(Dual) Steering Stabilizer - Rancho/ARB

BenJKWrangler15

New member
As I'd like to avoid "cheap" products and stay on the right track (no puns intented related to subject thread) I want to get opinions on which of the 3 companies mention above I should go for in term of dual steering stabilizer for my 2015 JK.

Rancho and ARB Old Emu seems to have a good rep and feedback regarding their products. What are your opinions on those, good or bad.

Also, is there any other company I forgot to filter down in my research of a dual steering stabilizer that is tested and proven? Don't want any chinese put-your-company-name-sticker-on-it brand like Pro Comp, Rugged Ridge, Rubicon Express & Teraflex, to only name a few.

So here are the three products part numbers from 4WP ;

ARB OLD MAN EMU (not dual)

#ARBOMESD48 - Twin tube steering stabilizer
#ARBFK50 - LHD Jeep bracket (Thanks, Aussie)

RANCHO

#RANRS64101 - Dual steering stabilizer bracket
#RANRS7405 - RS7000 Monotube steering stabilizer

Thoughts?

I'll be honest, I've been considering Fox and Icon as well but the thing is I like to drive my Jeep as if it was a Trophy Truck while off roading, most of the time - Pedal to the metal - when I'm not crawling over stuff & taking my sweet ass time to do it 🙃

So, thoughts, opinions, recommandations?

Thanks!

Ben & RaccøønJK

ImageUploadedByWAYALIFE1466913844.073684.jpg
 
You don't really "need" a dual steering stabilizer. I never had any problems with the stock one while running 35s.

If I had to recommend one off your list, it would be the Rancho RS7000 monotone steering damper.
 
I have an OME and like it, but it is not needed. Are you having any issues? You don't need a steering stabilizer for everything to be in proper spec.
 
Oh boy. Alright Ben, this gets asked a lot and always turns into a shitstorm. So I'll repeat what you're about to hear from the masses before this gets messy. As WJCO said, this isn't something you need. In fact spending a lot on a single SS set up can be a waste too. Properly set up steering can get away with no SS at all.

If you're having issues you're looking to solve, this isn't the place to look. It's a damper after all. It's going to hide the problem BY DESIGN. That's what it does.

Or if everything is running great and you just want it because it looks awesome, then right on man. Do your thing.

Edit: I missed the part about your spirited driving. I'm not sure if that changes things.
 
I have an OME and like it, but it is not needed. Are you having any issues? You don't need a steering stabilizer for everything to be in proper spec.

I experienced death wobble in the past due to the OEM stabilizer boot that was "crushed" in a accordion fashion but that's that. Otherwise, no, I haven't experienced any other kind of issues.

You don't really "need" a dual steering stabilizer. I never had any problems with the stock one while running 35s.

If I had to recommend one off your list, it would be the Rancho RS7000 monotone steering damper.

Thanks for the recommendation. Also, I really look at this build for the long run. One day it'll be sitting on Dana 60's and big ass fortys 🙃 As soon as my warranty if over [emoji134]🏼 And have the money for it, of course. Couple years from now [emoji16]
 
Oh boy. Alright Ben, this gets asked a lot and always turns into a shitstorm. So I'll repeat what you're about to hear from the masses before this gets messy. As WJCO said, this isn't something you need. In fact spending a lot on a single SS set up can be a waste too. Properly set up steering can get away with no SS at all.

If you're having issues you're looking to solve, this isn't the place to look. It's a damper after all. It's going to hide the problem BY DESIGN. That's what it does.

Or if everything is running great and you just want it because it looks awesome, then right on man. Do your thing.

Edit: I missed the part about your spirited driving. I'm not sure if that changes things.

Thanks a lot for the replie, much appreciate it! Learning stuff everyday 🙃 And I'll get my umbrella since the shitstorm's coming [emoji167][emoji90]
 
Last edited:
I experienced death wobble in the past due to the OEM stabilizer boot that was "crushed" in a accordion fashion but that's that. Otherwise, no, I haven't experienced any other kind of issues.



Thanks for the recommendation. Also, I really look at this build for the long run. One day it'll be sitting on Dana 60's and big ass fortys  As soon as my warranty if over [emoji134] And have the money for it, of course. Couple years from now [emoji16]

I'll start this post with, " You're already on my cool list since you look just like Steve Stifler...but there's no possible way a steering box stabilizer caused death wobble, especially due to a failed boot. Trust me, been there myself. I was fully convinced that my stabilizer fixed my DW but really just hid it. DW is a result of play somewhere in the steering and suspension and the coil spring suspension on a solid axle accentuates it
 
I'll start this post with, " You're already on my cool list since you look just like Steve Stifler...but there's no possible way a steering box stabilizer caused death wobble, especially due to a failed boot. Trust me, been there myself. I was fully convinced that my stabilizer fixed my DW but really just hid it. DW is a result of play somewhere in the steering and suspension and the coil spring suspension on a solid axle accentuates it

Well, if it wasn't the OEM boot that caused it, the guys over at my local dealer did something right while changing it as they passed it under my extended warranty.

