Turning radius on a JKUR, can it be made tighter?

[crawler#976]

Frankly, the maneuverability of the JKUR is disappointing to me. My Power Wagon with 140" wheelbase is way better off highway for doing technical turns. It won't turn as tight a circle as the Jeep, but with more turning angle on the front axle, it is hands down better in actual maneuverability. Even in town, it's easier to park the truck than the Jeep.

So, I thought I'd look at the steering stops to see if I can adjust them in. I found the nut to be welded to the bolt, so it can't be adjusted. It would be very simple to replace the factory bolt with an adjustable one to decrease the turning radius.

Is there a limit to the U-joints because there is still plenty of room to turn the tire at full lock (perhaps the AEV wheels offset helps with that)?

Mark

 

[SiliconTi]

You really can not change it as the front end will bind up until you break something. The front axle u-joints are not really all that flexible at the angle you can turn it from the factory - anything more and you'll break them. Aftermarket CV style axles may allow a bit more, but your never going to reduce it by more than a couple feet.

 

[Hilldweller]

My JKU turns MUCH tighter than my PW ever could. I needed a tugboat and two spotters to park the 'Wagon ---- and then I still had to 3-point it.
The JKU is downright nimble...

Is it our lift/wheel/tire combo maybe?

 

[crawler#976]

So the u-joints are the limiting factor. Bummer...

I may try to adjust it in a little, anything would be welcome. I'll put it up an stands and see where it binds, then back it off and see how it feels.

Bill, the PW has kinked after market arms that allow full turning radius without rubbing. The big bugger is very nimble off road. I wonder if they changed the front end in the fourth gen? That wouldn't surprise me since the front wheel wells are so much smaller than the 3rd gen trucks.

 

[brianjwilson]

I felt the same way when I first bought my JKRU. My last rig was an f150 with 138" wheel base.
In all honesty I just needed more trail time in the jeep. No it doesn't seem to achieve the same steering angle, but it is way more nimble once I got more comfortable with the size and seating position relative to the wheels. I really think you need more seat time in the jeep, and to get more familiar with size and wheel placement. You're sitting very close to the rear wheels and may just need more time to adjust to it if you feel the power wagon works better off road. No offense intended, I really felt the same way at first.

I felt the stock u joints bind and wobble at full lock as is. I would be hesitant to ask for higher angles. My rcv shafts are super smooth at full lock, and they tell me to limit them at 42 degrees. I don't know how that compares to stock, because I haven't messed with it. I do know I can grind down the stops on my Reid knuckles a bit more but I just haven't had the time to do it right. Either way I don't think you'll gain a whole lot...?

 

[kojackJKU]

I had a f150 crew with 6' box before my jeeps, My jeeps will turn in 1/4 of the space the truck will turn in. The JKU has a much tighter turning radius than the powerwagon. are your wheels hitting something? that could be this issue, stock wheels and tires? Just because the PW;s arms were bent don't automatically mean a tighter turning circle.

 

[crawler#976]

Bill, I also forgot that the 4th Gen PW is almost 10" longer in wheelbase than the 3rd Gen truck. Having driven both 3rd and 4th Gen trucks on the same trail on the same day, I can attest it makes a difference.

I felt the same way when I first bought my JKRU. My last rig was an f150 with 138" wheel base.
In all honesty I just needed more trail time in the jeep. No it doesn't seem to achieve the same steering angle, but it is way more nimble once I got more comfortable with the size and seating position relative to the wheels. I really think you need more seat time in the jeep, and to get more familiar with size and wheel placement. You're sitting very close to the rear wheels and may just need more time to adjust to it if you feel the power wagon works better off road. No offense intended, I really felt the same way at first.

I felt the stock u joints bind and wobble at full lock as is. I would be hesitant to ask for higher angles. My rcv shafts are super smooth at full lock, and they tell me to limit them at 42 degrees. I don't know how that compares to stock, because I haven't messed with it. I do know I can grind down the stops on my Reid knuckles a bit more but I just haven't had the time to do it right. Either way I don't think you'll gain a whole lot...?

We've had the Jeep for two years now. Unless we're towing the trailer, or I'm going out solo, the Jeep see's the majority of the trail time. That's why I'm inquiring about the maneuverability - it's become very apparent that the truck has better steering angles. Yes, the truck turns in a larger dia, but in close quarters, the truck is more nimble as it were.

