Help me understand.......high steer

Georgia Mike

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Location
flowery branch, GA
Hey guys, most of my previous experience with builds has been upgraded stock type replacements (bolt-ons, if you will) and I'm making the jump to tons in a ZJ. I see so many different options when it comes to high steer setups, and thankfully these days a "kit" is just a click away, so I don't have to start completely from scratch. But what kit do I need?

I've been looking at this kit:
www.ebay.com

DANA 60 HIGH STEER CROSOVER STEERING KIT FOR ALL DANA 60 APP THICK ARMS STUDS HD | eBay

Dana 60 High Steer for ALL Dana 60 Application, NO DOM Tubes. 10 - 1/2" Fine Threaded Studs. (Arms are 5 Hole pattern to suit Reid and any other Knuckle). Kit is without DOM tubing, buy local and save.
www.ebay.com

And also this one:
www.ebay.com

DANA 60 HIGH STEER CROSOVER STEERING KIT FOR ALL DANA 60 APP THICK ARMS STUDS HD | eBay

Dana 60 High Steer for ALL Dana 60 Application, NO DOM Tubes. 10 - 1/2" Fine Threaded Studs. (Arms are 5 Hole pattern to suit Reid and any other Knuckle). Kit is without DOM tubing, buy local and save.
www.ebay.com

Now I understand what actually makes the two kits different parts-wise, my question is which one would be a better fit for my application?

My setup will be:
'78 Ford Dana 60
Stock steering box (tapped)
TnT truss with track bar mount for high steer
Gusseted stock knuckles
Hopefully hydro assist
Stock-ish suspension design (long arms with track bar)
Most likely zero to very minimal street driving (building it as a dedicated trail queen)

Can anyone explain to me why I should choose one style over the other? My gut tells me to go with the full crossover and not the Y-link, but what do I know. That's why I'm asking you guys that know way more than me šŸ‘
 
Be aware the 78 60 like you have is known for weak knuckles. I have that same axle and I've been very lucky over the years. I use the top style kit. My TB is about as parallel with the drag link as you can get it in an XJ which I believe is the main goal.
 
Mostly packaging is a dictator in choice. Y-link creates a shorter steeper steering link. If used with a track bar in the same plain it can work well. The steering force can cause rotation on the wheel to wheel link and some issues of delayed response or a slightly sloppy action. Heims are worse for this over TRE's that are fresh and tight. I Y link can be considered weaker do to the joint and steering input from the box and related angle. Ford had some well offset versions to work with Twin I beams.

Cross over means longer everything and less bump steer along the travel. No intermediate joint for a weak spot. Also if any trac bar(pan hard bar) is introduced the angles need to closely match. And as a note it may be obvious to some but they also can not terminate or start from opposite sides creating an "x"......no Bueno.

A y link shines when running narrow axles or a track bar has to be fairly short. They are also the quick go to for tall lifts. But this is in reference to show trucks and pavement pounders with eleventy billion shocks and half as many lights mounted with zero wires hooked to them.šŸ˜‚

Off set brackets that push track bars lengths out side or flush with frame rails are excellent tools when combating angles.
 
The answer is in how much flex you anticipate having with your suspension. When you have the Y-link connection at the tie rod it can allow the axle to pivot significantly more than it can with the drag link end in the steering arm. Notice that the axis of rotation for the connection is perpendicular to the axis of pivot that the axle will travel with the drag link to steering arm connection but with the Y-link the connection rotates in the same plane. Drag link ends have more angular travel than tie rod ends but not nearly enough if the axle tilts a significant amount. The trade-off here is that when the drag link is mounted to the steering arm as it is in that kit there is more mechanical leverage from having the point of application of force further from the steering axis (the same steering box can apply more torque to the steering knuckle) as well as the steering will be a little "slower" with the same pitman arm because the drag link has to travel further to result in the same angular change to the knuckle.
 
Last edited:
OnlyOneDR said:
The answer is in how much flex you anticipate having with your suspension.
Click to expand...
I don't see myself having an unusual amount of flex. I'll be using coils and shocks, so I think I'll take the advice given here and go with the first one.

Thanks to everyone who responded!
 
Separated tie rod and drag link is stronger, simpler, and better geometry than a Y link. Offhand I canā€™t think of any reason to go with a Y link except for cost at an OEM level.
 
