anyone using stabilizers on front jacks? - Montana Owners Club

Happycamperscolorado · 04-17-2015, 05:08 AM

was wonder if these are worth the money. we do have shaking in the rv with someone walking around and we do have the crankdown wheel chucks between the tires already but looking to see what i can do to eliminate more of the rv movement when setup. any recommendations?

egregg57 · 04-17-2015, 05:22 AM

I put them on my Outback before we traded it in. I had six. Front to rear and side to side on both front jacks and one each on the rear jacks. They do make a big difference. The stabilizers used in conjunction with BAL Chocks dampened most all "wiggle". Additionally, shortening the length of the jack extension by using cribbing, Lynx Levelers, or other type of pad helps as well. The combination of the three will provide a significant difference in stability.

I have the Lippert 6 Point leveling system on our new Montana. We have not yet taken it out yet.. (Come on camping season!) We'll be interested to see how well it does in comparison to what we had on the Outback.

Eric

Lenny K · 04-17-2015, 07:01 AM

I added JT Strongarms on my SOB and they worked as advertised. We find that the only wiggle we feel with the Monte is when one of us goes down the stairs and the other is sitting in the recliners in the rear. We can live with that.
Hopefully some time in the future their will be a self levelling system installed.

Loui · 04-17-2015, 08:46 AM

We added them to our front living room model, took away 90% of the movement we had.
Cheers

BB_TX · 04-17-2015, 09:16 AM

Added JT Strongarms front and rear. Really helped a lot in reducing movement. And reduced trailer shake when washer/dryer started shaking in spin mode.

Standard jacks, not auto levelers.

chris199 · 04-17-2015, 10:35 AM

In our TT, the DW would complain about trailer movement if I got up early and moved around the RV. If I turned on the TV, she could hear it. (The "door" in our Cougar TT was a pull out flexible/expandable divider.)

In our first weekend this past weekend in our Montana, she was very pleased. The jack system basically eliminates all movement. The distance from the rear den to the front bedroom certainly helps with TV noise and the quality of the door in the Monte prevents the noise from the TV from making its way to the bedroom.

Unless the difference between the Cougar TT and the Montana 5er is just so dramatic and we'll eventually feel some movement in the 5er, I can't imagine needing anything else to stabilize this rig. May change this opinion over time....we'll see.

Important note: We do not have a washer/dryer so that may be the major difference. Perhaps if we did, we'd want some add'l stabilizers in place.

8.1al · 04-17-2015, 12:05 PM

I installed the Steadyfast stabilizers on ours and that made a big difference.

http://www.steadyfast.com/

1retired06 · 04-17-2015, 12:37 PM

We never felt the need

**Rondo** · 04-17-2015, 02:29 PM

Had the knockoff of JT Struts on our old unit both front and back and they worked wonders. Put the X-chocks on both sides and it all nearly eliminated all movement. You will never eliminate all movement but they sure help

tweber502 · 04-17-2015, 02:59 PM

We added the SteadyFast system to ours. Actually transferred to Monty from our SOB. We really like them. Tim

ReneT · 04-17-2015, 03:34 PM

I did a lot of research before buying the one's I have. I looked at the JT Strong Arm and the Steady Fast system. I chose the Steady Fast. Here are some of the reasons I went the way I did. The JT's have to bolt the arms under the rig in the center of the rig on the front and the back. In the front of my Montana, there is nothing to bolt to. All that's there is the compartment floor which is just heavy gauge sheet metal. I would have to somehow reinforce the compartment floor and even then, I think it would flex some. The back has nothing to bolt to. I would have to install a heavy piece of channel iron to make it work and it would also flex a little. The Steady Fast system bolts right to the frame. The other thing is that the JT's have a lot more mechanical joints which in time will probably wear and give movement. Another issue is in order to tighten the locking "T" Bole on the JT's, you would have to get under the RV in the rear in order to tighten it unless you use the handle they provided and that's something else you'd have to store. That "T" Bolt is only ground down to a point and every time you tighten it, it rounds out the point and eventually it will not grip anymore and you'll have to remove them and regrind them. The Steady Fast system, all you do is reach down and tighten up a large wing nut with your hands. They are readily accessible. I spoke to a guy who had the JT's last summer and I asked him how they worked. He said they were better than nothing. That tells it all. He wasn't happy with them.

I've had the Steady Fast for a year now and I'm very happy with them. I highly recommend them over the JT's. I do not use any type of wheel chocks.

I made a couple of upgrades to the Steady Fast system in fact the inventor is planning to introduce one of my changes in the near future. If anyone is interested in what I did, just send me a PM.

WaltBennett · 04-18-2015, 04:32 AM

Our old TT was so bad the coffee maker pot would spill if someone walked anywhere. Put a Steadyfast system on it and it was almost rock solid. The Monty wasn't terrible, but we picked up a set of JTs at last year's rally (good price!). Finished installing them a couple of months ago and have noticed a big difference. I'd say either system is worth the expense.

