really? that's interesting. i've been using the offset uppers going on 30 years and never once had a problem with them.
their other stuff though. sheesh.
Fast ratio pitman arm for small sector shaft
- Thread starter Steve Kranz
- Start date
-
their other stuff though. sheesh.
JDMopar
Well-Known Member
Late to the party here, but check for lower ball joint to lower control arm interference when the steering is turned to lock. Check it turned both directions. I did a mish mash of parts on a 74 Duster, just using stuff I had to save money. I used 73 & up UCA's, spindles, brakes and ball joints. I had a sway bar setup from a 72 Duster, so I used the matching lower control arms. The car wouldn't turn in a 40 acre field, and it ended up that there was a nub on the ball joint hitting the lower control arm on both sides. I fixed it by changing to later lower control arms with the correct sway bar setup. I was already using the 73 up center link. This may not be anything to do with what you have going on, but just wanted to throw it out there since you have a similar combo of parts. Hope you get it worked out soon.
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
General update:
Interesting situation. I will check for the ball joint to LCR interference, as I have 73 spindles and 68 LCRs. Also changing to the 73+ center link and Proforged fast ratio pitman and idler arms (they make a pitman arm for my small shaft FF box). Will check for clearance with the TTI head pipe and modify if necessary.
The Borgson unit sounds nice, but due to cost and work involved, I will stay with my rebuilt FF box. I have to believe that the FF box is not the cause of the sloppy steering, but anything is posible. Checked the coupler and it is fine. No slop.
The caster specs (3.6 deg. L and 4.2 deg R) are pretty good for my purpose, so I will likely forgo adding the offset UCA bushings.
I'll try this route. It's relatively inexpensive. We'll see.
Interesting situation. I will check for the ball joint to LCR interference, as I have 73 spindles and 68 LCRs. Also changing to the 73+ center link and Proforged fast ratio pitman and idler arms (they make a pitman arm for my small shaft FF box). Will check for clearance with the TTI head pipe and modify if necessary.
The Borgson unit sounds nice, but due to cost and work involved, I will stay with my rebuilt FF box. I have to believe that the FF box is not the cause of the sloppy steering, but anything is posible. Checked the coupler and it is fine. No slop.
The caster specs (3.6 deg. L and 4.2 deg R) are pretty good for my purpose, so I will likely forgo adding the offset UCA bushings.
I'll try this route. It's relatively inexpensive. We'll see.
autoxcuda
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 9,519
- Reaction score
- 5,043
yea, if you already have a fresh rebuilt Firm Feel Stage 2 box... run it.
It's just the caster difference from side to side that can cause pulling effect.
Keep going down the process of elimination and really start looking at things very closely.
There is something not right somewhere.
Last edited:
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Turns out the TTI shorty headers and head pipes are not a clearance problem for the pitman at all. Finally got off my butt and checked it out.
Was told that the caster difference wasn't that bad. But you do have a good point. I'll check further. Thanks!
Beautiful kitty cat. Car ain't too bad.
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
"Whatever I lay on is MINE"
autoxcuda
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 9,519
- Reaction score
- 5,043
You could have the alignment shop look into that since you'll be back there after you put the fast ratio steering arms on.
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Yes. Good point. The center link and arms may not effect the camber, but I'll se what they can do.
It depends on where You live and the way the engineers spec road construction, here in PA, I routinely set the caster 1/2-3/4° higher on the passenger side in cars with conventional IFS/RWD. The amount of avg. road crown to shed & drain the rains We get works out to a neutral wheel 90+% of the time. There are a few choice straight/flat/level stretches I go to when diagnosing handling issues, but they are the extreme minority.
I'm more interested in Your use of the word "slop" to describe what You're feeling, is there a lack of instant response to a change of input direction at the steering wheel, like it is not connected for a split second? Or just the car is slow to respond to the input, there is a big difference.
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Good point. My terminology leaves a lot to be desired! There is a lack of response to turning the steering wheel. I have to turn it approx. 10 degrees or more in each direction to keep the car going straight. It does not pull to either side. And yes, the road surface will determine how much I have to correct and when. All parts are new though. So worn components should not be the cause. Thanks again for all your help!
That sounds like a worn out steering coupler, or just play in the steering box.
Can you have someone turn the steering wheel back and forth while you watch the steering box and coupler? Should be pretty obvious, if the steering shaft turns and there's a delay in the steering input shaft then the coupler is the issue. If the shaft, coupler and input turn but there's a delay to the pitman arm it's the box itself.
Kendog 170
Let the boy go !
I replaced everything on my Suspension including Bushings and bushing offset. Then a Reman. box from a member here. The alignment shop said I needed a Idler arm. What I didn't realize was you need to check the Idler arm for side-to-side play and up-and-down play. It was the up-and-down play I was missing. I changed to the bearing style arm and all is good now. I would definitely check for play first. Sometimes it's easier with weight on suspension and someone turning the wheel back and forth while you look for play.
Good luck with whatever you do. JMO
Good luck with whatever you do. JMO
Dave999
Well-Known Member
I rebuilt my manual steering box with all new parts. 16:1 ratio ballnut and screw and a brand new sector shaft, new bearings seals
new suspension bushes and ball joints, new sway bar links and mounts
new idler and pitman
bout 5 years ago
I have no slop. if i turn the wheel inside, the wheels outside turn
i personally think ratio changes are best done in the box rather than via a long pitman arm, a long pitman are makes the steering faster (i.e more wheel turn per inch of steering input) in the just off straight position and i don't think that's good for stability. but i've never successfully come up with a decent explanation for this idea ...which means it might be BS.
in an ideal world you'd want to turn the wheel further to take the car off straight ahead. Stability at speed is a good thing. you don't what a "sneeze and find a ditch" type scenario.
and less turning of the steering wheel as you navigate round the twists is good, minimal input to improve your arc around that tight turn at speed.
Much like a variable rate steering rack, quite dead in the middle, and faster towards the lock (predominantly a japanese Australian and european thing).
i think you get the opposite with a longer pitman arm.
A longer arm might be pretty good for circle track racing. you get the ratio improvement but you are indeed going round a corner for 80% of the time, who cares about straight ahead etc
2 inch pitman arm turned through 2 degrees, short arc scribed by the ball stud end of it
2 mile long pitman arm turned through 2 degrees really long arc scribed by the end of it
steering input in respect to how far you turned the steering wheel is the same
steering input in respect to effort to turn the wheel will be different
hopefully that illustrates what i'm getting at.... don't have the maths/physics/alignment knowledge to back it up
and as i say i might be wrong,
We have had "spirited" discussion here about it before...
Dave
new suspension bushes and ball joints, new sway bar links and mounts
new idler and pitman
bout 5 years ago
I have no slop. if i turn the wheel inside, the wheels outside turn
i personally think ratio changes are best done in the box rather than via a long pitman arm, a long pitman are makes the steering faster (i.e more wheel turn per inch of steering input) in the just off straight position and i don't think that's good for stability. but i've never successfully come up with a decent explanation for this idea ...which means it might be BS.
in an ideal world you'd want to turn the wheel further to take the car off straight ahead. Stability at speed is a good thing. you don't what a "sneeze and find a ditch" type scenario.
and less turning of the steering wheel as you navigate round the twists is good, minimal input to improve your arc around that tight turn at speed.
Much like a variable rate steering rack, quite dead in the middle, and faster towards the lock (predominantly a japanese Australian and european thing).
i think you get the opposite with a longer pitman arm.
A longer arm might be pretty good for circle track racing. you get the ratio improvement but you are indeed going round a corner for 80% of the time, who cares about straight ahead etc
2 inch pitman arm turned through 2 degrees, short arc scribed by the ball stud end of it
2 mile long pitman arm turned through 2 degrees really long arc scribed by the end of it
steering input in respect to how far you turned the steering wheel is the same
steering input in respect to effort to turn the wheel will be different
hopefully that illustrates what i'm getting at.... don't have the maths/physics/alignment knowledge to back it up
and as i say i might be wrong,
We have had "spirited" discussion here about it before...
Dave
Last edited:
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Checked that. It's tight.
Thank you for sharing you experience on this issue. I've kind of been combining two concerns, excessive steering wheel movement to keep the car straight (no pulling to either side) and adding the fast ratio parts in hopes if increasing steering response. All of my parts are new, so I am hoping that re-checking the alignment and adding the fast ratio parts might solve the issue. Still plugging away. Thanks!I rebuilt my manual steering box with all new parts. 16:1 ratio ballnut and screw and a brand new sector shaft, new bearings seals
new suspension bushes and ball joints, new sway bar links and mounts
new idler and pitman
bout 5 years ago
I have no slop. if i turn the wheel inside, the wheels outside turn
i personally think ratio changes are best done in the box rather than via a long pitman arm, a long pitman are makes the steering faster (i.e more wheel turn per inch of steering input) in the just off straight position and i don't think that's good for stability. but i've never successfully come up with a decent explanation for this idea ...which means it might be BS.
in an ideal world you'd want to turn the wheel further to take the car off straight ahead. Stability at speed is a good thing. you don't what a "sneeze and find a ditch" type scenario.
and less turning of the steering wheel as you navigate round the twists is good, minimal input to improve your arc around that tight turn at speed.
Much like a variable rate steering rack, quite dead in the middle, and faster towards the lock (predominantly a japanese Australian and european thing).
i think you get the opposite with a longer pitman arm.
A longer arm might be pretty good for circle track racing. you get the ratio improvement but you are indeed going round a corner for 80% of the time, who cares about straight ahead etc
2 inch pitman arm turned through 2 degrees, short arc scribed by the ball stud end of it
2 mile long pitman arm turned through 2 degrees really long arc scribed by the end of it
steering input in respect to how far you turned the steering wheel is the same
steering input in respect to effort to turn the wheel will be different
hopefully that illustrates what i'm getting at.... don't have the maths/physics/alignment knowledge to back it up
and as i say i might be wrong,
We have had "spirited" discussion here about it before...
Dave
I rebuilt my manual steering box with all new parts. 16:1 ratio ballnut and screw and a brand new sector shaft, new bearings seals
new suspension bushes and ball joints, new sway bar links and mounts
new idler and pitman
bout 5 years ago
I have no slop. if i turn the wheel inside, the wheels outside turn
i personally think ratio changes are best done in the box rather than via a long pitman arm, a long pitman are makes the steering faster (i.e more wheel turn per inch of steering input) in the just off straight position and i don't think that's good for stability. but i've never successfully come up with a decent explanation for this idea ...which means it might be BS.
in an ideal world you'd want to turn the wheel further to take the car off straight ahead. Stability at speed is a good thing. you don't what a "sneeze and find a ditch" type scenario.
and less turning of the steering wheel as you navigate round the twists is good, minimal input to improve your arc around that tight turn at speed.
Much like a variable rate steering rack, quite dead in the middle, and faster towards the lock (predominantly a japanese Australian and european thing).
i think you get the opposite with a longer pitman arm.
A longer arm might be pretty good for circle track racing. you get the ratio improvement but you are indeed going round a corner for 80% of the time, who cares about straight ahead etc
2 inch pitman arm turned through 2 degrees, short arc scribed by the ball stud end of it
2 mile long pitman arm turned through 2 degrees really long arc scribed by the end of it
steering input in respect to how far you turned the steering wheel is the same
steering input in respect to effort to turn the wheel will be different
hopefully that illustrates what i'm getting at.... don't have the maths/physics/alignment knowledge to back it up
and as i say i might be wrong,
We have had "spirited" discussion here about it before...
Dave
Lol. Still pushing that insane theory that flies in the face of basic geometry?
With a pitman and idler set up like these cars have, the steering ratio is CONSTANT. It is not faster or slower from the middle to the ends of the range.
Since the geometry eludes you, you could just measure this yourself and see it firsthand. I'm going to assume you don't have a set of turn plates (or you'd know this already), so a plastic bag and some dish soap under the front tires will have to suffice. Pick an amount to move the steering wheel (1/4 turn, 1/2 turn, whatever). Get a nice yardstick and tape it to the inside of the tire, mark a line along it on the floor for your starting point. Now, move the steering wheel your set amount, and measure the ANGLE between the line on the floor and the current position of the yardstick. Repeat until you hit the steering lock, recording as you go. Now return to center and do it again, repeat that half a dozen times to get a nice data set.
You're gonna get the roughly the same measurement every time, give or take your error in measurement and accuracy turning the wheel. More error if you get too much drag between the tire and floor. But if you repeat that process half a dozen times, you're gonna see the angular rate of change between the steering wheel and the wheels is the same, it doesn't get faster and slower as you go from center to lock and vice versa.
Adding the fast ratio parts won't fix the steering issue you're having, unless your pitman or idler are worn out. In which case the fast ratio pitman and idler being new would solve the issue, and the fast ratio aspect of it would still change nothing.
Just because everything is "new" doesn't mean that everything is GOOD. This is especially true of many of the suspension components being produced now. If you have a big "dead spot" in your steering and constantly have to be making steering inputs to keep the car straight you have part (or parts) in your steering system with excessive play, and/or a poor alignment. The fast ratio might reduce the distance you have to move the wheel with your steering inputs to keep the car straight, but it won't fix the fact you shouldn't need to be doing that at all.
Kendog 170
Let the boy go !
Did you adjust any play in your box?
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Good point. Not yet. I "assumed" that it should be okay being a rebuilt Firm Feel box. I purchased it about 9 years ago when restoration began. Definitely worth a look. Thanks!
Kendog 170
Let the boy go !
Probably good then but never assume. Check everything.
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Been looking at the Moog offset UCA bushings. All that I can find indicate that they only fit B and E body cars. (Moog K7103.) Will these also fit the A body cars? They look the same, but... Thanks!
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Been looking at the Moog offset UCA bushings. All that I can find indicate that they only fit B and E body cars. (Moog K7103.) Will these also fit the A body cars? They look the same, but... Thanks!
that is the correct part number, it fits basically everything from 62 onward.
right now i think amazon has the best price on them.
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Excellent! Thank you!
Steve Kranz
Well-Known Member
Finally got off my butt and checked the steering on the Cuda. Jacked up the front and checked for any play in the system (running of course). The wheels move with very little steering wheel movement, so it appears to be reasonably tight. (All parts are new.)
Rechecked the caster alignment specs (posted earlier: L 0.4 deg. and R 4.6 deg.) and the difference could be the cause of the excessive play while driving (probably). Ordered a set of offset UCA bushings. This might help resolve the issue?
Rechecked the caster alignment specs (posted earlier: L 0.4 deg. and R 4.6 deg.) and the difference could be the cause of the excessive play while driving (probably). Ordered a set of offset UCA bushings. This might help resolve the issue?
-
Similar threads
