Question for the home made R&P guys?
04-29-2012, 04:36 PM
#1
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Lubbock TX
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for the homemade R&P guys?
I've finished my R&P install and have been working on the exhaust. Should I wrap this header pipe or is there enough room for this u-joint to survive?
[/IMG]
[/IMG]
Last edited by Kalvin; 04-29-2012 at 04:50 PM.
04-29-2012, 08:49 PM
#3
Race Director
thats more space then i have on my steeroids unit.....i had to use the BFH to dimple my header tube.....make sure any set screw isnt rubbing though as you turn it.
04-30-2012, 10:25 PM
#4
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Lubbock TX
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, for the response guys. I'm very anxious to post my thread (book!). I took a different approach and with the car sitting still it is working to perfection. I'd post it now but being a responsible person I'll wait until I can drive it. I'm still working on the exhaust and redoing the carb. I may take a few new pics, some are cluttered with crap on the garage floor. I can say it will bring more people on over to the "Rack" side. Keep a look out for the title;
"The No Guess @ Bump Steer DIY Rack & Pinion Install" or the way "Bubba" would do it!It's a little long but detailed and has a few puns at Bubba.
"The No Guess @ Bump Steer DIY Rack & Pinion Install" or the way "Bubba" would do it!It's a little long but detailed and has a few puns at Bubba.
05-01-2012, 07:57 PM
#6
Drifting
Thanks for the insight.
Kalvin,
I admire you for your tenacity and ingenuity, but you've really just used an inferior design for your conversion. General Motors spent millions designing a steering system that was strong, gave good road feedback and had features such as a good turning circle and no bump steer.
All of the above are at best compromised, at worst lost, when you fit a R&P system that was designed for a totally different vehicle. The main reason that OEMs use R&P in their new cars is cost. By and large, a R&P is cheaper to manufacture than a worm & sector steering box and its associated idler arm, drag link and tie rods.
Plus, for some reason, a R&P works better in a "front steer" application than a "rear steer" application. You have used a rear steer rack, although you don't have much choice as a front steer rack fitment would require major surgery to your chassis and welded in cross member.
Overall, your car would have steered better with a Borgeson steering box. Although based on a similarly proportioned box from another application, it is machined to be an exact replacement for the factory steering box. It also uses the GM Pitman arm, drag link and tie rods, etc. so that there is no bump steer and the full turning circle is retained.
Of course, there is no need for two or three uni joints, steering support bearing, header wrap, etc. with the Borgeson box. And the added advantage is that when fitted, it looks like it was fitted at the factory. If you add in Borgeson's written three year warranty, there really isn't a good reason not to use their product in your valuable classic Corvette.
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
I admire you for your tenacity and ingenuity, but you've really just used an inferior design for your conversion. General Motors spent millions designing a steering system that was strong, gave good road feedback and had features such as a good turning circle and no bump steer.
All of the above are at best compromised, at worst lost, when you fit a R&P system that was designed for a totally different vehicle. The main reason that OEMs use R&P in their new cars is cost. By and large, a R&P is cheaper to manufacture than a worm & sector steering box and its associated idler arm, drag link and tie rods.
Plus, for some reason, a R&P works better in a "front steer" application than a "rear steer" application. You have used a rear steer rack, although you don't have much choice as a front steer rack fitment would require major surgery to your chassis and welded in cross member.
Overall, your car would have steered better with a Borgeson steering box. Although based on a similarly proportioned box from another application, it is machined to be an exact replacement for the factory steering box. It also uses the GM Pitman arm, drag link and tie rods, etc. so that there is no bump steer and the full turning circle is retained.
Of course, there is no need for two or three uni joints, steering support bearing, header wrap, etc. with the Borgeson box. And the added advantage is that when fitted, it looks like it was fitted at the factory. If you add in Borgeson's written three year warranty, there really isn't a good reason not to use their product in your valuable classic Corvette.
Just my $0.02 worth.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
05-01-2012, 08:47 PM
#7
Burning Brakes
AussieJohn-
Are you a rep for Borgeson? You always seem to put down the rack conversions, and boast about how superior this Borgeson box is.
I would like to point out that I do have a borgeson box on my other classic car. It is a great steering system, BUT I would never trade it for my rack in my vette for these reasons:
Weight, steering ratio, cost, no manual steering, and high speed road feel. It is a great steering system for a cruiser, but not ideal for someone more performance oriented IMO.
Are you a rep for Borgeson? You always seem to put down the rack conversions, and boast about how superior this Borgeson box is.
I admire you for your tenacity and ingenuity, but you've really just used an inferior design for your conversion. General Motors spent millions designing a steering system that was strong, gave good road feedback and had features such as a good turning circle and no bump steer.
They spend millions of dollars back in 1963. And back in 1963, it probably was a great setup. I would say that todays econo-boxes have better road feel and response than a stock C3 box. For what its worth, my home made rack conversion has the full turning circle and probably less bump-steer than a stock system at my lowered ride height
All of the above are at best compromised, at worst lost, when you fit a R&P system that was designed for a totally different vehicle. The main reason that OEMs use R&P in their new cars is cost. By and large, a R&P is cheaper to manufacture than a worm & sector steering box and its associated idler arm, drag link and tie rods.
If cost was the issue here, I think modern Ferrari's, Lamborghini's and even the ZR1 vette would be using steering boxes over a rack & pinion. Even no-budget race cars use rack & pinions
Plus, for some reason, a R&P works better in a "front steer" application than a "rear steer" application. You have used a rear steer rack, although you don't have much choice as a front steer rack fitment would require major surgery to your chassis and welded in cross member.
Overall, your car would have steered better with a Borgeson steering box. Although based on a similarly proportioned box from another application, it is machined to be an exact replacement for the factory steering box. It also uses the GM Pitman arm, drag link and tie rods, etc. so that there is no bump steer and the full turning circle is retained.
While "better steering" is an opinion, do you think that putting a steering box from a Jeep is going to be better oriented towards performance than a rack out of a sports car? The rack & pinion offers a quicker steering ratio, and has the option for manual steering.
Of course, there is no need for two or three uni joints, steering support bearing, header wrap, etc. with the Borgeson box. And the added advantage is that when fitted, it looks like it was fitted at the factory. If you add in Borgeson's written three year warranty, there really isn't a good reason not to use their product in your valuable classic Corvette.
Just to clarify here... There is no need for 3 universal joints. Two is all that is needed with the rack. Take a look under the hood of any modern sports car... I can bet there is going to be more than one universal joint. Header wrap is also unnecessary, but would do a steering box equal good if it was used. If someone is looking for non stock parts under your hood, they might notice the power steering hoses coming from an integral power steering box and notice something is different there... Its not like other sports cars of that period didnt have rack & pinions.
They spend millions of dollars back in 1963. And back in 1963, it probably was a great setup. I would say that todays econo-boxes have better road feel and response than a stock C3 box. For what its worth, my home made rack conversion has the full turning circle and probably less bump-steer than a stock system at my lowered ride height
All of the above are at best compromised, at worst lost, when you fit a R&P system that was designed for a totally different vehicle. The main reason that OEMs use R&P in their new cars is cost. By and large, a R&P is cheaper to manufacture than a worm & sector steering box and its associated idler arm, drag link and tie rods.
If cost was the issue here, I think modern Ferrari's, Lamborghini's and even the ZR1 vette would be using steering boxes over a rack & pinion. Even no-budget race cars use rack & pinions
Plus, for some reason, a R&P works better in a "front steer" application than a "rear steer" application. You have used a rear steer rack, although you don't have much choice as a front steer rack fitment would require major surgery to your chassis and welded in cross member.
Overall, your car would have steered better with a Borgeson steering box. Although based on a similarly proportioned box from another application, it is machined to be an exact replacement for the factory steering box. It also uses the GM Pitman arm, drag link and tie rods, etc. so that there is no bump steer and the full turning circle is retained.
While "better steering" is an opinion, do you think that putting a steering box from a Jeep is going to be better oriented towards performance than a rack out of a sports car? The rack & pinion offers a quicker steering ratio, and has the option for manual steering.
Of course, there is no need for two or three uni joints, steering support bearing, header wrap, etc. with the Borgeson box. And the added advantage is that when fitted, it looks like it was fitted at the factory. If you add in Borgeson's written three year warranty, there really isn't a good reason not to use their product in your valuable classic Corvette.
Just to clarify here... There is no need for 3 universal joints. Two is all that is needed with the rack. Take a look under the hood of any modern sports car... I can bet there is going to be more than one universal joint. Header wrap is also unnecessary, but would do a steering box equal good if it was used. If someone is looking for non stock parts under your hood, they might notice the power steering hoses coming from an integral power steering box and notice something is different there... Its not like other sports cars of that period didnt have rack & pinions.
Weight, steering ratio, cost, no manual steering, and high speed road feel. It is a great steering system for a cruiser, but not ideal for someone more performance oriented IMO.
05-01-2012, 09:37 PM
#8
Drifting
Where is my answer?
[QUOTE=vette427-sbc;1580703436]AussieJohn-
Are you a rep for Borgeson? You always seem to put down the rack conversions, and boast about how superior this Borgeson box is.
427,
I answered this a few minutes ago, where is it? I hope the mods didn't dump it.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
Are you a rep for Borgeson? You always seem to put down the rack conversions, and boast about how superior this Borgeson box is.
427,
I answered this a few minutes ago, where is it? I hope the mods didn't dump it.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
05-01-2012, 10:30 PM
#9
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Lubbock TX
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aussiejohn, my rack design is different than anybody elses. I believe it will be as good as the borgeson unit and give the performane of a R&P. I just need time to get the car running again so I can put my money where my mouth is as they say. My thread is almost ready to print, but I will go ahead and give you a paragraph from it explaining the difference from a R&P and the worm & sector steering box as you put it.
A conventional parallelogram steering linkage consists of the idler arm on one side and the pitman arm to gear box on the other, both attaching to the center link to form a parallelogram. The idler arm and pitman arm translate circular motion to linear motion and since they are held in place they keep the center link (relay rod) and the inner tie-rods in the same plane. This is designed to work with the motion of the A-arms. Any changes in the geometry can cause bump steer. So what does a R&P do? It does the same thing but it's strictly linear motion that keeps the inner tie-rods in the same plane.
A R&P is just a more simple way of doing the same work. Just as in physics, the work is constant in both applications. In other words they just turn the wheels! I will post my thread as soon as I can, my static tests have shown that my tires are turning just as far as they did before. My neighbor has a 73 blue beauty that we will compare once I get mine running again. Thanks for the replys. I've been a member of the forum for quite a while now but all my previous Vette's were fairly new at the time and I never really needed to ask any questions. I made a mistake and traded in my 07 for the wife's new car. It was driving me crazy so I found a project car. The funny thing is, I'll probably care more about this one than my last 3. Cheers as you say!
A conventional parallelogram steering linkage consists of the idler arm on one side and the pitman arm to gear box on the other, both attaching to the center link to form a parallelogram. The idler arm and pitman arm translate circular motion to linear motion and since they are held in place they keep the center link (relay rod) and the inner tie-rods in the same plane. This is designed to work with the motion of the A-arms. Any changes in the geometry can cause bump steer. So what does a R&P do? It does the same thing but it's strictly linear motion that keeps the inner tie-rods in the same plane.
A R&P is just a more simple way of doing the same work. Just as in physics, the work is constant in both applications. In other words they just turn the wheels! I will post my thread as soon as I can, my static tests have shown that my tires are turning just as far as they did before. My neighbor has a 73 blue beauty that we will compare once I get mine running again. Thanks for the replys. I've been a member of the forum for quite a while now but all my previous Vette's were fairly new at the time and I never really needed to ask any questions. I made a mistake and traded in my 07 for the wife's new car. It was driving me crazy so I found a project car. The funny thing is, I'll probably care more about this one than my last 3. Cheers as you say!
Last edited by Kalvin; 05-04-2012 at 12:15 AM.
05-02-2012, 03:29 AM
#10
Drifting
Thanks for the update.
[QUOTE=Kalvin;1580704426]Aussiejohn, my rack design is different than anybody elses.
