Anyone here installed this system on their vans regardless of make or configuration? Through a thread here I happened upon a discussion about the 15 passenger van handling issues and it seems they're nothing less than quite interesting.

My '00 E250 cargo van/raised roof doesn't have a high center of gravity like the passenger or extended body versions although its normal daily driven weighs is about 7800 pounds. I'll be talking to the manufacturer this week upcoming but would prefer some real world experiences from someone whose used them, how they affected the handling characteristics etc etc.

Looking forward to some wonderful insights as well as pro's and con's!

 

JWA: Just like you, I am looking at many things on suspension / steering, chassis etc.

As opposed to a simple add-a-leaf, Roadmaster AS works for variable payload. If payload is unchanged, add-a-leaf seems to be the sensible solution (along with other components, such as tires, shocks, axles, etc).

In other words, Roadmaster's AS is the poor man's air bags. I used airbags before. If I knew, I would have probably gone with Roadmaster's AS. At the time I could not find velvet shackles before my trip (which forced me to do bags).

Roadmaster AS it is very tempting. AS has less things than airbags to worry about. Of course cost/benefit is the main factor in the choice.

None of these system increases the GVWR (legally speaking). I do see them more as correcting the suspension geometry.

Pls keep us posted and educated on what you learn from them this week.,

 

Have you seen the demo on You Tube?

 

Hey Henry and Silver----I've become as knowledable as online and a few personal phone calls to Active Suspension allows. Viewed several of the You Tube videos so the system and concepts behind it are understood and nothing less than fascinating.

I was looking more for those who might have installed and used the RAS, real world experiences. There was a thread running some time ago about inherent handling problems with the 15 passenger vans (disregarding Ford specifically, citing Dodge and Chevy too) which is where I first saw the RAS mentioned.

Thanks for the input guys and still hoping someone knows of this first hand.

 

Yesterday my wife and I ordered a 2011 E-350 XLT 12 passenger wagon. We're finally going to retire our '95 E-350 XL 12 passenger. We're very excited about the new ride, but I'm interested in this Roadmaster AS. I've got 5 kids, and we frequently run with as many as 8 kids in the van. So, safety is naturally a high priority.

I'm wondering specifically if it has any implications or affects on the AdvanceTrac/RSC system. I'm guessing it won't, but I wonder if adding in the AS will tweak the sensors in the AdvanceTrac/RSC system and give inaccurate readings?

I'm sure I'm probably way off, and am demonstrating my complete lack of understanding of both the AdvanceTrac/RSC and the Roadmaster AS systems, but I thought I'd throw it out there for discussion's sake.

Thanks!

TimR><>

 

Tim you might want to research the Roadmaster Active Suspension system because it is a mechanical system similar to an anti-sway bar. Their website is: www.activesuspension.com and there are plenty of videos and FAQ's there--worth taking a look!

 

JWA,

I did spend some time today reading about and watching the videos for the AS. It looks like a great system - and I think I'll add it to my new ride.

From what I read about AdvanceTrac/RSC, it's reasonable to believe that the AS shouldn't interfere with AT/RSC at all. That system is based largely on gyroscopic and speed sensors, whereas the AS is simply a mechanical spring.

My concern was that would the addition of the AS mess with any calibration/computations in the AT/RSC system. I presume the answer is no - that they aren't related in the slightest, but still worth asking the question to be sure.

TimR><>

 

Tim R: Don't the 2006 + years come with a rear sway bar? I do not think you will need the RAS. How many miles or your old van now that you are retireing it?

 

I have RAS installed on my 12 passenger 2006 van that does not have a rear sway bar. I've had air bags and Timbrens on other vehicles. RAS is fantastic for the price. It does cut down on van sway, and it does keep my rear up when my trailer is attached. There is no effect on the empty ride either. I highly recommend the product.

 

I'm not sure about that. I don't see anything in the literature about a rear sway bar, only a front one. From your profile pic it looks like you've got a late model 350. Take a look under yours and let us know what you find. Anybody else know?

As for my '95, it has about 186k on it. Are you interested?

TimR><>

 

Just for more information about my current set up: '00 E250 cargo van weighing just at 7800# loaded which is also the typical weight, almost never carrying additional loads that add 200#, never ever pulling a trailer. This is my daily driver work van with almost no weight added above the floor although there is a fiberglass raised roof. Tool racks and boxes all mounted on the floor. I don't think I've raised my CoG as I might if this were a 12 or 15 passenger van.

Hellwig heavy duty sway bars front and rear, Bilstein shocks soon to be added which will be the heavier "sport" versions rather than the "comfort ride". (With Bilstein's life time guarantee the $325 shipped set of four is a no brainer for me!) FWIW the Hellwig front bar is a huge improvement over the stock bar because its attached to the suspension in a way that reduces the lever effect seen by the stock bar. The Hellwig has a larger diameter which is also an improvement over stock.

I've rarely seen any E van with a rear anti-sway bar but from experience I know it makes a huge difference in handing, does not help with load carrying though. I can't speak for the newer vans with the AT/RSC system so can't speak to it however I can't believe the RAS would interfere with it just as a rear sway bar shouldn't either. Perhaps someone more familiar with the AT/RCS can share their knowledge with us?

I like the RAS and/or anti-sway bars because they're essentially passive and mechanical, only coming into play when something acts upon them like a quick lane change. Anything electronic or computer controlled concerns me since they're a bit more prone to becoming inoperative without warning (blown fuse etc). If a driver relied on such systems to compensate or improve the vans handling and they become inoperative would the driver know and be able to adjust their driving accordingly? I'm old school so the idea of anything purely electronic over a passive device always seems the best idea.

Roadmaster's "active" suspension is a bit misleading since most of us would assume its more complex or electronically controlled. Passive isn't a smart or well perceived marketing term IMHO so perhaps that word "active" is a bit misleading?

However as I read more there might be some overkill if I were to install both the RAS along with Bilstein shocks and my current Hellwig sway bars. I notice when talking with Roadmaster's creator Clive its often mentioned I can simply remove the Hellwig bars and in their words "throw them away.........."! Hmmmmm not sure I'm ready to that just now!

I've spotted a gently used set of RAS that would fit the E vans for about $200. RAS has an 'til end of 2010 $30 savings along with a 30 money back guarantee, no questions asked if purchased directly from them. Summit Racing has a 90 day return policy but their cost is the full $350 + $15 shipping. Having already invested $220 in the rear Hellwig I'm a bit torn what to do at this point.

Too many choices is NOT always a good thing!

 

I thought the main benefit of the RAS was to correct the suspension geometry, i.e. raise the rear, i.e. leaf-spring helper, on-demand. Helping with Sway is the by-product of helping the leaf-spring. Besides, LTXs and Hellwigs are the primary tool of fighting sway.

JWA: I agree with you -- your van is not the textbook example for this system. Your load is constant, while RAS is more helpful if the load is variable. In other words, if during the week your van was 7,000 pounds, while on weekends you load up, tow a camper and roll 8,600 pounds -- RAS is intended for this scenario. RAS would not be doing much during the week, but comes alive on weekends. This is not your intended use of the 250 though.

ClevelandJim has good results because he 1- does not have a rear sway-bar 2- RAS keeps the van's rear up when towing a trailer 3- RAS does not effect his ride when empty.

Although you are rolling at 93% of GVWR (7800 # out of 8400, If I am not wrong) you are still within the GVWR. I you have squatting then $ 50 helper leaves might be a more sensible solution.

 

I call snake oil...
if the vehicle is having problems with a load, then it's overloaded or something is not right/broken with the vehicle.

 

Just to restate for the late arrivals or those who don't read the opening post I'm looking to improve my handling---there is no current or existing deficiency or squat to my rear springs---covered that I thought a bit earlier here.

Henry I think for the most part you're correct in how the RAS works but I believe the main function is to first reduce the lane changing sway and resultant crashes. I can't speak for the designer but what I get is the geometry correction action acts in a secondary nature to accommodate increased rear loading, cargo or trailering. The RAS serves a dual purpose it seems but my main interest was improving my handling.

Oh well---as we discuss this and I do more casual research the RAS while a great idea on paper and for those without a rear sway bar it might be just the ticket. I've spotted a used set locally for just about $200 which is a good cost savings if I were looking to simply try them for a while.

Still open to any other ideas---------thanks all so far!

 

Yes, you did say "improve handling". I apologize for going off on "squatting". Please keep the group updated, it looks like many of us are very interested in this.