BB_TX · 04-18-2015, 05:07 AM

ReneT - I will not argue the advantages of Steadyfast vs JT Strongarm. But some of the things you say about the JTs simply is not true.

The JTs do attached to the front pan. But at the front edge along the bend it is plenty strong enough without additional reinforcement.

I did install a piece of square tubing across the rear to attach the rear stabilizers. Not a big deal. And it is stout enough that there is no detectable flex. Some have found a way to mount them to the existing metal at the rear. And I do not have to get under the trailer to tighten the handles, front or rear. They are very reachable by just leaning down near the rear of the trailer.

The T handles do not wear down and have to be regound. I have had mine on for 6 years, they have never been reground, and they still hold just as well as they did when new. And there is no noticeable wear on any of the components.

The guy you spoke with is an isolated case. Virtually everyone who has installed the JTs (or any other brand for that matter) praise them. He is probably not putting tension on them as directed when setting up. If you just tighten them with no tension on them, they do not work as they should.

ReneT · 04-18-2015, 06:15 AM

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by BB_TX

The JTs do attached to the front pan. But at the front edge along the bend it is plenty strong enough without additional reinforcement.

I did install a piece of square tubing across the rear to attach the rear stabilizers. Not a big deal. And it is stout enough that there is no detectable flex. Some have found a way to mount them to the existing metal at the rear. And I do not have to get under the trailer to tighten the handles, front or rear. They are very reachable by just leaning down near the rear of the trailer.

The T handles do not wear down and have to be regound. I have had mine on for 6 years, they have never been reground, and they still hold just as well as they did when new. And there is no noticeable wear on any of the components.

The guy you spoke with is an isolated case. Virtually everyone who has installed the JTs (or any other brand for that matter) praise them. He is probably not putting tension on them as directed when setting up. If you just tighten them with no tension on them, they do not work as they should.

When I was looking at the JT's, I looked under my RV in the front and there was nothing of any strength which would work. As far as the rear, it would take a pretty beefy piece of steel that would not flex. Just a tiny bit flex would amplify inside the RV.

The same guy who wasn't happy with his JT's showed me one of his T Bolts and it was rounded over. He said he had to sharpen them again. These bolts are not case hardened so they would have to eventually round over in time. It's the nature of the beast. The answer the guy gave me about the JT's being better than nothing gave me the impression that he was embarrassed that he screwed up buying them and wish he hadn't.

I know on my RV, I would have to just about lay on the ground and reach way in in order to get to the T Bolts in the rear. If that wasn't the case, why do they give you a handle in order to reach the T Bolts. The T Bolts are on the arms inboard of the stabilizer jack.

I'll still stand by the Steady Fast any day over the JT's. All you folks out there interested in getting something take a hard look and look around for others out there who have both systems and get their opinions. Have a nice day everyone.

BB_TX · 04-18-2015, 06:33 AM

As I said, I will not argue one over the other. Just stating the facts from someone who has actually used them for years. And again, the one guy who was not satisfied is an isolated case, not the norm, as can be determined from all the positive posts about them.

scattershot · 04-18-2015, 04:53 PM

We have the cross braces on the front of our Montana, and it helps a lot. FWIW, I saw a rig at Quartzsite that had the cross beaces fore and aft, as well as stringers mounted lengthwise. It was like pushing on an office building. No movement whatsoever.

dieselguy · 04-18-2015, 05:36 PM

Both JT's and Steady Fast work, but I'm with Bill on what ReneT miss states. I've have the JT's on my "11" 3150RL since new. Although there is no real cross beam on the front, the steel belly pan works just fine in conjunction with the reinforcement plates supplied with the JT's when mounted near the front edge as directed. I also never have had to grind any of the T's due to wear in over 5 years on this unit and another 5 years on my previous "05" 2980RL. I find I don't have to tighten them down very much at all to get them to hold. As stated, you just have to preload them a bit after tightening the T's ... this is done by a simple touch of the landing gear button. I too by no means have to lay on the ground to get to the rear T's. I'm not pushing an argument ... just telling it like it is from an actual user of over 10 years on 2 different units.

mtheo · 04-19-2015, 05:18 AM

I have built my own, first set back in 95, I think before any other had even been marketed. I think any of the brands would work on the same principle. What they stop is the side to side wiggle of the trailer. They do very little for the up and down motion in the middle of the trailer, that is due to the flex in the tires and springs. friends of mine put stablizes in the middle of the trailer.

tweber502 · 04-19-2015, 05:56 AM

[quote They do very little for the up and down motion in the middle of the trailer, that is due to the flex in the tires and springs. friends of mine put stablizes in the middle of the trailer.
[/quote]

While our SteadyFast system does do an excellent job at stabilizing the Monty, As stated above, we do get a little 'bounce' movement. To alleviate this, while staying in a site for more than a couple of days, I do place scissors jacks just in front of the forward wheels on each side of the rig. I wanted to permanently mount them but couldn't on the street side due to the placement of the galley gray tank drain piping. I set them on 12" long 6x6's, then crank up until they are snuggly against the frame. I do have to re-tighten every couple of days. Works for us. Tim

You may also like: