OK, some may want to pick the pictures of this steering conversion, However beware! I can pick the steeroids twice as much as you can this.

It may just be me, but I like this two to one over the Steeroids set up. This has one mount with a shim and the steeroids has many that just are not a conventional mounting and relies on putting something foreign into a C-3 that even has that appearance, foreign.

Oh yeah, I'm grouchy some days myself, lol jim

 

I like the jeep power rack system also, the only problem is header clearance but the steeroids has that also.

 

Tom is an old guy at Corvette Steering Service and although his customer relations skills are not the best, the product is. He may have some of the billet steel pitman arms he made for his earlier Vette conversions still around if you want to hunt up a local steering box and do the work yourself but, Tom puts in the fast ratio (Camaro-Firebird) 12:1 spool into his boxes. The kit I bought (haven't gotten around to installing it yet because of a busy work schedule) is very well done and has a Borgson U-Joint to take place of the rag joint on the steering coupler. I would have already done the conversion but, I'm going to a standard steering column from my Tilt-Tele and am busy making a quick release adapter for my steering wheel. I would just buy the kit, it is a good value from a top craftsman in the Corvette industry (his Tilt-Tele column re-builds are the BEST, I can't do the work for the $$ Tom charges for his services.) I can understand how Tom must get frustrated by all the callers taking up his time but, if you want to do the conversion yourself, he has the right pittman arm already made if you wat to hunt down a Jeep box with a slower variable ratio than Tom's box. The latest conversions have the pittman shaft re-splined to the correct Corvette splines so the stock arm will "bolt-on".

 

Thank you Marck. I will look for the drawings and is the 93 grand am rack a center take off??? I assume it is or you wouldn't be pushing it?

 

Jim if my motor was out I would cut the frame and install a plate for bolting the steering box too. That would be simple but with the motor in an adaptor would be the only solution.

 

It just needs to be rear steer, center take off. I jsut checked and it was a 89 grand am rack

I sent you the pics, there's a little of photochopping work done to 1 of the pics, that's done by me. I was redesigning the brackets to use the 3rd steering box bolt hole (it's there so why not use it) never got around to finishing it..since you know where I'm heading w/ the steering.

 

Thank you Marck. I got the drawings. I thought you were going to front steer?? That involves alot of redesigning. I just don't want to pull the motor and the front end off the car.
When you go to the parts store they do not stock the racks so they are custom ordered and they like you to know what you want.
Thanks again.

 

Thanks Solid LT1 but I am leaning towards the rack and pinion. I can buy a rack for $150 CDN , make all the rest of the parts, well all but the steering universals. EVen at $672 am. it amounts to $1000 CDN after shipping, brokerage and taxes.

I would also consider shortening the steering column and adding a good bearing at the firewall.

 

yes, front steer, that's why I never finished the design of thoe bracket, never got around to measuring where that hole was.

 

One more thing. Why do I want a quick ratio? Why not slow? I don't want the thing too darty at high speed. The quicker the ratio the less I have to put into the steering to make it darty.
Why not a slow ratio???

 

If I had this choice it would be the Jeep box hands down. I have seen one, not driven one-but it should keep the stock geometry. That would be my choice. He machines the Pitman shaft to a lot different that stock, so it would be difficult to duplicate.

 

Norvall,
The 92 + grand am rack is the one you want. The earlier ones weren't as reliable. Other than that it doesn't matter. All grand am racks of that vintage are useable and cheaply available.

There are other cars that used the same rack, Jim Shea spelled it all out somewhere around here...

if you get a sport model rack it has the exact same rate as the stock vette in the power steering holes. It does have fewer turns lock to lock, but the rate that the wheels move vs the rate the steering wheel moves is exactly the same.

 

I have the Steeroids in mine with decent width front tires and it got rid of all the loose feeling the front end had before. I don't have to try and "catch up" with the steering anymore and it doesn't follow the tracks in the road. The only thing I can say is that it "turns in" a lot faster than the old system making the car feel a bit "loose" in the back end as the front moves so quickly now.
I haven't had any high speed runs with it yet, as I was pulling a trailer the entire trip I had it on. I did how ever run it all day long at 80 MPH over some VERY rough roads and never felt out of control or lack of response as I did with the stock system.

 

That's why they make Chocolate and Vanilla.........

I plan on ordering mine within the next two weeks and when it comes I will post new pic's on the parts and their modifications. I'm not close to installing it yet. jim

 

norval, Corvette power steering is notoriously BAD at high speed on the road race coarse. If it was me I would first try manual steering, I have stock manual steering and while I am not parallel parking it`s really not to bad at low speed. Next it would be the Jeep box which I think is actually a Saginaw 704 or 605 box. I am sure YOU could come up with an easy way to marry the Saginaw box to the longer pittman shaft and side mounting system of the Corvette box like Corvette steering does.
...redvetracr

PS: my races are not too long and when the time comes it`s the "Jeep" box for me!!

