uptravel. But the outcome is slick if you can.

 

[Slander]

Fwiw, I am currently installing a traditional single ended ram hydro assist. I cut the front suspension off and moved it forward to solve my uptravel issue, just to close out my original question!

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Nice man!

I found this video I took a few years ago in my garage. It's nothing crazy and not necessarily "tech", but figured it might be worth sharing anyways. Some lock to lock action (with one hand only, so not super fast) and quicker shimmys. I don't recall if this was with the stock pulley on the stock TC (WJ) pump, or the smaller pulley I put on later but gives some frame of reference. 5k lb WJ on 42"s, but aired up on concrete so it doesn't mean anything really

Edited to add more info to compare with JR's post below -
2 1/2" x 8" DE ram
Stock WJ steering box, tapped for hydro assist and no other modifications
3.25 turns lock to lock IIRC
Stock TC pump from a 01-04 WJ with larger ports for the hydraulic cooling fan (but displacement is still the same as most others AFAIK)
Either stock ~5.5" pulley or 4.5" PSC pulley, can't recall if this video was before or after the swap

 

[JR4X]

I took this to compare with Agitated. 2 1/2 x 6” DE ram. Big TC pump. 10:1 Saginaw box from Sweet MFG and a sweet TT servo. Steering arms on the portals are 5 1/2” from the center of the pivots. I left the noise on so you can see I didn’t speed up the video. 1.75 turns lock to lock I put a piece of green tape on the steering wheel so you can see how many times it comes by in a L2L situation. Belt only squeals at full lock when it’s cold. The PRV relieves it and doesn’t stall the pump at full temp. First time this things been started in a while.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

That's an awesome comparison, and your idle steering speed makes me jealous! I added more details to my video post as well just to make a more direct comparison to your setup

I have a CB pump that should have around ~25% more displacement per rev that's sitting on the shelf as a long term round tuit project, but it hasn't been pressing enough to handle soon

 

[JR4X]

That's an awesome comparison, and your idle steering speed makes me jealous! I added more details to my video post as well just to make a more direct comparison to your setup

I have a CB pump that should have around ~25% more displacement per rev that's sitting on the shelf as a long term round tuit project, but it hasn't been pressing enough to handle soon

the only benefit the CB is going to gain you alone is more steering pounds of force while on the trail. It won’t speed up your idle steering much. I’m not limited in strength or speed by the TC pump I have but I have my stuff optimized. The pump is spun fast enough at idle to do what I want it to do while NOT being over spun at the top of the RPM range and hurting it. The only pump change I’m considering is going to RadialDynamics TC pump.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

the only benefit the CB is going to gain you alone is more steering pounds of force while on the trail. It won’t speed up your idle steering much. I’m not limited in strength or speed by the TC pump I have but I have my stuff optimized. The pump is spun fast enough at idle to do what I want it to do while NOT being over spun at the top of the RPM range and hurting it. The only pump change I’m considering is going to RadialDynamics TC pump.

Hmm. The CB's displace more volume per revolution, so if I gave it the same diameter pulley as the TC I'm running, I should have more volume at idle by whatever the percentage difference is. I don't want to drill out the orofice of the flow control from where it is as my flow beyond that point already feels great, just want to get more volume moving around at idle.

From that tech thread a few years back, Radial was kind enough to post up the displacements of various pumps in post #131:

CBR Steering Pumps - OEM Applications?

Good to see people that get it, nice work. Since there is so much talk about pump displacements, here is what I have measured and know to be true to help you guys keep your numbers accurate:

• TC pumps: 0.64 in3 (10.5cc)
• SPX-1/CBR XR race pump: 0.67 in3 (11.3cc)
• Cast iron CB pumps including my CB-X series: 0.80 in3 (13.1cc)
• P pumps: 0.95 in3 (15.6cc)
• CBR pumps: Varies... I have found everything from 0.67in3 to 0.95in3 in the ones I have opened up including new and rebuilt PSC models
• "Trophy Truck" pumps (based on a Saginaw big bearing model referred to as P235 although they go by a few names): 1.22 in3 (20.0cc)

So my current TC should be around ~0.64 cu/in per rev, and the CB is 0.80 cu/in per rev, giving around ~25% more volume. But the CB has the shaft riding on a bushing which is definitely inferior to the bearings of the TC, so I may just jump to one of Radial's products as well in the long run

 

[JR4X]

Hmm. The CB's displace more volume per revolution, so if I gave it the same diameter pulley as the TC I'm running, I should have more volume at idle by whatever the percentage difference is. I don't want to drill out the orofice of the flow control from where it is as my flow beyond that point already feels great, just want to get more volume moving around at idle.

