| [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #276909] |
Tue, 28 April 2015 12:20  |
glwgmc
Messages: 1014
Registered: June 2004
Karma: 10
|
Senior Member |
|
|
While on this last trip in the Clasco I had the ability to see what impact removing those monster Caspro rear sway bars would have on ride and drive. At the same time I removed those, I also installed bag risers (the Clasco has the stock one bag per side system) and discovered the rear Bilstein shocks have seen better days. So, this report is on the combination of those three things.
Prior to all of this the Clasco ride was flat and well controlled with little sway under any driving conditions even though the ride heigh was set low both front and rear. With the ride height unchanged, there now is more noticeable sway in the wind but it is still a one hand on the steering wheel ride. The bag risers do seem to exacerbate the sway issues, but finding the rear shocks likely bad makes it hard to pinpoint how much of the sway is due to the bag risers or the questionable shocks. The one thing that is very much an improvement is we can now level the coach side to side far more easily and effectively. So, bottom line, I would say those very large Caspro rear sway bars did their intended job of keeping the coach flat and level at the expense of making it harder to level side to side. I don’t know if those big sway bars negatively effected the degradation of the rear shocks or not, but they certainly do need to be replaced.
The Royale also still uses the stock one air bag per side and has bag risers but with newish KYB shocks all around. It has the one ton front end and is set at factory ride height. It sways in the wind less than the Clasco and is also a one hand on the wheel ride. My wife says she can notice less sway in the Royale than in the Clasco even when not in the wind but that was not as noticeable for her before we removed the Caspro rear sway bars on the Clasco.
Jerry
Jerry & Sharon Work
Kerby, OR
glwork@mac.com
http://jerrywork.com
78 Royale
77/94 Clasco
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jerry & Sharon Work
78 Royale
Kerby, OR
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #276921 is a reply to message #276909] |
Tue, 28 April 2015 15:40  |
Jon payne
Messages: 495
Registered: May 2008
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Intesting post and got me thinking about other mods that help with stability. I have read many posts about how the 4-airbag systems helps alot with stability and also recall reading how the reaction arm helps with stability (in addition to braking of course). And if I recall correctly some were saying if you have the reaction arms already installed on your coach then installing the 4 bag system for the stability improvement was not necessary.
Do have that right? I'm asking because I would like to have improved stability and improved braking but I really do not want to install the 4-bag system due to the cost (I plan to install the sully bags this summer).
Jon
Jon Payne
76 Palm Beach
Westfield,IN
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #277028 is a reply to message #276909] |
Wed, 29 April 2015 20:48 |
kerry pinkerton
Messages: 2565
Registered: July 2012
Location: Harvest, Al
Karma: 15
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Our 'new' Buskirk Kingsley has the monster sway bar on the front and smaller ones on the rear. It drives absolutely amazingly...amazingly. Certainly better than the Eleganza that has had EVERYTHING replaced except the bogie bushings. I still have not had time to get into it but once I get the brakes working, I'll investigate it more. As far as leveling goes, so far in our vast camping experience (LOL), we always parked in pretty level spaces so I'm not real sure if I'd remove the sway bars just for leveling.
Kerry Pinkerton - North Alabama
Had 5 over the years. Currently have a '06 Fleetwood Discovery 39L
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #277035 is a reply to message #277028] |
Wed, 29 April 2015 22:19 |
Bob de Kruyff
Messages: 4260
Registered: January 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Karma: 1
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The brake reaction arm will not affect handling unless you are talking about braking stability. Front and rear roll stiffness are equally important and need to be balanced. Too much on the front and the vehicle will understeer excessively or plow. Too much on the rear and the vehicle will start to tend to oversteer. Some level of understeer is best. There are two ways to affect roll stiffness--the spring rates and the stabilizer bars. That is why people with modified rear suspensions feel they may or may not need stabilizer bars. Larger stabilizer bars can really hurt ride quality on bad roads. I don't think any of the available roll bars will get anyone in trouble, but think of balance.
Bob de Kruyff
78 Eleganza
Chandler, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #277057 is a reply to message #277023] |
Thu, 30 April 2015 09:42 |
Keith V
Messages: 2337
Registered: March 2008
Location: Mounds View,MN
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ronald Pottol wrote on Wed, 29 April 2015 20:15Usually, you want the proportionally softer bar on the driven wheels.
Explain why please.
I feel the coach needs more front roll stiffness, but it's hard to know how a bigger sway bar will feel until you put it on.
Keith Vasilakes
Mounds View. MN
75 ex Royale GMC
ask me about MicroLevel
Cell, 763-732-3419
My427v8@hotmail.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #277072 is a reply to message #277057] |
Thu, 30 April 2015 13:52 |
bpimm
Messages: 211
Registered: June 2013
Location: Washougal Washington
Karma: 2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The softer swaybar on the driven wheels is usually a traction concern, If you are on a ridge diagonally the stiffer bar will tend to take weight off of the light wheel. Trade off between acceleration and handling, usually more of a concern with RWD lifting the inside tire under cornering but in the case of the MH more rear stiffness will control bodyroll while allowing for more articulation in the front for traction. But keep in mind as mentioned before more rear stiffness will tend to move towards over steer and while a long wheelbase will drift better than a short wheelbase I don't think these would make good drift vehicles. 
I have a Subaru Legacy that has so much roll stiffness that I have been stuck on dry pavement with AWD. It has open diffs front and rear and a particular parking lot entrance is steep enough to lift one wheel and leave so little weight on the diagonal opposite wheel that without enough forward momentum I came to a stop and had to back up and get a bit of a run at it.
Brian & RaeDean
1973 26' #383
Washougal WA
[Updated on: Thu, 30 April 2015 13:59] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #277100 is a reply to message #277072] |
Thu, 30 April 2015 17:50 |
Ronald Pottol
Messages: 505
Registered: September 2012
Location: Redwood City, California
Karma: -2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Yes, it's from a performance view point. Which may not make any sense for a
motor home.
Just remember, it's front wheel drive, you do your donuts in reverse!
On Apr 30, 2015 11:53 AM, "Brian Pimm" wrote:
> The softer swaybar on the driven wheels is usually a traction concern, If
> you are on a ridge diagonally the stiffer bar will tend to take weight off
> of the light wheel. Trade off between acceleration and handling, usually
> more of a concern with RWD lifting the inside tire under cornering but in
> the
> case of the MH more rear stiffness will control bodyroll while allowing
> for more articulation in the front for traction. But keep in mind as
> mentioned
> before more rear stiffness will tend to move towards over steer and while
> a long wheelbase will drift better than a short wheelbase I don't think
> these would make good drift vehicles. :twisted:
> --
> Brian & RaeDean
>
> 1973 26' #383
>
> Washougal WA
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
1973 26' GM outfitted
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] Giant Caspro rear sway bars, report after removal [message #277179 is a reply to message #277100] |
Sat, 02 May 2015 16:41 |
jimk
Messages: 6734
Registered: July 2006
Location: Belmont, CA
Karma: 9
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jon,
Reaction arm does not increase stabiliy, if tou want to believe that then
your missing how it works,
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Ronald Pottol
wrote:
> Yes, it's from a performance view point. Which may not make any sense for a
> motor home.
>
> Just remember, it's front wheel drive, you do your donuts in reverse!
> On Apr 30, 2015 11:53 AM, "Brian Pimm" wrote:
>
>> The softer swaybar on the driven wheels is usually a traction concern, If
>> you are on a ridge diagonally the stiffer bar will tend to take weight
> off
>> of the light wheel. Trade off between acceleration and handling, usually
>> more of a concern with RWD lifting the inside tire under cornering but in
>> the
>> case of the MH more rear stiffness will control bodyroll while allowing
>> for more articulation in the front for traction. But keep in mind as
>> mentioned
>> before more rear stiffness will tend to move towards over steer and while
>> a long wheelbase will drift better than a short wheelbase I don't think
>> these would make good drift vehicles. :twisted:
>> --
>> Brian & RaeDean
>>
>> 1973 26' #383
>>
>> Washougal WA
>> _______________________________________________
>> GMCnet mailing list
>> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
>> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC, Fremont,CA
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
http://www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Jim Kanomata
Applied/GMC
jimk@appliedairfilters.com
www.appliedgmc.com
1-800-752-7502
|
|
|
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