But anyways, haven't experienced it again ever since. The real thing that my JK need is a lift... But for now I just trimmed my rear fenders as they were rubbing against my 33's and at full flex with the front and rear swaybars on, I don't experience any rubbing so far on my stock suspension so I'm fine with it... For now [emoji28]🤓

And thanks for putting my name on the cool list [emoji10][emoji41]
 
Well, if it wasn't the OEM boot that caused it, the guys over at my local dealer did something right while changing it as they passed it under my extended warranty.

But anyways, haven't experienced it again ever since. The real thing that my JK need is a lift... But for now I just trimmed my rear fenders as they were rubbing against my 33's and at full flex with the front and rear swaybars on, I don't experience any rubbing so far on my stock suspension so I'm fine with it... For now [emoji28]邏

And thanks for putting my name on the cool list [emoji10][emoji41]

A SS can easily hide the symptom but really if everything is in working order, it's not really needed.
 
Not dead set as the Old Man Emu SS from ARB is a single SS. But I'd rather invest for the long term.

Would you invest in blinker fluid or cross drilled brake lines? If not, then you get the point. It's completely useless and isn't an investment. If you want it to look cool, that's one thing, but they have zero advantage over stock. Save your money and spend it elsewhere.
 
Would you invest in blinker fluid or cross drilled brake lines? If not, then you get the point. It's completely useless and isn't an investment. If you want it to look cool, that's one thing, but they have zero advantage over stock. Save your money and spend it elsewhere.

If you want to invest for the long term, stick with your stock stabilizer and save for hydro assisted steering.

Thanks for the replies everyone.
 
Here is the skinny on the stabilizer posts I see from an engineering aspect.

A steering stabilizer go's allot deeper then trying to cure issues. A steering stabilizer (like any dampener) is added to a design to move or attenuate the natural frequency of the assembly. The designers goal is to prevent vibration amplitudes that cause damage.

All steering systems (solid axle or IFS) have a natural frequency where they will vibrate, shimmy, wobble, or have a tendency to become uncontrollable. This is due to the fact they are attached to rotating parts (wheels) and are allowed to rotate themselves (steer). They vibrate, have movement, and move at velocities that can place the assembly (or critical parts) in a resonant frequency.

All assemblies in nature have a natural frequency, it's just that most do not move fast or slow enough to cause a problem. Manmade assemblies also have natural frequencies that have motivated major design advancements and understanding of the issue (like the Tacoma Narrows Bridge disaster).

A designer tries to design around the natural frequency so that it will not be a problem. This is accomplished a number of ways:

1. Make the frequency low enough, so that the assembly is accelerated through the critical (natural) frequency fast enough that it will not produce amplitudes high enough to cause damage. Adding mass will lower the natural frequency. Motors, turbines, and blower assemblies are designed this way. The natural frequency is usually below 30% of the operating speed and the assembly never operates anywhere near this speed. If you find a problem add flywheel weight.

2. Make the assembly light enough that it's mass and amplitude has little impact on the total assembly. This is common on a lightweight rear view mirror on a motorcycle. All riders know the speed where fuzzy mirrors become a problem and avoid that speed. The mirror mass is so low that it does not impact the rest of the bike. On a car we just add mass to a mirror and move the critical frequency lower knowing that the potential for a problem is minimal because it is not connected to the steering. Imagine what steering the same bike would be like if we raised the mirror mass and was great enough to produce headshake?

3. Make the natural frequency high enough that we do not operate the assembly anywhere near enough to cause damage. Reducing mass increases the natural frequency. I have been told that the Jeep 4.0 has a critical frequency around 6000 rpm that will cause oiling problems, due to bearing clearance irregularities caused by the crankshaft flexing. When the engineers redesigned the crankshaft, from twelve counterweights to four, they limited the performance below the critical speed. A sailor will feel (and hear) when the boat is reaching the critical hull speed. The shrouds and entire boat will start to hum, warning a change in trim or tack is in order (slow the boat).

4. Make the assembly tough enough to handle the critical speed without major damage. This appears the method employed by Jeep on the original twelve counterweigh crankshaft. The critical frequency is still there, but the crankshaft is designed to accept the added stress. If someone does the research on the bridge failure mentioned above, they will find that all suspension bridge designed were revised for improved deck strength and aerodynamic dampening to accomplish the same effect.