 

Thanks redvetracr. At time my steering feels fantastic but a certain type of road really brings out the bad. I need power steering. I do alot a manuvering around my shop, around town and with the wide 245 x 45 tires I don't want to hard a steering.
I like the idea of the Jeep box but worry about header clearance. I am almost against it now and the jeep box while about the same width is longer and more probable to hit.
I have a good offer on a almost new jeep box and it is tempting.
If the motor was out it would be no contest. I would cut the frame and make room with a frame insert and the proper bolt pattern.
No one has told me why I want quick ratio rather then a slower ratio?? I know my wife's car and my truck are not sensitive at speed to steering input and they track really well.
I would think that a high speed I want a slow response so I don't oversteer????
Thanks again

 

I was looking closely today and if I removed the steering column but first marked exactly where it came through the firewall I could shorten the shaft, install a bearing in the firewall to support the end of the steering and imediately install a universal. The would allow me a more gentle bend on the steering and snake down low under the pipes.

 

Norval I found this on CS Web-site and some good info below with a print showing dimensions.

CAR # 651 Has big block engine with hooker headers !!! BB '67 Vette Uses the 2000 Series Integral power steering box installed, 12.7 to 1 Ratio. Tom thanks for all the help. Your box is great ! Mark Shoen & Mike Dilgard Phx. AZ




Power steering box ratios. Most GM cars & light trucks:

Ratios & the Number of Turns. A big question for most people !

12.7 to 1 (Commonly referred to as the 12 to 1

12 to 1 is the fastest or quickest ratio Power box used in any GM vehicle In an 80s Z-28 GM Introduced the 12 to 1 quick box !

It only had a pitman shaft travel (rotation) of 68 degrees. We refer to this as a restricted travel box. This box turned approx. 2.5 turns lock to lock. This is fine for most late models but not for 60s & 70s cars.

The 1964 to 72 A Body GM Cars need 83 degrees of pitman shaft travel to have the factory full turning radius. Will have 3 turns of travel lock to lock, an un-restricted box (Has no stop limits). So a 12 to 1 box can have from 2 1/4 to 3 Turns lock to Lock, one can't tell the ratio or how quick the ratio by the number of turns alone. The 16-13 to 1variable ratio box and the 14 to 1 (fixed ratio) have about the same number of turns, giving they have the same internal stops. The Variable ratio box has a longer center tooth on the pitman shaft than its side teeth. Making the ratio slower in the straight travel, then quickening up for parking & U-turns. The 14 to 1 ratio having about the same amount of total turns is muck quicker for highway lane changing. In the 90s GM switched to the 14 to 1 ratio for pickup trucks.

14 to 1 Box will have a 3 1/4 turns lock to lock (no stop limits) and about 2 1/2turns with high internal stops... This is a fairly new ratio for GM, most pickups 1992 and newer have this ratio.

16-13 to 1 Box Used Mid 70s to 91 for most cars & light trucks. 63 Buick Riviera Might have been first to have this ratio ???

17 to 1 Ratio is over 4 1/2 turns lock to lock, in a box with no stops, used from 1959 to mid 70s in most cars & trucks..

The only way to know the true ratio is to measure the distance of the worm thread (pitch) & to look if the teeth depth in the worm nut or the pitman shaft. all straight ratios have the same length teeth 12, 14 & 17 to 1 ratios..

The distance (thread pitch) between threads for 12 to 1 is approx. .650 inch

14 to 1 thread pitch is approx .590 inch.

17 to 1 thread pitch is approx .470inch

16 -13 to 1 Variable ratio is the same as 14 to 1 (but teeth length make the difference)

We hope this clears most questions on ratios & the number of turns:

 

Header clearance is an issue with the box itself. I have the stahl sidepipe headers for my big block and I had to dent all three tubes that go past. I was also able to get a set of Hooker super comp under cars to fit with a minimal amount of dents. The adapters really didn't get in the way. The #5 tube required me to grind a little off one of the adapters corners. I'll get some pictures to you later this week.

 

Grand AM rack, Norval....'92 was my donor car, it was a fresh rebuilt unit, dry all over the bellows, that's why I chose it....

must have been a zilliion to choose from at that time...I happened to find one that came out to 2.7 turns lock to lock which is a 6" toss on the tie rods....

since it is a CTO rack, obviously you need rework your bump stear setup....
I personally don't think much of the steeroids steel plate, it is good for bump stear, but I just don't like the overall stability, I stuck with my solid steel block, sacrificing bump stear theory to overall reliability, IMO of course....


Now there is of course another issue, my install of course is done my way, totally differant than steeroids setup, I have the rack further up by about 1/2 inch or so, same offset to the driver's side by about an inch, but here is the thing, I tilted my rack so that input shaft is about 45* pointing up toward the steering shaft....to do this I hole sawed a crescent out of the engine mount horn in lower rear, this to clearance the input coupling, with my SB iron heads, i'ts not a problem....
I have just two universals, and so need no stabilizing heim link....like steeroids uses.....they still have issues with binding in some cars/installs, of course I pushed the column up to the firewall far as I dared...about 1/2 inch of smooth column appears out of the bearing...then the splines for coupling...

GENE

GENE