I had a f150 crew with 6' box before my jeeps, My jeeps will turn in 1/4 of the space the truck will turn in. The JKU has a much tighter turning radius than the powerwagon. are your wheels hitting something? that could be this issue, stock wheels and tires? Just because the PW;s arms were bent don't automatically mean a tighter turning circle.

The 285/70-17 tire on AEV wheels are free and clear on the Jeep, and that's why I'm considering trying to adjust the stops. It appears there are a few more degrees of steering left if the stops are turned in, but if the u-joints are the limiting factor, it's probably not a great idea.

On a 3rd Gen Power Wagon with the stock rims and 35/12.5-17's, the tires make hard contact with the control arms. So, to cure the problem, it was addressed by new control arms that are 0.500 longer than stock to center the tire in the wheel well, and by having the arms kinked to allow the tires to go to full lock. The AAM 9.25 front axle is different than the D44 too. The upper ball joints have about 7 degrees of inward cant to allow the tires to turn at a tighter angle. That presents it's own problem - the truck eats ball joints. In fact, it's going in next week for the fourth set of ball joints in 61000k.

 

[1stDeuce]

Crawler, I understand what you're saying and I'll explain for everyone else...

The JK does in deed have a tighter turning radius than the trucks that are being compared to it, but only by virtue of its short wheelbase. A JKU, being longer, has a larger turning radius, though still probably better than a Power Wagon. I am certain the cramp angle (max steer angle) is to blame. The JK front axle is lacking 3 to 5 degrees compared to most other vehicles. That makes it feel like you can't turn very sharp when trying to swing the front around something in tight quarters. Even though the wheelbase is longer, the front of a Power Wagon will swing faster at max steer.

You are right to look at the steering stops, but I doubt it'll do much good. The steering box should not have much more travel than the stops allow, or you'd be bending the linkage when you force the wheel at lock, and that would not be good... If you can see the tires stop turning, and you can still turn the steering wheel a bit more, then you'd gain that little bit by trimming the stops, but it's probably not much. JK's just don't have much cramp angle, or max steer angle as compared to a lot of other stuff. The 1st Gen Super Duty Fords were the same... Try parking one of those!!

I wouldn't recommend going offroad with the stops removed, as they do keep the linkage from getting over-stressed, but you can pull them and do some turns in 2wd in a calm place and see if there's much difference. If there is, you can go get some good graded bolts and nuts to put in place of the welded ones and gain a little. Or just grind them down a bit until the steering wheel and tires stop turning at the same time.

If you really want to pilot a school bus, you should try driving an AEV 4dr JK Brute... My 2500 crew cab GMC is a lot more maneuverable, and that is no exaggeration!
Chris

 

[crawler#976]

Thanks - good explanation!

The listed factory turning radius for the JKUR is 20.6 vs 23.3 for the truck, but, again, that's a full circle. I'm fortunate to have the opportunity to drive both on a regular basis. The Power Wagon and JKUR are, IMO, the pinnacle of U.S.A. produced vehicles used for extended off highway travel.

 

[SoCal Tom]

Keep in mind, with the e-lockers engaged, turning radius gives to crap. You don't get the differential action and the tires slip in the dirt to let you turn. Is your complaint with the locker engaged?
Tom

 

[crawler#976]

I've had front and rear locked vehicles for nearly two decades, including a trail beater with spools front and rear. Put over 50K on the Sloyota. So I'm pretty familiar with lockers and how they effect handling.

Sent via gigawatt laser...

 

[Metcalf]

You could always get crazy and swap an Atlas transfer case in for front digs. That opens up a new world of maneuverability....

 

[kojackJKU]

A friend and work aquaintence has a power wagon, he only uses it to pull his work trailer from site to site. I am first in line to get it when he's ready. Its babied and never sees dirt. I love the truck. Right now I have the titanic for a truck, Ford 250 SD 4 door with 8 ft box. I think its longer than a school bus.

 

[alosix]

If you're hunting for more steering angle and are limited by the u-joints these might help:

http://www.rcvperformance.com/index.aspx

On my TJ the limiting factor tends to be the offset of the wheels on the front. The current 35s on a somewhat tighter wheel than the 33s have reduced a lot of turning radius.

Guessing you've already hunting for things rubbing control arms and sway bars right? Are the steering stops adjusted up to nearly where they'll rub?

I feel your pain though. I had a JKUL Rubi for a bit, with the TJ and M725. Rented another to camp out of on Kauai over the holidays and the darn thing felt like driving a school bus, even compared to my M725.