HOSS 3.0 severe duty STEERING RACK and TIE RODS ...Ford Performance M-3200-WT

[orion]

Time to pour some fuel on the fire!

Presenting the one and only HOSS 2.5 Steering Rack brought to you by @NORCALGXP and Hamm's an America's Classic Premium Beer Born in the land of sky blue waters.

Hoss 1.0 Motor bolted to a HOSS 3.0 rack. Fault codes are below and looks like there is a steering position sensor inside the clock spring. I think this is a very important discovery as there are 2 separate clock springs for the bronco. I have a feeling this is related to why HOSS 3.0 the rack works in my bronco and not fancy those fancy broncos. FYI I Plugged the HOSS 2.5 rack into my bronco for testing.

Next phase will be a full install, since discovering the codes are related to the steering wheel clock spring. So at this point if you do a motor swap you may not need to program the rack. This is pretty big as it will allow more flexibility with a trail repair or make your own HOSS 2.5 rack.

So if I'm getting this right, I could buy a HOSS 3.0 rack, swap motors and be good to go? Or is there an issue with the clock spring or is that because you did the 3.0 programming first and then did this??? It's kinda weird to me that the clock spring would have anything to do with it. If I remember correctly, didn't one of you test the lock to lock on both racks and they were the same.

Forgive my ignorance on the subject.

Sponsored

 

[Snacktime]

So if I'm getting this right, I could buy a HOSS 3.0 rack, swap motors and be good to go? Or is there an issue with the clock spring or is that because you did the 3.0 programming first and then did this??? It's kinda weird to me that the clock spring would have anything to do with it. If I remember correctly, didn't one of you test the lock to lock on both racks and they were the same.

Forgive my ignorance on the subject.

So far it looks like a viable option, should have a exact answer in a week or two. Just need to pay for a FDRS subscription and stick it in a Bronco. I should be able to figure out exactly if FDRS is even needed.

 

[NORCALGXP]

So if I'm getting this right, I could buy a HOSS 3.0 rack, swap motors and be good to go? Or is there an issue with the clock spring or is that because you did the 3.0 programming first and then did this??? It's kinda weird to me that the clock spring would have anything to do with it. If I remember correctly, didn't one of you test the lock to lock on both racks and they were the same.

Forgive my ignorance on the subject.

We shall see, I had a bad rack 3.0 we switched out the assist motor from my 2.0 rack and we shall see. I am going to Death Valley and will try and install the rack when I get back after April 8th. We will keep you posted.

 

[Tex]

Got on the short list the other day for a 74Weld rack using my 3.0 internals, should be ready to go in about a month. Really interested in seeing how it compares to the stock rack on the highway, and staring at all of its billetyness (that's a word, I googled it, trust me). Soon as I get that installed I'll be looking at what's left of my 3.0 rack as well as my complete 2.0 rack to see what kind of options there might be to reinforce these housings. I won't really know what it'll actually end up looking like due to clearances and whatnot, so this is just an approximation. Here's the basic idea:

The truss will be made with sheet steel (4130 if I can get away with it) and will reinforce the areas of the housing that are susceptible to failure, such as the preload area and ends of the housing, as well as stiffening the entire structure. I'd like for it to be mirrored on the opposite side, two truss halves bolted together making a sort of shell around the housing. It'll be bolted to the rack with slightly longer bolts going to the crossmember, and then utilize the flange bolts on the passenger side for additional tie in points. It will also bolt to the steel bands that are clamped to the ends of the housing, and these bands will have an area machined to accept OEM boots. The ends of the housing may need to be machined down to fit the clamps, or the clamps machined to a unique shape to fit the end of the housing, I won't really know until I get mine apart and see which method will be ideal. As for the preload area, there will be a large threaded bung added for a cap which will be tightened against the preload adjustment itself, so the forces that cause failure here will be transferred to the truss instead of the housing. It'll act sort of like a clamp holding that area together. Hopefully that's all that will be needed to prevent blowing out the preload adjustment. The cap can be unthreaded and removed to access the preload for adjustment whenever necessary.

A steel truss would be the strongest option, though an aluminum version might be feasible if everything was welded together. I'll get the steel version put together and decide if aluminum is even worth pursuing. My goal is to design it in a way that anyone who can remove their rack will be able to install this, ideally if it can be installed without completely removing the rack, just unbolting it enough to gain access for the install. Once I get the design figured out I'll just open source it to anyone that wants it, and any company that can bring it to market.

I think the rack itself is fine, the housing just needs a little help and bigger tie rods to match. Probably some better bushings too. We shouldn't have to spend $2-5K for a rack when a cheap truss could potentially make the stock rack strong enough for most anyone's needs. I'll make a thread for it when I get started so I don't clutter up this one, in the meantime throw me some suggestions and ideas if you have any.

 

[Snacktime]

@Tex I don't even think we need to even beef the rack up. I think if we take apart the HOSS 3.0 and press in some brass or fancy oil impregnated metal into the ends and line bore them we will be good to go. Just need better rack shaft support and to remove point loads (spread the force out).

 

[zuke]

@Snacktime @Tex

I applaud both of you for thinking so hard about this, and while there might be merit to both ideas as we see more tires above 37" and more extreme lift angles than 3". I think the 3.0 by itself might be sufficeint for where the majority of Rockcrawlers are heading right now.

If lift angles are above 3.5", then there really need to be other measures taken to correct CV and Tie Rod angles, I don't think more beef is the answer to poor geometry.

If someone is running 40" tires, they are already in a league far beyond the average rock crawler, that's buggy territory there, and requires a pretty significant investment to expect stuff to survive, and that might be the market that 74weld is trying to address.

However, we're gonna need to see more 3.0 racks fail, and go from there, Both of you're ideas could have a lot of merit if we see similar breakage to the 2.0 racks.

 

[Bmadda]

@Snacktime @Tex

I applaud both of you for thinking so hard about this, and while there might be merit to both ideas as we see more tires above 37" and more extreme lift angles than 3". I think the 3.0 by itself might be sufficeint for where the majority of Rockcrawlers are heading right now.

If lift angles are above 3.5", then there really need to be other measures taken to correct CV and Tie Rod angles, I don't think more beef is the answer to poor geometry.

If someone is running 40" tires, they are already in a league far beyond the average rock crawler, that's buggy territory there, and requires a pretty significant investment to expect stuff to survive, and that might be the market that 74weld is trying to address.

However, we're gonna need to see more 3.0 racks fail, and go from there, Both of you're ideas could have a lot of merit if we see similar breakage to the 2.0 racks.

@BigMeatsBronco is on 40s already. 6g Bronco seems to want more and more meat! Looking at the Loren Healy build in the other thread, 44s are gonna happen pretty quick!

 

[zuke]

@BigMeatsBronco is on 40s already. 6g Bronco seems to want more and more meat! Looking at the Loren Healy build in the other thread, 44s are gonna happen pretty quick!

Totally agree with you! But Loren Healey and @BigMeatsBronco are hardly average

Mall Crawlers will get away with 40's on Rough Country style lifts (Small Diff Drop, Raises Tie Rod seat on the Knuckle) Just like they have on IFS Pickups for the last 10 years. But Serious Crawling on 40's is gonna require serious investment!

 

[Tex]

Line bored bronze bushings are another thing I'll be checking into, particularly with the 3.0 as it'll be more or less a gutted housing that I can play with. I want to strengthen the housing first before I get started with the bushings, so I can see where the outer clamps are going to be located in relation to the bushings. Ideally, I'd like the clamps directly over the bushings, so the housing is basically sandwiched between the clamp and the bushing. Line boring before the truss and clamps are in place might throw off concentricity or runout. There's also a good chance that when the bushings are upgraded, the weak link may end up being something that bushings can't address.

The idea for the truss is to give 2.0 owners an option besides installing a 3.0 rack, and 3.0 owners an avenue besides going straight to a 74Weld rack. Right now we have three options for more strength...the 3.0, BB stuff, and 74Weld. Since this part would be aimed at strengthening just the housing, it would compliment any direction you go. A stock rack with a truss, 3.0 with a truss, upgraded bushings whether they're BB or line bored bronze bushings, or a combination thereof. I have a feeling that a lot of guys aren't thrashing their Broncos like they want to, or going to the size tires they want, because they're keenly aware of the weak rack and tie rods. That's absolutely the case with me and why I decided to give the 74Weld rack a go.

Steering geometry certainly plays a big part in the longevity of a rack, and if one were to correct this I think some of the failures would never have happened, particularly with tie rods. However, even when you address this, you'll still run into the same problem when you're trying to squeeze out every last inch of travel from your suspension later on. When you go long travel, you'll inevitably run out of good geometry after getting rid of all the other binding issues. You may get to a point where you manage to gain 2" of droop without binding, but with marginal geometry. Your choice is to take that extra 2" and potentially damage your rack, or lose 2" of travel so you don't stress your rack at full droop. Having a tougher rack that can handle marginal geometry can give you the option of taking that extra 2" of travel without consequences.

 

[Snacktime]

To be honest with the group I think the practical limit is 37s. HOSS 3.0 is an upgrade but we need more power! Even with the HOSS 3.0 its hard to tell I have more steering power. To be 100% honest I only have really loaded the steering at Praire City the video below. I full on was sawing my steering all the way up the obstacle try to see if it would stall out (was on 35s). On the trail I am much more gentle and try not to bind up the front. I will say I have been 100% happy with the HOSS 3.0 and think its a fantastic upgrade. Definitely worth it for anyone wheeling vs buying BB upgrades.

Issues,
The assist system is plastic with a non-adjustable belt tensioner. The factory bushings are good but not perfect. These racks are not heavy duty and are a service item. Even with what Weld74 is doing they are still in the it will wear out and be a service item.

 

[Bmadda]

To be honest with the group I think the practical limit is 37s. HOSS 3.0 is an upgrade but we need more power! Even with the HOSS 3.0 its hard to tell I have more steering power. To be 100% honest I only have really loaded the steering at Praire City the video below. I full on was sawing my steering all the way up the obstacle try to see if it would stall out (was on 35s). On the trail I am much more gentle and try not to bind up the front. I will say I have been 100% happy with the HOSS 3.0 and think its a fantastic upgrade. Definitely worth it for anyone wheeling vs buying BB upgrades.

Issues,
The assist system is plastic with a non-adjustable belt tensioner. The factory bushings are good but not perfect. These racks are not heavy duty and are a service item. Even with what Weld74 is doing they are still in the it will wear out and be a service item.

Ideally your steering should feel exactly the same. I'm in the opposite camp...I feel that the EPS is capable of producing more torque on the components than conventional assist did. This was very apparent climbing [undisclosed mountain] at [undisclosed WI location] with my son wheeling my old xj and me wheeling the Bronco. XJ pump went into bypass in alot of spots where the Bronco's EPS just muscled the tire through. I have wheeled the XJ up [undisclosed] many times, and it's a little technical, but it does it no problem, and the Bronco did too, but what hit me was the buttery smoothness of the steering...yes I know apples/oranges...but I kinda came to the theory that if the assist was a little weaker, it would give you more feedback, and thus prevent you from breaking stuff as easily. I'm really interested in your 2.5 rack concept for this reason...A stronger rack w/less assist power might be perfect for the "weekend warrior" and actually increase durability long term by forcing the driver to take a better line, and giving a clear warning when pushed too hard

 

[Rkgzx9leftcoast]

To be honest with the group I think the practical limit is 37s. HOSS 3.0 is an upgrade but we need more power! Even with the HOSS 3.0 its hard to tell I have more steering power. To be 100% honest I only have really loaded the steering at Praire City the video below. I full on was sawing my steering all the way up the obstacle try to see if it would stall out (was on 35s). On the trail I am much more gentle and try not to bind up the front. I will say I have been 100% happy with the HOSS 3.0 and think its a fantastic upgrade. Definitely worth it for anyone wheeling vs buying BB upgrades.

Issues,
The assist system is plastic with a non-adjustable belt tensioner. The factory bushings are good but not perfect. These racks are not heavy duty and are a service item. Even with what Weld74 is doing they are still in the it will wear out and be a service item.

You guys are doing awesome work with this upgrade.
My only thing I would add is that on mine, 22 Basequatch with 37s, 2.0 rack BB bushing and JKS tie rod sleeves. Not lifted. I tested mine at Trail Hero last October , on 2 - 7 rate trails Plan B, and Double Sammy. My only issue was that at certain points after going over an obstacle with both lockers engaged, steering would bind up.

I would have to back up and go forward after disengaging lockers to get the steering to free up. I think the lockers are slow to disengage at points, which adds to this. this happened maybe 5 times both days. There are others who have had this issue as well. My thinking is that the motor is getting over heated at points as well? My thinking is the bigger motor on the 3.0 was for this reason?

I had no other issues and my steering has been fine since.

 

[orion]

You guys are doing awesome work with this upgrade.
My only thing I would add is that on mine, 22 Basequatch with 37s, 2.0 rack BB bushing and JKS tie rod sleeves. Not lifted. I tested mine at Trail Hero last October , on 2 - 7 rate trails Plan B, and Double Sammy. My only issue was that at certain points after going over an obstacle with both lockers engaged, steering would bind up.

I would have to back up and go forward after disengaging lockers to get the steering to free up. I think the lockers are slow to disengage at points, which adds to this. this happened maybe 5 times both days. There are others who have had this issue as well. My thinking is that the motor is getting over heated at points as well? My thinking is the bigger motor on the 3.0 was for this reason?

I had no other issues and my steering has been fine since.

I think that is all drivetrain bind, nothing to do with the steering. I came across that with my front binding and not turning, after unlocking the front locker, but after a few feet in slippery mud steering was back to normal.

 

[zuke]

I think that is all drivetrain bind, nothing to do with the steering. I came across that with my front binding and not turning, after unlocking the front locker, but after a few feet in slippery mud steering was back to normal.

Agreed, I get this in my Jeeps when locked as well. When locked, you can't turn the wheels without over-coming the traction, and many times something will break instead when you try, so it's better to have the steering stop trying at the point before things will break!

 

[Tex]

Ideally your steering should feel exactly the same. I'm in the opposite camp...I feel that the EPS is capable of producing more torque on the components than conventional assist did.

My experience is that traditional PS is weak sauce in everything worth putting bigger tires on. Once you go past 38's, not much is going to handle them without hydro assist added. Even 35's on older vehicles are more than the steering can really handle, but the Bronco handles them better than older vehicles handled their stock 29" tires. I'm reminded of my Excursion's PS with stock tires that couldn't handle one handed turning while stopped on flat ground. That pig got a hydro assist and all that did was make it feel like it should've felt from the factory, and the Bronco with 35's still has it beat in how easy it turns.

Sponsored