Another thing to note is the differences in the Pittman arm pivot length in comparison to the distance from the drag link to king pin distance.

Meaning:

Using the y link style, moves the distance from the drag link to the king pin, and steering angle is increased over mounting the drag link in front of tie rod.

This was a long time problem on my jeep.

My Astro box and flat Pittman arm, with the drag link mounted in front of tie rod, would only generate about 28Ā° of steering.

I couldnā€™t lengthen the Pittman arm any more than I already had.

I converted to the y link style and was able to steer to the stops @ about 37Ā° which is near the max for non clearanced 1480 shafts and joints.
 
shawn said:
Where's your track bar? How long is it? Does a crossover drag link hit the frame?
Click to expand...
Either way you still have a track bar with both, unless weā€™re talking 4 link, in which case youā€™re better off with hydro steer because the vertical travel path wonā€™t match the radial travel path of a conventional drag link or Y link.

The track bar should be the same length as the drag link, which goes from the steering box to opposite knuckle on both styles and is the same length. Packaging constraints are generally the same on both, as the overall shape and size isnā€™t that different. Frame issues are actually worse with a Y link because the dummy/tie-rod side rises up slightly instead of going straight across to the other knuckle.
1699708734208.png


Also, with a Y link, steering geometry changes as the suspension cycles (not much with the kit shown, quite a bit with a stock Jeep setup like above). With a knuckle to knuckle tie rod, there is no change in toe. If the drag link is the same length and angle as the track bar, there is no bump steer (this applies to both systems). If done right, itā€™s basically a big parallelogram between your steering and track bar, with the frame and axle being the vertical connections, and everything moves in unison.
 
nc4x4.com

Dana 60 Steering Help

I have been running chevy 1tons from a cucv ever since I broke the suspension in the first Uwharrie 4x4cross race in 2008. When I swapped them in, I did like 90% of these swaps, and used XJ springs up front, and this meant I needed to change the steering box to accommodate for the front...
nc4x4.com nc4x4.com

Here is my old thread about when I solved my issue. Has decent pics. Iā€™ll tag OP in the thread
 
Mac5005 said:
Another thing to note is the differences in the Pittman arm pivot length in comparison to the distance from the drag link to king pin distance.

Meaning:

Using the y link style, moves the distance from the drag link to the king pin, and steering angle is increased over mounting the drag link in front of tie rod.

This was a long time problem on my jeep.

My Astro box and flat Pittman arm, with the drag link mounted in front of tie rod, would only generate about 28Ā° of steering.

I couldnā€™t lengthen the Pittman arm any more than I already had.

I converted to the y link style and was able to steer to the stops @ about 37Ā° which is near the max for non clearanced 1480 shafts and joints.
Click to expand...
This is a valid point, which honestly has more to do with the design of the arms than the steering system itself. Most of the arms put the drag link mount waaay out from the pivot point of the knuckle, which is great for leverage, but requires a lot of travel to get enough steering angle.

Does anyone make a kit where the drag link mounts on top of the knuckle, and the tie rod mounts below in the same location? I believe thatā€™s how the stock Super Dutyā€™s are setup.
 
jeepinmatt said:
This is a valid point, which honestly has more to do with the design of the arms than the steering system itself. Most of the arms put the drag link mount waaay out from the pivot point of the knuckle, which is great for leverage, but requires a lot of travel to get enough steering angle.

Does anyone make a kit where the drag link mounts on top of the knuckle, and the tie rod mounts below in the same location? I believe thatā€™s how the stock Super Dutyā€™s are setup.
Click to expand...
Iā€™ve seen that done, but not with high steer.

I canā€™t remember where, but it was on a ā€œcorrectā€ Ackerman kit, where the high steer arm hole lines up with the factory TRE hole, so that a long bolt can be ran through both.

A tube sleeve was used over the bolt for correct spacing to allow the drag link and tie rod to mount on same bolt but offset vertically like you describe.

Wheel clearance was an issue and had to run lower back spaced wheels for clearance, and necessitated using heim joints instead of TRE at the axle.

Iā€™m guessing if you have enough up travel and clearance, you could put the drag link above the high steer arms and the tie rod below the high steer arms. But depends on suspension travel and clearances
 
Mac5005 said:
nc4x4.com

Dana 60 Steering Help

I have been running chevy 1tons from a cucv ever since I broke the suspension in the first Uwharrie 4x4cross race in 2008. When I swapped them in, I did like 90% of these swaps, and used XJ springs up front, and this meant I needed to change the steering box to accommodate for the front...
nc4x4.com nc4x4.com

Here is my old thread about when I solved my issue. Has decent pics. Iā€™ll tag OP in the thread
Click to expand...
Gosh dangit, reading through that reminds me of how smart and helpful this board used to be. I miss the pre-meme internet.
 
Mac5005 said:
Iā€™ve seen that done, but not with high steer.

I canā€™t remember where, but it was on a ā€œcorrectā€ Ackerman kit, where the high steer arm hole lines up with the factory TRE hole, so that a long bolt can be ran through both.

A tube sleeve was used over the bolt for correct spacing to allow the drag link and tie rod to mount on same bolt but offset vertically like you describe.

Wheel clearance was an issue and had to run lower back spaced wheels for clearance, and necessitated using heim joints instead of TRE at the axle.

Iā€™m guessing if you have enough up travel and clearance, you could put the drag link above the high steer arms and the tie rod below the high steer arms. But depends on suspension travel and clearances
Click to expand...
Or just go rogue like old GM style and put em on different sides. If I ever decided to stretch my TJ, I was gonna do it enough so I could keep the stock steering box in the stock location, and have the drag link behind the axle and the passenger side arm have a drag link mount at the back and tie rod mount at the front.
 
jeepinmatt said:
Or just go rogue like old GM style and put em on different sides. If I ever decided to stretch my TJ, I was gonna do it enough so I could keep the stock steering box in the stock location, and have the drag link behind the axle and the passenger side arm have a drag link mount at the back and tie rod mount at the front.
Click to expand...
FJ80 Land Cruisers are also like this.

Mac5005 said:
Another thing to note is the differences in the Pittman arm pivot length in comparison to the distance from the drag link to king pin distance.

Meaning:

Using the y link style, moves the distance from the drag link to the king pin, and steering angle is increased over mounting the drag link in front of tie rod.

This was a long time problem on my jeep.

My Astro box and flat Pittman arm, with the drag link mounted in front of tie rod, would only generate about 28Ā° of steering.

I couldnā€™t lengthen the Pittman arm any more than I already had.

I converted to the y link style and was able to steer to the stops @ about 37Ā° which is near the max for non clearanced 1480 shafts and joints.
Click to expand...
You said it better than I did; I noted the same thing in my post above.

shawn said:
Really need to mock it up first. Until you know where your track bar can go and what's going to hit the frame, you don't even know if you can run high steer.
Click to expand...
I had to put my track bar behind the axle and could not run high-steer on mine due to the portal boxes tucking the axle up so high so depending on the packaging this is really important.
 
I believe that in the name of simplicity, the front axle will be in the stock-ish location. I'd originally said in my build thread that I'm not looking to anything groundbreaking with it, and I feel like K.I.S.S. is the best option for this build at my skill level. The rear may get stretched out, but there's a whole lot less to worry about back there with the Ironman triangulated 4 link.
 
Georgia Mike said:
I believe that in the name of simplicity, the front axle will be in the stock-ish location. I'd originally said in my build thread that I'm not looking to anything groundbreaking with it, and I feel like K.I.S.S. is the best option for this build at my skill level. The rear may get stretched out, but there's a whole lot less to worry about back there with the Ironman triangulated 4 link.
Click to expand...
Iā€™m not sure about the simplest solution for tons in a ZJ bc I havenā€™t personally built one to know what clearances or constraints exist.

Same for the relationship between steering angle, Pittman arm length, and drag link travel.

Also a lot depends on lift amount, track bar clearance, and eliminating bump steer.

Iā€™d focus on getting the axle under it and get a tie rod in it, and a track bar in it, then see where you can get the drag link the easiest way.
 
Mac5005 said:
Iā€™d focus on getting the axle under it and get a tie rod in it, and a track bar in it, then see where you can get the drag link the easiest way.
Click to expand...
That seems to be the best way to go about it, BUT.....

Somehow, some way, UPS managed to damage my truss in transit enough they voluntarily sent it back to TnT instead of delivering it to me last Friday. So, I get to wait some more šŸ™„
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20231112_122743_DuckDuckGo.jpg
    Screenshot_20231112_122743_DuckDuckGo.jpg
    47.9 KB · Views: 30
Back
Top