Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

al perna · 06-03-2013, 20:40

David , I would not be surprised if BB thoughts were also safety related . BB has always shown themselves to be safety conscious . lets face it , they thought they were making it better .
I think this was a factor in why they fell behind in slide development . There was no way they were going to jeopardize there school bus name .

davidbrady · (06-03-2013)

That's why it really is the owners call as to whether he/she wants to experiment with removing it. All I can say is what Ridewell told me, "the anti-sway bar isn't a Ridewell component it's a BB addition, and the suspension works just fine without it", and what my experience is in terms of ride and handling improvement on my LXi. Owner's need to make their own call and take their own responsibility. I personally think the bus is safer without the bar. I find the bus much easier to drive when my head isn't banging up against the ceiling as I'm launched off my seat!

As far as BB lagging in slideout development, I'd argue differently. True, when compared to the plastic coaches BB lagged, but when compared to the other bus makers they didn't. BB built their first slide equipped bus in 1998, I believe this was the same year Newell introduced theirs. Prevost and MCI didn't have slides till much later - 2001 in the case of Prevost.

al perna · (This post was last modified: 06-03-2013 21:16 by al perna.)

I thought Newell started in 1997 ? I do know for sure , but BB was a year behind on going 102 wide . 1987 , I believe ?

(06-03-2013 21:15)al perna Wrote: I thought Newell started in 1997 ? I do know for sure , but BB was a year behind on going 102 wide . 1987 , I believe ?

nedb · 06-03-2013, 21:17

Darty is bad, exhausting to drive even in a road-feeling sports car but especially in a plush-riding heavy rig. Good call on removing it.

timetravelers · (06-03-2013)

Let me again register my thanks for getting rid of the sway bar and new Koni shocks one turn toward stiff.

What a difference on bridge joints and chuck holes!!!! I'll trade a little more lean any time against rattling every thing in the bus including my teeth.

Now, I've read conflicting advice on camber and am looking forward to definitive advice.

cmillsap · (06-03-2013)

(06-03-2013 20:13)davidmbrady Wrote: That's excellent news Al. You hit the nail square on the head. The bus with the bar has you feeling every pebble on the road. I used to joke with my wife that I could roll over a dime and feel it! Enjoy the new ride!

Hey Ned,

I'm certain BB installed the bar to tighten up the handling, and it does. Without the bar the bus requires a moment to "take a set" in the turns, say when exiting a clover leaf. It's not unlike driving GrandPa's 1957 Cadillac, you need to feed it a good amount of steering and let the coach roll before it starts turning. But, with the bar you still need to do that. This is a 50K lb bus after all, not a Corvette. The trouble with having the bar is that you get the worst of both worlds because you can't keep bushings in it. The bar is so stiff that it quickly shreds the bushings in the vertical links[b]. When that happens then you get this weird non-linear handling. What happens is the bar w/o bushings is super sloppy and is doing nothing at the beginning of a turn, then suddenly it catches as the play is taken up, then the bus becomes darty. I'd rather have a linear progressive roll, with a softer ride. Some folks say a sway bar shouldn't effect the ride quality. Well, when both wheels hit the exact same bump at exactly the same time this is true, but in the real world this is hardly ever the case. I understand the benefits of a well tuned anti-sway bar, and when I get some time on my hands I may experiment with various size bars. There is a size out there that will provide an improvement w/o too much of a compromise. All I know is that the 2.125" diameter bar that BB used isn't the right one!

Also I want to point out that this is personal preference. All you need to do is remove the vertical links and tie the bar snugly up against the frame rails, go for a test drive and make your call. If you like it, then good. If not, then swing it down and connect up the links. No harm done.

I can attest to the pre-mature wear on the anti sway bar bushings. Parliament changed those bushings in November on my bus. They are already quite worn after only about 5000 miles.

mhughes01 · 09-26-2013, 15:48

So when the bushings wear out, is it just like having no bar at all?

davidbrady · (This post was last modified: 11-08-2013 10:25 by travelite.)

Pretty much, but I suppose if you went into a turn hot the bus will roll and the slack in the bar will eventually be taken up and the bus might suddenly bounce off it's anti-sway bar - it could get weird.

***ernie ekberg*** · 09-26-2013, 22:38

I think Paul Lazar had a modification done on this suspension to dampen all that

davidbrady · 09-26-2013, 22:56

Paul worked with ITB to have a custom anti-sway bar made for his steer axle - the '97 came from the factory without a steer axle sway bar. The 1997 has the Wide Body Ridewell suspension which has two hangers in the rear - one for the drive axle and a separate one for the tag axle. The early LXi's used this same setup but the later ones went to a single drive/tag hanger. Ernie's coach has the liftable tag option which as far as I know wasn't carried thru to the LXi's. Is the '97 the only coach that had this as an option?

I've been after Paul for many moons to get the specs on his steer axle sway bar, but I never got them. Once upon a time I looked under his coach to check it out. The bar is mounted on the I-Beam axle with vertical links connected to the frame rails and it's a shadow of the monster that BB burdened the LXi's with. I'd guess 1 5/8" in diameter. The LXi's bar is mounted in the reverse; i.e., the bar is secured to the frame rails with D bushings and the vertical links drop down to the suspension carrier.