From that tech thread a few years back, Radial was kind enough to post up the displacements of various pumps in post #131:

CBR Steering Pumps - OEM Applications?



So my current TC should be around ~0.64 cu/in per rev, and the CB is 0.80 cu/in per rev, giving around ~25% more volume. But the CB has the shaft riding on a bushing which is definitely inferior to the bearings of the TC, so I may just jump to one of Radial's products as well in the long run

Is it hard to steer on the floor unless you rev it up?

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Is it hard to steer on the floor unless you rev it up?

Nah it's easy so the pressure is good even at idle, I just hit a wall in regards to how fast it will let me turn the steering wheel. Then adding revs improves the lock to lock time right up until the flow cutoff point (somewhere around like 1,500 engine RPMs give or take with the current orofice diameter)

 

[JR4X]

Ok. Then it is the pump not keeping up at idle. I have no change in steering performance between idle and WOT. I don’t run into resistance turning the wheel unless I lug it down to near dying which I can do because manual trans.

Nah it's easy so the pressure is good even at idle, I just hit a wall in regards to how fast it will let me turn the steering wheel. Then adding revs improves the lock to lock time right up until the flow cutoff point (somewhere around like 1,500 engine RPMs give or take with the current orofice diameter)

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Ok. Then it is the pump not keeping up at idle. I have no change in steering performance between idle and WOT. I don’t run into resistance turning the wheel unless I lug it down to near dying which I can do because manual trans.

Yeah that sounds like perfection. I would much rather have the flow cutoff point right around idle to minimize that change in volume through the RPM range as you note with your system. Though I want that point faster than what the pump can currently deliver at idle

 

[RadialDynamics]

Hmm. The CB's displace more volume per revolution, so if I gave it the same diameter pulley as the TC I'm running, I should have more volume at idle by whatever the percentage difference is. I don't want to drill out the orofice of the flow control from where it is as my flow beyond that point already feels great, just want to get more volume moving around at idle.

From that tech thread a few years back, Radial was kind enough to post up the displacements of various pumps in post #131:

CBR Steering Pumps - OEM Applications?



So my current TC should be around ~0.64 cu/in per rev, and the CB is 0.80 cu/in per rev, giving around ~25% more volume. But the CB has the shaft riding on a bushing which is definitely inferior to the bearings of the TC, so I may just jump to one of Radial's products as well in the long run

You are definitely dealing with lack of flow at idle which explains the feeling of hitting a wall until you rev up.

I should probably add a disclaimer to that post in the CBR thread from way back, considering the additional information I have since learned from working directly with the OEM manufacturer of Saginaw steering pumps plus all of the additional experience I have gained with other companies' pumps since then. Although looking back at my post and just going based on measurements of what I had my hands on at the time, my numbers were pretty darn close.

For starters, all of my TC pumps use an 11.0cc/rev cam ring set but TC's can also be found from certain OEM applications with an 8.5cc displacement cam ring.

CB and CBR pumps have available displacements from 9.4 up to 15.0cc/rev. The CB-X pumps I used to sell, which were CB pumps made by another aftermarket steering company to my pressure/flow specs, started off using all 13.2cc rings although I did find them sprinkling in some 15.0cc rings during the time they were supplying me with pumps. For reference, Trail Gear's pumps are a CB type pump with 9.4cc displacement.

Unless you are buying a pump from a known manufacturer that can tell you exactly what displacement ring you are getting, then there is no guarantee. Especially with a parts store reman pump, it is a complete crap shoot regardless of what the spec from the OEM application called out for displacement.

The other factors to consider are the materials of the internals and shaft design. I would avoid using the CB pump because a) it may not actually be larger displacement without opening it up and measuring the cam ring and b) the c-clip shaft design is particularly sensitive to belt alignment and internal pressures which can result in rapid wear (same goes for CBR and P pumps). By comparison, the TC pump having a press fit ball bearing ends up having no c-clip on the shaft and so the rotor is fully floating.

