JT versus SteadyFast - Montana Owners Club

Art-n-Marge · 01-22-2010, 10:27 AM

I have seen two popular products for improving the stability of the Monty, one from JT Stabilizer systems (http://www.jtrv.com/our_products.html) and the other from Steadyfast Stabilizer systems (http://www.steadyfast.com/Compare.html).

I have read success stories from owners of the JT Stabilizers but are their any proud owners of the Steadyfast system? For the owners of the JT's would you have wished this less expensive system was available in that you think it would be an acceptable solution?

The Steadyfast looks like a simpler install and with longer braces probably provides just as much if not more stability, but I'd like some testimonials just to be sure. Being less expensive I am leaning toward these unless I hear they don't work as well as the JTs.

H. John Kohl · 01-22-2010, 11:11 AM

Art,
The stead fast seems to support only two of the four supports. I think it would work ok but feel that supporting each leg gives you a little more. Just my humble opinion.
I do have the JTs and also scissor jacks in the middle.

exav8tr · 01-22-2010, 11:47 AM

The Steadyfast seems to support only two of the four supports. I think it would work ok but feel that supporting each leg gives you a little more. Just my humble opinion.

I do have the JTs and really like them. I had mine installed at Quartzsite '08 by the sellers and they have worked great since. I ended up giving my tripod stabilizer away that day. (I hated that thing).

Had the Steayfast system been side to side, I probably would have still chosen the JT's as many folks had them and raved about them. I don't necessarily buy based on price, but what I get for that price.

I know there are some on here with the Steadyfast system, Now, if they will speak up you will get some good opinions.

Good luck and see you in Texas in March......

Phil

jjackflash · 01-22-2010, 12:10 PM

Art, I also have the JT's and love them. My JT's ran me 299.00 with free shipping and they mistakenly shipped me 2 sets. I couldn't lose on that deal.
Jack

8.1al · 01-22-2010, 01:10 PM

We have Steadyfast and like them. I have no way to tell if they are better than JT's but can tell you they are an easier install. Everything is mounted on the frame, there is no need to add a rear crossmember like with JT and you have fewer attachment points to allow a little movement. The instructions are some of the best I have ever seen. Setup is quick, snug up 3 large wingnuts and you are done. No gurantees but if you call him and tell him you are from the club he may give you a discount

exav8tr · 01-22-2010, 02:30 PM

Art, I have an '06 3400 and DID NOT have to have any rear crossmembers installed. It was a bolt on system. I suppose some models do and some don't. I don't know how to tell you which ones do and which ones don't need the extra crossmember. I do have 6 wingnuts to tighten with the JT's but DW says "no big deal"!!!!!

PSFORD99 · 01-22-2010, 03:13 PM

I think there is a couple things that stand out about the two that may effect how well they work. Being a steel fabricator, and a DIY guy, I like the simplicity of the steadyfast from a builders view, and from the installation point. The thing about steadyfast is like I said simplicity, IMO there is less joints in the steadyfast thus less chance of movement. There are four points of connection on a steadyfast compared to eight on JT, I am referring to the front braces. This is just my opinion. I am nearly done making a set that mirrors the steadyfast with a couple changes that I think will improve them. I will post the results. Now not knowing one system from the other on how well they work, the only thing I know is how much movement I have now, and will know after I am finished on how much of that movement I stopped. Time will tell. If you are putting out the money for them, I believe either one would get the job done. They seem to be the most popular.

8.1al · 01-22-2010, 03:49 PM

Phil,
Is it possible you DID NOT have to add a crossmember because you used your hitch? That said, they are both good systems and if you and I are happy with what we have what more could we ask?

Art-n-Marge · 01-22-2010, 08:00 PM

I have no talent as a fabricator but I hope PSFORD99 posts pictures of his handiwork. I kinda agree that even with less fastening points the SF system is probably just as stable (and cheaper). But you can't beat jjackflash's price....

I am able to bolt things on just fine. For the Steadyfast, it's less work and it sure looks like it just as sturdy. I like using a tripod at the pin, but it's a pain installing it and storing it. I am also looking for much more stability in the rear end because the dropdowns don't cut it - they help, they just don't help as much as I'd like.

Phil, kudos to you in getting your wife to run around and tighten things down since it's no big deal. My wife considers all outside duties to be mine. She's starting to help out more, for the sake of knowing so it will be just a matter of time.

I appreciate all the replies!

DarMar · 01-23-2010, 02:26 AM

Art, either system will be an improvement over what you currently have, we happen to have the JTs and are pleased with the results. When we purchased ours the JTs seemed to be far more popular with the Steadyfast system just entering the market, but now your have the experience of others here to go by and they seem to be pleased as well. JMHO

exav8tr · 01-23-2010, 03:24 AM

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by 8.1al

Phil,
Is it possible you DID NOT have to add a crossmember because you used your hitch? That said, they are both good systems and if you and I are happy with what we have what more could we ask?

Charlie, I had the JT's installed before the hitch was added. In looking at them, there is, what appears to be, a crossmember UNDER the belly pan and where the rear cap attaches at the bottom. Don't know if that is a structural member or not, but it has been working for two years......

I must admit, I am thinking of doing what John Kohl did with the scissor jacks in front of the wheels. Even with the JT's I still get some bounce. As Richfaa says, that just lets you know you are camping....

Anyway, see you in Texas in March.....

PSFORD99 · 01-23-2010, 04:11 AM

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Art-n-Marge

I have no talent as a fabricator but I hope PSFORD99 posts pictures of his handiwork. I kinda agree that even with less fastening points the SF system is probably just as stable (and cheaper). But you can't beat jjackflash's price....

I am able to bolt things on just fine. For the Steadyfast, it's less work and it sure looks like it just as sturdy. I like using a tripod at the pin, but it's a pain installing it and storing it. I am also looking for much more stability in the rear end because the dropdowns don't cut it - they help, they just don't help as much as I'd like.

Phil, kudos to you in getting your wife to run around and tighten things down since it's no big deal. My wife considers all outside duties to be mine. She's starting to help out more, for the sake of knowing so it will be just a matter of time.

I appreciate all the replies!

The one thing I won't fabricate is the foot pads, I like they way steadyfast made them, and will purchase a pair from them , the cost is 58.00 for a pair shipped. Everything else I will either fabricate or machine. when finished I will post pictures . I will also post pictures of my DIY bedsaver that some may be interested in. Good luck with your choice, I would think either one would work well for you.

richfaa · 01-23-2010, 04:15 AM

Can't comment on the steadfast but we do have the JT's and they do remove a great deal of the movement but not all. I do not beleive that any system will remove all of the movement since we still are on the suspension system.

Art-n-Marge · 01-23-2010, 07:16 AM

That's what I'm looking for Rich. Saving lots of time setting up the tripod and much more stability in the rear. The rear jacks pushes down and stabilize up and down, but not side to side which is where these systems are very effective.

Even with the JTs or the SF, the idea with having drop downs at the wheels could remove much of the suspension as a factor, but I'll need much more time to talk myself into that one at this time. I see it as the majority of the weight of the trailer is on INFLATED tires with LEAF SPRINGS that both have some bounce. The drop downs should help only take them out of the picture but not 6 tons worth. They just need to take human movement weight out of the picture, so they would do well for that. IIRC H. John Koll has done that, but I wonder if two sets on either side of the wheels/tires would be even better to eliminate body movement.

Always thinking keeps the economy recovering.

richfaa · 01-23-2010, 07:23 AM

We also put a set of pyramid jacks in front and rear of the wheels. That takes out some more movement..but not all... I would do what H.John and a few others have done with the extra stabilizer jacks if I were not so cheap and lazy. Actually us walking around the camper causes no movement. Only when the W/D goes into high spin do we get some vibration and I think we would get that vibration if we were on a foundation.

8.1al · 01-23-2010, 01:43 PM

Phil,
I was going by what I have seen some installers do. Obviously that crossmember you are mounted to is more adequate than they think. I was talking with the owner of Steadyfast and he has done a lot of research regarding the bounce we all feel even with stabilizers and he has determined that most of it is due to flex in the rear stabilizers. Replacing them with scissor jacks took care of the bounce

Champ_49 · 01-23-2010, 02:43 PM

I also did the same thing PSford did. I fabricated my own, and they mirror the JT's. They work very well and stop most of the bounce in the rig. But I will now do as John did with the scissor jacks in front of the wheels. Makes a lot of sense doing that, and a very simple thing to do.

I looked at the SF type, and I also liked them but the pad was the drawback in my case. Didn't think of calling and buying them. I had most of the things needed to build the JT type so I went with that style.

Dave

jretz · 01-24-2010, 12:11 PM

I installed the Steadyfast just over 2 years ago. When I bought them I checked out the JTs and the Steadyfast. My reasons for going with the Steadyfast were, they seemed to be constructucted of stronger (heavier) materal, the insturctions were very detailed, they came with everything needed to install including the right size drill bit, the simplicity of setup with only 3 wing nuts. I also checked out rigs with them installed and could not notice a difference instabliliy between the two systems. Also I had the oppurtuniy to talk to the developer/designer of the Steadyfast.

Since using the Steadyfast I have gotten rid of my pin tripod and feel very stable, atleast as stable as you can be on rubber air filled tires.

f6maniac · 01-25-2010, 07:50 AM

I put the Steadyfast system on as my first upgrade a few months ago. It has easily reduced front and rear side to side movement by 95%+. I don't notice bounce unless someone is coming down the stairs and then it is minimal. I had a Class C RV prior to the Montana and notice significantly less bounce in the 5th.

deadeye · 01-25-2010, 08:03 AM

We have the Steadyfast System and we are very pleased with it. Haven't got a JT that is close or haven't ever installed one on anyones wagon. Steadyfast is easy to install. Kind of an ugly color if you are buying for color....

Mine was gray. I painted it black to match everything else....JB

You may also like: