Opinions: Fast-ratio manual steering, suspension upgrades

-

Dr.M

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Location
Los Angeles
Hey guys,
Just wanted to get some opinions on fast-ratio steering gear box rebuilds, and some other suspension upgrades I'm considering.
I'm driving a '64 Plymouth Valiant and looking at going 20:1 on the steering (FirmFeel rebuild). Also adding front and rear sway bars from Hellwig, positive caster upper control arms from FirmFeel, and possibly some Bilstein shocks. Anybody using Bilsteins on their '64 Plymouth? Would love to hear about your experience.
Thanks,
-M.
 
If the car is light and you are in decent shape, the fast ratio will not be a problem. If you cannot open a mayonnaise jar without help, you may benefit from POWER steering!
Look into fast ratio idler and pitman arms for that steering box, that will alter the ratio closer to 16 to 1.
Bilsteins? Great shocks. I have a set of the RCD versions on my 70 Charger along with 1.15 torsion bars and HD leafs. I went with a 1.25" front sway bar and a 3/4" bar. I had a 7/8" rear bar but the car felt loose that way. Oversteer is great if you are a drift guy but since mine is a street car, oversteer can be really dangerous when you are not ready for it.
 
Hey Kern,
Thanks for the info! That sounds like a pretty spicy set-up on your Charger! I bet it handles really well!
I realize I probably should have been more clear in my first post about how I will be driving this car. Really just a daily driver, for cruising around. It's a four door, so with passenger comfort being a consideration I probably won't go too crazy on the suspension, but great to know what my future options are! How do those Billsteins feel for a leisurely cruise? I've heard they're stiffer, but very smooth.
Also, I'd like to think I'm in Mayonnaise-shape. I've even tangled with some rather formidable jars of pickles, so I ain't scurred. 20:1 is probably good for me though. Don't want to make parallel parking into an arm wrestling showdown in the thunderdome.
 
The bilsteins are light years better than KYB's. The difference will be more noticeable with better torsion bars, but better shocks are better shocks.

If you're planning on tubular UCA's, sway bars and bilsteins you'll be a lot happier with a set of ~1" torsion bars. PST sells some nice 1.03's that will match nicely with the Bilstein's, and FABO members get a discount if you call them.

20:1 shouldn't be too bad. Not sure how much positive caster you're planning, most cars can get up to around 3.5* or so with just the Moog K7103 offset bushings and stock upper control arms. That's not bad at all for manual steering on a daily driver, so really you could do without the tubular UCA's and save the some money. The torsion bars would be a bigger bang for your buck. More positive caster will make the steering effort heavier, although it will also improve the stability of the car and camber gain on turn in. The latter you probably don't need, although the stability is nice on the freeway. Steering effort also has a lot to do with the tires, on an early A they'll be smaller so they shouldn't be as hard to deal with. It's a trade off. But for a daily driver/cruiser you'd probably be pretty happy with +3.5* for caster with manual steering and most cars don't need tubular UCA's to get that.

You can run more, I mean I run 16:1 manual steering with +7* caster and 275/35/18's on my Duster, and it's my daily driver. Parallel parking is not one of my favorite things to do though. And my car is basically set up for autoX, not daily driving. Even if daily driving is what I do with it. Overkill is my specialty. It handles really well, and slow speed maneuvering doubles as a shoulder workout. :D
 
Haha, 72blu that is ridiculous! Overkill is an understatement! Thank you for your response though, it really gives me some insight about what I'm doing.
As it turns out, I've already purchased the UCAs from Firm Feel, so it's harder to go back now, but I could still probably cancel them...
Any idea what kind of caster I might get from the UCAs? I didn't ask when I purchased because at the time the number would have been meaningless. I'm starting to get a better idea now though. Either way I can ask them tomorrow. Also, do you know what stock caster might have been, roughly?

I had a long conversation with the gentleman from FirmFeel about torsion bars, as I'm fairly green and still learning a lot about what these parts all do and how they affect your ride. What I got from that conversation was that heavier torsion bars would make my handling tighter, but could easily make it an uncomfortably stiff ride. Something I'd definitely like to avoid. You know, for the sake of my passengers.

As for parallel parking: I'm in LA. I just can't carry enough post-workout protein for 16:1.
 
So, first a little history lesson. The stock caster was negative for manual steering. And the stock camber was positive. The reason for that was that the stock tires were bias ply. Fast forward and bit and bias ply's went away, replaced with radials. Radials have better grip, but different handling and wear characteristics. So, negative camber, and positive caster. If you run radials with the stock alignment settings, you get some pretty awful handling and road feel. Also, the factory torsion bars left these cars pretty undersprung. Part of that was the whole "riding on a cloud" 70's suspension feel, part of it was the rock hard bias plys. Add some traction and you get a whole lot of body roll, which is why you probably want sway bars. More traction = more force applied to the suspension = higher wheel rates to control the suspension.

Anyway. Most of the tubular UCA's have additional caster built in, it's usually an extra 2-3*. It depends on ride height and some of your other settings as well, but you shouldn't have much trouble getting around +5* caster with those UCA's. Which might be actually be on the high end of what you want with manual steering for a cruiser.

As for the torsion bars, it really depends. Ride quality is a pretty subjective thing. I run 1.12" torsion bars on my Duster, and I also run a 1.125" Hellwig front sway bar and a 7/8" Hellwig rear sway bar. I run Hotchkis Fox shocks on it, they do a little better with the larger bars than the Bilsteins (which are still a great shock!). With that set up the ride quality really isn't all that different than most modern performance muscle cars. It's maybe only a little stiffer than the 2013 Mustang with premium suspension my wife had for awhile, which is softer than what they run on say a new Boss 302 or other higher performance cars.

Honestly, with a set of 1.03's and Bilstein RCD's I don't think your ride would be any more uncomfortable than your average new commuter, Honda Civic, Corolla, etc. But it will not feel like an old 70's musclecar, so it really depends on what you're after. I ran 1" torsion bars on my Duster for a bit with a set of Bilsteins, I found them to be too soft for my liking. Big improvement over stock, but still pretty soft. But obviously I prefer stiffer suspension and will sacrifice some comfort for handling.

Here's the stock alignment specs. Do not use these for radial tires!!!
factoryalignspecs.jpg


And here are some recommendations for radial tires. The SKOSH chart is a great starting point, I think the caster numbers are a little conservative, but they're actually not bad if you're using them with manual steering. I'd probably add +1* of caster across the board even with manual steering, and for power steering more like an additional +1.5* to 2*. Most modern cars run +7* or more for caster for their factory spec, of course it does vary a bit with suspension type/application.

alignment-specifications-jpg.jpg
 
Is your Valiant a V8? If so, I personally wouldn't go with anything less than the PST 1.03 Tbars. That's what I've got in my '64 dart, and they're a little to soft IMHO for the extra weight of a small block. I do run the Hellwig bars front and back and they are worth the money all day long!

image.jpg
 
Haha, 72blu that is ridiculous! Overkill is an understatement! Thank you for your response though, it really gives me some insight about what I'm doing.
As it turns out, I've already purchased the UCAs from Firm Feel, so it's harder to go back now, but I could still probably cancel them...
Any idea what kind of caster I might get from the UCAs? I didn't ask when I purchased because at the time the number would have been meaningless. I'm starting to get a better idea now though. Either way I can ask them tomorrow. Also, do you know what stock caster might have been, roughly?

I had a long conversation with the gentleman from FirmFeel about torsion bars, as I'm fairly green and still learning a lot about what these parts all do and how they affect your ride. What I got from that conversation was that heavier torsion bars would make my handling tighter, but could easily make it an uncomfortably stiff ride. Something I'd definitely like to avoid. You know, for the sake of my passengers.

As for parallel parking: I'm in LA. I just can't carry enough post-workout protein for 16:1.

I wouldn't go 16:1 LA either. What size front tires you running.

I did run 1" t-bars in LA and it was ok as a daily driver.

The 1.14 I run now are annoying when I go back down there to visit. I wouldn't do that size in a daily driver there.

Whats the name of the shop that is aligning your car? I'm familiar with most the shops in your area.
 
Last edited:
Forgot to mention, but I'm also running a manual 16:1 box from PST with 225/45R17 Continental ProContact tires up front. At speed, the steering is awesome. Parking lots suck. I have to admit, the steering is a bit too heavy at very low speeds to be comfortable.
 
It makes sense to look at how the cars were engineered when they were new as compared to what we want from the car today.
In 1964, the buying public seemed to want a really smooth ride. Handling was not much of an issue until the tire technology improved.
The suspensions and steering were designed around the limits of the tires on the market. Soft torsion bars, weak shocks, easy effort steering is common on many cars built back then. If you take one of these cars and simply add a set of modern radial tires, you will start to see other areas that can benefit from improvements. The alignment settings need to be changed with wider radial tires to get the most from the superior tire design. Anti-sway bars will keep the car from leaning too far in the turns. Frame connectors help reduce chassis flex from the stiff torsion bars/sway bars. Urethane sway bar bushings, a welded K member, gussets on the lower control arms, Monte Carlo brace (This is a triangle gusset that connects each shock tower to the firewall)....Many of these things are total overkill for a nice street driver.
In short, a few small upgrades including tires and a modern alignment often will improve the feel of a classic car without draining the wallet.
 
I wouldn't go 16:1 LA either. What size front tires you running.

I did run 1" t-bars in LA and it was ok as a daily driver.

The 1.14 I run now are annoying when I go back down there to visit. I wouldn't do that size in a daily driver there.

Whats the name of the shop is aligning your car?

Yeah, but those Mopar Performance 1.14's are rated at 350 lbs/in for the wheel rate. Even my 1.12's from Firm Feel are "only" rated at 300 lbs/in. That's a 17% increase even compared to my bars, and mine are still 250% stiffer than the stock .87" bars at 120 lbs/in. Although the stock bars are way undersprung.

According to PST their 1.03's are 265 lbs/in, but that number doesn't even jive with the published rates on their other torsion bars. Using the same spring constant as their other bars (from solving backward from their own published rates) I get 232 lbs/in, which makes a lot more sense. At any rate, there's a lot of folks on here running them that are pretty happy with them.


It makes sense to look at how the cars were engineered when they were new as compared to what we want from the car today.
In 1964, the buying public seemed to want a really smooth ride. Handling was not much of an issue until the tire technology improved.
The suspensions and steering were designed around the limits of the tires on the market. Soft torsion bars, weak shocks, easy effort steering is common on many cars built back then. If you take one of these cars and simply add a set of modern radial tires, you will start to see other areas that can benefit from improvements. The alignment settings need to be changed with wider radial tires to get the most from the superior tire design. Anti-sway bars will keep the car from leaning too far in the turns. Frame connectors help reduce chassis flex from the stiff torsion bars/sway bars. Urethane sway bar bushings, a welded K member, gussets on the lower control arms, Monte Carlo brace (This is a triangle gusset that connects each shock tower to the firewall)....Many of these things are total overkill for a nice street driver.
In short, a few small upgrades including tires and a modern alignment often will improve the feel of a classic car without draining the wallet.

Yup, it's a slippery slope. All starts with the tires. The better the tires are, the more force they transmit to the suspension and chassis, and the stiffer the suspension and chassis needs to be to manage the additional loads. You can definitely upgrade some without setting off a cascade of upgrades that go throughout the entire chassis though. And just adding some better tires and a good alignment will do wonders compared to stock. Add moderately sized torsion bars and sway bars and you can do pretty well. Although I would recommend subframe connectors for everything regardless, they make a big difference.

But it's pretty easy to go down the rabbit hole. And you have to match to your tires, so, if you go big and sticky on the tires you end up doing pretty much everything you listed and then some.
 
I have a 66 Formula S 4 speed Barracuda. Factory .875 torsion bars and front sway bar, Bilstein shocks, Firm Feel 16:1 manual box, HD 6 leaf rear springs, 15 x 6 rims with 60 series tires. I am running all Moog rubber bushings and the caster is about +2*. It is a very nice handling and riding car. Early A's feel lighter than later A's. The 20:1 box would be a nice compromise. Ride is very subjective, you need to decide that for yourself.
 
20:1 box with standard pitman and idler arms and appropriate tires: fantastic setup that makes you wonder why the hell they didn't all come that way from the factory.

16:1 box: efficiently drains all the fun and pleasure out of driving the car.
 
"16:1 box: efficiently drains all the fun and pleasure out of driving the car."

That's a little harsh. It does make it more work to drive at low speeds, but by no means would I consider it to be THAT bad. Besides, if you just want it to be a "pleasurable" experience, you'll be better off with power steering and a soft suspension anyways. If you want max performance, comfort generally starts getting sacrificed.
 
The OP asked for opinions. I stated mine, and I stand by it.

I do not consider no-feel power steering and a soft suspension to be any more of a pleasurable drive than ridiculously high-effort steering is. And a 16:1 box is not a "higher performance" item than a 20:1 box, it's a different tool for a different job.

Too many people fall into the trap of thinking a bigger number (or in this case a smaller one) just obviously must be better, so they buy camshafts, carburetors, steering boxes, headers, etc that really don't suit how they're going to be using the car. The results range from not-cost-effective to not-optimal to unpleasant to severely disappointing.
 
Hey guys,
Just wanted to get some opinions on fast-ratio steering gear box rebuilds, and some other suspension upgrades I'm considering.
I'm driving a '64 Plymouth Valiant and looking at going 20:1 on the steering (FirmFeel rebuild). Also adding front and rear sway bars from Hellwig, positive caster upper control arms from FirmFeel, and possibly some Bilstein shocks. Anybody using Bilsteins on their '64 Plymouth? Would love to hear about your experience.
Thanks,
-M.
I have a '64 Valiant Slant 6 and am very happy with the suspension for a daily driver. 1" Just Suspension torsion bars, Edelbrock IAS shocks (NLA), all poly bushings and bump stops except the lower control arm bushings and the steering struts bushings (I used moog at those locations), Hellwig 1.25" front sway bar, Hellwig 0.75" rear sway bar, Hotchkiss rear leaf springs. It is firm enough to feel safe and in control, but still comfortable when I am just cruising. I have stock power steering btw and love it, running 14x6 SBP Rallye wheels with P205/75R14s. The steering is light, but you get used to it quickly. Parking is done with one finger.
 