As for cam ring material, the majority of OEM applications use a powdered metal ring which wears a lot quicker than the bar stock machined, hardened, and ground rings that I use in the Pro Series TC pumps. Because the materials are that much more wear resistant, the Pro Series pumps hold up extremely well at high pressure and high rpm so I feel more comfortable overdriving them to make up extra flow at idle. I have no problems sending these pumps up to 8K+ max rpm if necessary.

 

[AgitatedPancake]

Excellent info as always man, cool additional details on pump volumes. And I wasn't aware of the difference of materials between your rings and OEM ones, that's slick.

Because this is good stuff we’re covering that might get talked about every now and then, but rarely has these video references, here’s another one I took tonight. Not super tech heavy or anything, just talking about how the pressure is good and my steering power at idle is fantastic, but volume at idle could be improved. I know this might be a bit of a side tangent of this thread, but seems related enough to be helpful. If I went with the smaller 2" DE ram mentioned earlier in this thread, much less volume would be required so I'd be able to steer faster. But this is a heavy rig with big tires, so I'm still happy I went with a 2.5" ram, sacrificing some speed for more power. I just might up the pump size to accompany that in the future

 

[Bebop]

Because the materials are that much more wear resistant, the Pro Series pumps hold up extremely well at high pressure and high rpm so I feel more comfortable overdriving them to make up extra flow at idle. I have no problems sending these pumps up to 8K+ max rpm if necessary.

That has been tested many times with great success

 

[410sgarage]

Excellent info as always man, cool additional details on pump volumes. And I wasn't aware of the difference of materials between your rings and OEM ones, that's slick.

Because this is good stuff we’re covering that might get talked about every now and then, but rarely has these video references, here’s another one I took tonight. Not super tech heavy or anything, just talking about how the pressure is good and my steering power at idle is fantastic, but volume at idle could be improved. I know this might be a bit of a side tangent of this thread, but seems related enough to be helpful. If I went with the smaller 2" DE ram mentioned earlier in this thread, much less volume would be required so I'd be able to steer faster. But this is a heavy rig with big tires, so I'm still happy I went with a 2.5" ram, sacrificing some speed for more power. I just might up the pump size to accompany that in the future

you have a direct line to get a hold of you for your products?

 

[Big4x4ride]

Since now I'm not the one reviving an old thread lol, I've been kicking this exact idea around. Current running 99-04 SD 60 in my rig and the only way to squeeze the ram in was to utilize offset TRE's to push the tie rod out an extra inch. Due to a mishap with a spun pinion race, I'm going to end up building another front axle and would like to get away from the offset TRE's if at all possible. Rig is a dual purpose street/offroad JK, sees plenty of rocks (going to Moab in 2 days actually), and also drives to work at 75-80 on the highway at least once a week. Running a PSC pump currently, stock steering box, and a 1.75x6.75" ram. Thinking of going to a the Surplus center 2.0" x 8" DE ram and keeping the same box an pump, or even moving on to the Radial dynamics Trail Series TC pump. Quick half ass math comparing the 2x8 DE to a 1.75x8 SE (I'm repositioning my steering arm placement to utilize 8" of throw this time). * Also added the 2.5x8x1.5 for grins *

2.0x8x1.25 DE
Bore = 25.12 ci
Rod = 9.8125 ci
8" travel fluid volume = 15.3075 ci
1" travel fluid volume = 1.9134 ci

1.75x8x.75 SE
Bore = 25.12 ci
Rod = 3.5325 ci
8" travel fluid volume = 19.2325 ci / 15.7 ci (varies based on which side of piston)
1" travel fluid volume = 2.404 ci / 1.9625 ci (varies based on which side of piston)

2.5x8x1.5 DE
Bore = 39.25 ci
Rod = 14.13 ci
8" travel fluid volume = 25.12 ci
1" travel fluid volume = 3.14 ci

Based on that (and I may be entirely wrong here), the 2x8x1.25 DE should actually require less volume to operate. So I guess the question for me here is, how does this feel on the highway? Still feel like normal steering with assist, or does it take away some road feel and feel like full hydro somewhat? My wife drives this thing on occasion too, so I want to be sure I keep it comfortable in that sense. if it were only me, the box would be gone and an orbital in its place lol.

 

[Big4x4ride]

Bumping this back up again after this weekend. Strongly considering going to a DE ram assist setup after some steering issues this past weekend.