5. Dampen the assembly so that it never remains at any one speed long enough to create large amplitudes. This is the utility of velocity dampeners (shocks) because the resistance is always changing with amplitude and velocity. A critical amplitude and speed can be targeted and a shock designed to reduce the speed out of the range of the critical frequency. Before shocks, designers used caster and the resulting friction drag on the tire to produce dampening.

Where does this fit into the stabilizer?

First realize the system (suspension) has a natural frequency. It is not a design flaw. It is something that is NOT easily designed out of the system.

The result is designers combine all the tricks to reduce the chance a natural frequency will become a problem: caster, camber, scrub radius, tire mass, wheel offset, suspension bushing stiffness, linkage design, control or a-arm mass, driveline angle, shock valving, and a stabilizer. Each of these tricks adds dampening to one or more components. The goal is to assure that two or more components will not work in resonance at the same speed.

Are all of the tricks needed? Probably not, but if an Attorney pointed out that you failed to exhaust all potential problems and solutions you could find yourself wishing you added more caster (demanding power steering), more tire pressure (requiring softer springs), a stabilizer (resulting in slower steering), and an anti-sway bar (harsher ride) to avoid a lawsuit.

People wonder why modern 2000 lb. cars need power steering when it was rare on 4000 lb cars of 50 years ago, and they had easier steering? Well, dampening added by all the tricks has to be countered with more power steering.

Designs are driven to reduce weight to achieve better mileage and performance. You cannot just add mass and make everything so damn large and expensive that it cannot be afforded. Even if we did get extreme on the design there are ten "idiots" unknowingly waiting to prove the "idiot proof" design fails to deliver.

Considering that thousands of Jeeps have been sold with a 100,000 mile life is common for the design, the few wobble problems that do exist reflect a good solution in using a stabilizer. Unfortunately something as simple as a weak bushing can upset the design when added stress is placed on the system (big tires, wear, bad alignment). All the bushing and sleeves can be tight and even a loose shock or weak rubber in a control arm bushing can promote the wobble.

A special steering system (even as advanced as IFS) will not eliminate wear due to vibration. Every time I read a post that this or that custom part "got rid of my Death Wobble," I reframe from the urge to say bull shit. I hold my thoughts only because the solutions, while not addressing wobble, have other benefits. The many "solutions" that only postponed the replacement of other bushings, after more wobble blues, proves this out.

I believe that an owner can remove a stabilizer and not experience wobble. It will still be safe, for that owner that has a high level of attention to detail and uses it every time they get ready to drive it (pre-flight).

Will removing the stabilizer work for you? Maybe, but I'll gamble it will not eliminate an existing wobble condition and I'll give odds it's removal will make the wobble worse.

Is it a safe practice to drive without a stabilizer? Probably not.

Attention to detail (maintenance and proactive part replacement) can reduce the chance you will experience any wobble due to vibration. I believe this is the best solution.

Is a dual system needed?, no, it's not but running a pressurized damper will require an opposing damper. Also adding a ram assist system while helping turn those big tires will also have the benefit of reducing vibration resonance.

So in knowing that all the parts that make up our axle assemblies, tires/wheels, steering and adding mass. I would recommend that a damper (steering stabilizer) be used to dampen what it's suppose to, vibration resonance.
 
Here is the skinny on the stabilizer posts I see from an engineering aspect.

A steering stabilizer go's allot deeper then trying to cure issues. A steering stabilizer (like any dampener) is added to a design to move or attenuate the natural frequency of the assembly. The designers goal is to prevent vibration amplitudes that cause damage.

All steering systems (solid axle or IFS) have a natural frequency where they will vibrate, shimmy, wobble, or have a tendency to become uncontrollable. This is due to the fact they are attached to rotating parts (wheels) and are allowed to rotate themselves (steer). They vibrate, have movement, and move at velocities that can place the assembly (or critical parts) in a resonant frequency.

All assemblies in nature have a natural frequency, it's just that most do not move fast or slow enough to cause a problem. Manmade assemblies also have natural frequencies that have motivated major design advancements and understanding of the issue (like the Tacoma Narrows Bridge disaster).

A designer tries to design around the natural frequency so that it will not be a problem. This is accomplished a number of ways:

1. Make the frequency low enough, so that the assembly is accelerated through the critical (natural) frequency fast enough that it will not produce amplitudes high enough to cause damage. Adding mass will lower the natural frequency. Motors, turbines, and blower assemblies are designed this way. The natural frequency is usually below 30% of the operating speed and the assembly never operates anywhere near this speed. If you find a problem add flywheel weight.

2. Make the assembly light enough that it's mass and amplitude has little impact on the total assembly. This is common on a lightweight rear view mirror on a motorcycle. All riders know the speed where fuzzy mirrors become a problem and avoid that speed. The mirror mass is so low that it does not impact the rest of the bike. On a car we just add mass to a mirror and move the critical frequency lower knowing that the potential for a problem is minimal because it is not connected to the steering. Imagine what steering the same bike would be like if we raised the mirror mass and was great enough to produce headshake?

3. Make the natural frequency high enough that we do not operate the assembly anywhere near enough to cause damage. Reducing mass increases the natural frequency. I have been told that the Jeep 4.0 has a critical frequency around 6000 rpm that will cause oiling problems, due to bearing clearance irregularities caused by the crankshaft flexing. When the engineers redesigned the crankshaft, from twelve counterweights to four, they limited the performance below the critical speed. A sailor will feel (and hear) when the boat is reaching the critical hull speed. The shrouds and entire boat will start to hum, warning a change in trim or tack is in order (slow the boat).

4. Make the assembly tough enough to handle the critical speed without major damage. This appears the method employed by Jeep on the original twelve counterweigh crankshaft. The critical frequency is still there, but the crankshaft is designed to accept the added stress. If someone does the research on the bridge failure mentioned above, they will find that all suspension bridge designed were revised for improved deck strength and aerodynamic dampening to accomplish the same effect.

5. Dampen the assembly so that it never remains at any one speed long enough to create large amplitudes. This is the utility of velocity dampeners (shocks) because the resistance is always changing with amplitude and velocity. A critical amplitude and speed can be targeted and a shock designed to reduce the speed out of the range of the critical frequency. Before shocks, designers used caster and the resulting friction drag on the tire to produce dampening.

Where does this fit into the stabilizer?

First realize the system (suspension) has a natural frequency. It is not a design flaw. It is something that is NOT easily designed out of the system.

The result is designers combine all the tricks to reduce the chance a natural frequency will become a problem: caster, camber, scrub radius, tire mass, wheel offset, suspension bushing stiffness, linkage design, control or a-arm mass, driveline angle, shock valving, and a stabilizer. Each of these tricks adds dampening to one or more components. The goal is to assure that two or more components will not work in resonance at the same speed.

Are all of the tricks needed? Probably not, but if an Attorney pointed out that you failed to exhaust all potential problems and solutions you could find yourself wishing you added more caster (demanding power steering), more tire pressure (requiring softer springs), a stabilizer (resulting in slower steering), and an anti-sway bar (harsher ride) to avoid a lawsuit.

People wonder why modern 2000 lb. cars need power steering when it was rare on 4000 lb cars of 50 years ago, and they had easier steering? Well, dampening added by all the tricks has to be countered with more power steering.

Designs are driven to reduce weight to achieve better mileage and performance. You cannot just add mass and make everything so damn large and expensive that it cannot be afforded. Even if we did get extreme on the design there are ten "idiots" unknowingly waiting to prove the "idiot proof" design fails to deliver.

Considering that thousands of Jeeps have been sold with a 100,000 mile life is common for the design, the few wobble problems that do exist reflect a good solution in using a stabilizer. Unfortunately something as simple as a weak bushing can upset the design when added stress is placed on the system (big tires, wear, bad alignment). All the bushing and sleeves can be tight and even a loose shock or weak rubber in a control arm bushing can promote the wobble.

A special steering system (even as advanced as IFS) will not eliminate wear due to vibration. Every time I read a post that this or that custom part "got rid of my Death Wobble," I reframe from the urge to say bull shit. I hold my thoughts only because the solutions, while not addressing wobble, have other benefits. The many "solutions" that only postponed the replacement of other bushings, after more wobble blues, proves this out.

I believe that an owner can remove a stabilizer and not experience wobble. It will still be safe, for that owner that has a high level of attention to detail and uses it every time they get ready to drive it (pre-flight).

Will removing the stabilizer work for you? Maybe, but I'll gamble it will not eliminate an existing wobble condition and I'll give odds it's removal will make the wobble worse.

Is it a safe practice to drive without a stabilizer? Probably not.

Attention to detail (maintenance and proactive part replacement) can reduce the chance you will experience any wobble due to vibration. I believe this is the best solution.

Is a dual system needed?, no, it's not but running a pressurized damper will require an opposing damper. Also adding a ram assist system while helping turn those big tires will also have the benefit of reducing vibration resonance.

So in knowing that all the parts that make up our axle assemblies, tires/wheels, steering and adding mass. I would recommend that a damper (steering stabilizer) be used to dampen what it's suppose to, vibration resonance.

48a3ac381a5470dc09ceac9a90ac381993d66d9af383b020fb94207701dbb01d.jpg.....
 
Top Bottom