Last edited:
16:1 box: efficiently drains all the fun and pleasure out of driving the car.

Kinda how I feel about driving a /6 "musclecar". :p

The steering ratio controls the mechanical advantage. You're trading effort for the amount of turns on the wheel. The stock 24:1 manual steering box is ~5.5 turns lock-to-lock. A 20:1 box is ~4.5 turns lock-to-lock, and if you guessed a 16:1 box is roughly 3.5 turns lock-to-lock you'd be right. The 16:1 box is the same ratio as the power steering box, just without the "boost".

The 16:1 box is great as long as you're going more than 10mph. Very responsive, really lets you feel the road and the car reacts very quickly to steering inputs. Even with +7* of caster and 275's up front it's no big effort at all as long as you're moving at a decent speed. It's good at 30+mph, and at 50+ the steering feel isn't even heavy IMO, I like it. Now, below 10mph, it requires some significant effort. Below 5mph and it's a workout. And you're not turning the wheels if you're not rolling. But then, you SHOULDN'T be turning the wheels if they're not rolling anyway if you like your tires and steering components. It's easy to forget that with power steering, since you can steer lock to lock at a standstill with your pinky finger. But the loads on the steering components on the other side of the steering box are the same as with a 16:1 manual box.

So really, you just have to ask yourself how often you're going less than 10mph and how much steering you're doing at those speeds. I wouldn't do 16:1 manual steering on a car I was parallel parking everyday, at least not with my Dusters tire and alignment set up. But less tire on the road and less caster make a big difference too, as does the weight of the car. My '74 Duster is likely a decent amount heavier than the OP's early A.
 
20:1 box with standard pitman and idler arms and appropriate tires: fantastic setup that makes you wonder why the hell they didn't all come that way from the factory.

16:1 box: efficiently drains all the fun and pleasure out of driving the car.

I agree with Dan. In defense of the corporation, they made one ratio in the beginning and it had to work across the board, A's, B's AND C bodies.

I have a 68 small block cuda with a factory 16:1 manual box. 215-60x15 tires. Great on the road but tough parking. I would not want to autocross it but, WTH, I'd give it a try.

My 64 /6 Val vert has 24:1 manual. Easy at all speeds but too slow. You just have to crank the wheel too much on turns.

Also have an original Direct Connection 20:1 worm and sector in my stash and a couple extra boxes. That may end up in the 68 with the 16:1 going in the Val as it's definitely lighter.
I'd say the 20:1 is the best all around and would be my first choice, in my opinion.
 
So many great responses guys, I really appreciate the discussion and all the different set ups you all have described. I'm getting a much clearer grasp of my options and how they'll affect the end result.

Autoxcuda: To answer your question, I'm getting most of my work done at Pristine Auto on Fairfax. It was my assumption that I'd be getting my alignment there as well, unless you have other suggestions? Possibly getting the steering box pulled and replaced by Pol at "Automotive Center #1" up in San Fernando, just because I bought the car up there and driving it down with it's sloppy steering is pretty nerve wracking. Plus, his prices are excellent. Any shops around town that you think are great?
 
So many great responses guys, I really appreciate the discussion and all the different set ups you all have described. I'm getting a much clearer grasp of my options and how they'll affect the end result.

Autoxcuda: To answer your question, I'm getting most of my work done at Pristine Auto on Fairfax. It was my assumption that I'd be getting my alignment there as well, unless you have other suggestions? Possibly getting the steering box pulled and replaced by Pol at "Automotive Center #1" up in San Fernando, just because I bought the car up there and driving it down with it's sloppy steering is pretty nerve wracking. Plus, his prices are excellent. Any shops around town that you think are great?

I go to specialized shops for specialized things.

For an alignment and suspension stuff on that part of town go to Bagge and Son on Washington across from Sony Pictures in Culver City. They do all kinds of weird and tricky stuff. Been doing it over 75 years. Our family has gone there for 50+ years.

Pristine is more body shop. Angeleos Jaguar owned (maybe still) that land that Pristine is now on. Angelos was a customer of mine about 7 year ago. Then folded and rented to Pristine.
 
My 66 Barracuda had a 16:1 manual steering box in it for 25 of the 27 years I owned it. It was not that bad to drive. Parallel parking in the city? Yes, it's a bit more difficult. You learn to never turn the wheel without the car moving. Regarding torsion bars - the 1" FF bars I put in were pretty good. I never got around to putting Bilsteins on it though. I had KYBs and I would say that made it a bit harsh riding.
 
-
Back
Top