Current setup is 2014 JKU with stock ported steering box, and PSC pump #SP43362J, 99-04 60 up front using offset GM taper tie rod ends in order for the 1 3/4" tie rod to clear the diff cover at full lock passenger, and to allow the ram to just clear the trackbar bracket. These offset TRE's suck, constantly fought them loosening up previously, and then this weekend sheared 2 of them off where the shank meets the body. (2 separate rigs with essentially the same setup).

I drive this JKU routinely on the highway, and wheel it. Wife also will jump in at anytime and drive it around town, so whatever I do needs to stay very road friendly. From a road manners standpoint, are there any negatives towards going this route versus a normal tie rod with single ended ram for assist? I cant envision any, and the math works out to be a better option than the 1.75" SE ram when using a 2.0"x8" Surplus center ram. Anyone have any input??

 

[06h3]

I have a friend who has broken a few offset TRE's. It seems the offset heims hold up better.

As for the double ended full hydro ASSIST it seems the consensus is that the box cant flow enough.

Here is a solid thread.

General Tech - Power Steering...the Hard Way

Let’s talk about steering. The initial concept for what I’m trying to execute came when speaking with Woodward steering about external servos back in 2014 or 2015. My brother and I had gone down the rabbit hole trying to understand how to make a better hydraulic assist. We learned about...

www.rme4x4.com

I am a steering idiot, so I want to preface that so people do not take my comment as truth but so we can learn. I THINK the picture above shows why its slow. A normal steering box has tiny ports in the spool valve, so going with something like this keeps the steering quick.

 

[Big4x4ride]

I have a friend who has broken a few offset TRE's. It seems the offset heims hold up better.

As for the double ended full hydro ASSIST it seems the consensus is that the box cant flow enough.

Yeah, Ive lost faith on the offset TRE's now and have considered just going to heims for the time being until I can come up with a permanent fix. The casting material on those offset TRE's is just junk.

Interesting on the not flowing enough part, My understanding was that this becomes the case when people are trying to speed the steering up, but I could be wrong.

Based on the math below, the 2.0x8 DE cylinder should actually require less fluid than a 1.75x8 SE cylinder would.

2.0x8x1.25 DE
Bore = 25.12 ci
Rod = 9.8125 ci
8" travel fluid volume = 15.3075 ci
1" travel fluid volume = 1.9134 ci

1.75x8x.75 SE
Bore = 25.12 ci
Rod = 3.5325 ci
8" travel fluid volume = 19.2325 ci / 15.7 ci (varies based on which side of piston)
1" travel fluid volume = 2.404 ci / 1.9625 ci (varies based on which side of piston)

 

[broken4_racing]

I am starting a new 4500 class build so have been doing a ton of research. The typical sweet valve that everyone uses is actually the exact same spool as in the saginaw cases. And there has been a lot of success with the sweet valve so I don't think its fair to say the normal steering spool valve has too small of ports. Companies do port them to be successful, but its still a standard spool.

Its cool that you linked the Woodward spool as I have been looking very closely at it and have even been chatting with some local pros along with Eric at Radial Dynamics about it. He will probably correct me, but I think he said the woodward ports are approx 30% larger in terms of flow area. Another massive benefit I see to it is that it has a replaceable torsion bar, vs the sweet valves you basically just buy a whole new one. Ill ikely be getting to steering in around 6 months so there may be some new options by then..

 

[JR4X]

I don’t think the potential flow out of the Woodward is necessary until you get into 3”x11 rams or bigger. And the twitchiness reported by that guy is evidence that his system isn’t balanced or timed correctly.

To time it correctly he would be going the wrong way from his stated goal. He wants it streetable, but the cure for it not to dart, would be to go to a steering box in the 6:1 ratio range. So 3/4 turn lock to lock.

I’m not here to tell anyone what to do. But think about what you’re saying. You need more flow in your streetable trail rig than an IFS 4400 car does? The Howe modified Sweet valve is more than sufficient FLOW for the fastest 4x4’s you’ve ever seen. You DO NOT need the crazy flow potential for your 3 or 4 turn street rig your ol lady drives once or twice a year with your cheapo off the shelf regular little rams. The Howe and PSS valves have their issues but insufficient flow isn’t one.

 

[mobil1syn]

Current setup is 2014 JKU with stock ported steering box, and PSC pump #SP43362J, 99-04 60 up front using offset GM taper tie rod ends in order for the 1 3/4" tie rod to clear the diff cover at full lock passenger, and to allow the ram to just clear the trackbar bracket. These offset TRE's suck, constantly fought them loosening up previously, and then this weekend sheared 2 of them off where the shank meets the body. (2 separate rigs with essentially the same setup).

why not notch the diff cover to make things happy?

 

[broken4_racing]

I don’t think the potential flow out of the Woodward is necessary until you get into 3”x11 rams or bigger. And the twitchiness reported by that guy is evidence that his system isn’t balanced or timed correctly.

To time it correctly he would be going the wrong way from his stated goal. He wants it streetable, but the cure for it not to dart, would be to go to a steering box in the 6:1 ratio range. So 3/4 turn lock to lock.

I’m not here to tell anyone what to do. But think about what you’re saying. You need more flow in your streetable trail rig than an IFS 4400 car does? The Howe modified Sweet valve is more than sufficient FLOW for the fastest 4x4’s you’ve ever seen. You DO NOT need the crazy flow potential for your 3 or 4 turn street rig your ol lady drives once or twice a year with your cheapo off the shelf regular little rams. The Howe and PSS valves have their issues but insufficient flow isn’t one.

I definitely agree with you on that. For me the draw to the woodward is 1/2 the price (500US) of the modified sweet valves, and the swappable torsion bars.

 

[Sean]

Yeah, Ive lost faith on the offset TRE's now and have considered just going to heims for the time being until I can come up with a permanent fix. The casting material on those offset TRE's is just junk.

Not sure there's any big difference but the Barnes offset SREs (looks like a 2 pc. end) are less expensive ~$32 than the Artec 3 pc. offsets ( ~$50 on Summit or through Artec). Not sure of any other brands with a good reputation. FK doesn't make offsets from what I could find on their site.

I'm sort of planning a SE ram assist on my SD60 outers mated to a 14B on an '02 Dodge with the Cummins and 40s. Would you recommend making the steering arms long enough to avoid an offset tie rod? I was planning that if I had to go offset, it would be SREs (mounted in double shear) over TREs, but it sure seems like you're saying a regular tie rod with regular SREs or TREs wouldn't have the breakage issues you're experiencing with the offsets....

 

[JR4X]

I definitely agree with you on that. For me the draw to the woodward is 1/2 the price (500US) of the modified sweet valves, and the swappable torsion bars.

That makes all the sense in the world, but that’s not the justification I read in the posts. 🍺

For the 7th or 8th time since the last time my dad broke a Howe servo. A 4400 class IFS car (Ben Napiers old Penhall car) came to me needing to buy our spare servo to get to race at the finals. The new replacement was ordered this morning for $975 dollars.

 

[Big4x4ride]

why not notch the diff cover to make things happy?

its actually already the low profile diff cover for the SD60. To be clear though, going to the DE cylinder setup would also be on an entirely new axle housing as I have some internal damage on my current housing that has me on borrowed time everytime I wheel this thing. This will make it easier to solve the trackbar bracket interference as well ad that will all be done from scratch.

For now, I think I'm gonna switch to offset heims and call it good. Ill end up single shear at the knuckles though for now. Not the end of the world, but also far from ideal.

 

[Big4x4ride]

Not sure there's any big difference but the Barnes offset SREs (looks like a 2 pc. end) are less expensive ~$32 than the Artec 3 pc. offsets ( ~$50 on Summit or through Artec). Not sure of any other brands with a good reputation. FK doesn't make offsets from what I could find on their site.

I'm sort of planning a SE ram assist on my SD60 outers mated to a 14B on an '02 Dodge with the Cummins and 40s. Would you recommend making the steering arms long enough to avoid an offset tie rod? I was planning that if I had to go offset, it would be SREs (mounted in double shear) over TREs, but it sure seems like you're saying a regular tie rod with regular SREs or TREs wouldn't have the breakage issues you're experiencing with the offsets....

My tie rod is mounted to the factor tie rod holes on the 99-04 SD60 housing. I used a bolt on steering arm (Weaver Fab) on the passenger side only for the steering itself. Have the tie rod further out would definitely help, I just ran out of real estate on my setup. Regular TRE's would hold up much better IMO than the offsets due to having the leverage central on the tie rod ball housing itself versus further out. There are also much better quality TRE's than what is offered in the offsets as well. Can also get a larger shank than the 7/8" which would also be an increase in strength compared to the offsets. My end setup would pobably be 3/4x7/8" heim at the cylinder to SD TRE at the knuckle itself if I do go this route.