Kalvin,
That's precisely the point I am trying to make. If you've read as many steering threads as I have, you will know for a fact that several Forum members who have fitted the commercially available racks have complained about flimsy brackets that actually twist when under load, and frequently there's header interference and the need for a support bearing in some conversions adds complexity and subtracts available clearance with headers.
The fact that you're doing something different from anybody else's will make your conversion either worse or better, and of course I'm sure it's the latter. My criticism of the commercially available R&P kits is that they are, or at least were, all centre take off racks, CTO, and the longer than factory tie rods will induce bump steer. Plus, you still have to plumb two hoses down under the engine where they are subject to road debris, possibly oil saturation if the timing cover is leaking, etc.
Last month, one member who had bought a R&P conversion only a few years ago, posted here on the Forum that the rack was worn out and was asking what car it was from so he could buy another to replace it. I would be very surprised to hear such a question asked about a Borgeson steering box. The latter have been designed by a Company that has been in business for 98 years and its products are approved by the NHRA and the NSRA, plus it's a member of SEMA.
They also offer a written three year warranty and the best of all, it's a straight bolt in application, using ALL of the steering components designed by the engineers at GM all those years ago.
I more or less fell into selling the product by accident, as I was only looking to replace the faulty power system on my '74 coupe, but was so impressed by the product that I am now selling them to Mustang owners, as well as Corvette and 55-57 Chevy owners Down Under.
www.pro-steer.com.au
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
Kalvin,
That's precisely the point I am trying to make. If you've read as many steering threads as I have, you will know for a fact that several Forum members who have fitted the commercially available racks have complained about flimsy brackets that actually twist when under load, and frequently there's header interference and the need for a support bearing in some conversions adds complexity and subtracts available clearance with headers.
The fact that you're doing something different from anybody else's will make your conversion either worse or better, and of course I'm sure it's the latter. My criticism of the commercially available R&P kits is that they are, or at least were, all centre take off racks, CTO, and the longer than factory tie rods will induce bump steer. Plus, you still have to plumb two hoses down under the engine where they are subject to road debris, possibly oil saturation if the timing cover is leaking, etc.
Last month, one member who had bought a R&P conversion only a few years ago, posted here on the Forum that the rack was worn out and was asking what car it was from so he could buy another to replace it. I would be very surprised to hear such a question asked about a Borgeson steering box. The latter have been designed by a Company that has been in business for 98 years and its products are approved by the NHRA and the NSRA, plus it's a member of SEMA.
They also offer a written three year warranty and the best of all, it's a straight bolt in application, using ALL of the steering components designed by the engineers at GM all those years ago.
I more or less fell into selling the product by accident, as I was only looking to replace the faulty power system on my '74 coupe, but was so impressed by the product that I am now selling them to Mustang owners, as well as Corvette and 55-57 Chevy owners Down Under.
www.pro-steer.com.au
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
05-02-2012, 08:27 AM
#11
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Lubbock TX
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aussiejohn, we're definitely talking about 2 different animals. I've made the process of installing a rack more simple and my brackets are easy to make and the frame will bend before the brackets. If the rack ever wears out you can change it out in about 15 minutes. The beauty of my install was that even with buying all new parts it was a total cost of right at $400. The cost could have even been cheaper and once you see my thread you will see why. My thread will show how to make the brackets and do everything else. I don't weld or have any fancy tools, my brackets were make at a local machine shop for $100. I feel centering the steering is much simpler with the rack and my hose selection allowed me to tuck most of it up under the left motor mount-looks nice. The rack may have not been designed for the Vette but mine sure looks like it was. My design will be more appealing to Corvette owners than any aftermarket kit. Like I said I just want to drive it before posting. From the threads I've read isn't there more header problems with the Borgeson unit due to it's immense size? Another appealing factor will be if you want to go to a different setup like the Borgeson unit you can do it in about 30 minutes! Time to go to work,Cheers!
05-02-2012, 09:18 AM
#12
Race Director
is this a joke? who would ever design a new steering system with an idler arm and drag link? that is antiquated designs and may have been necesary in the past but its far from an optimum set up.
Waiting for details......
05-02-2012, 07:33 PM
#15
Drifting
No joke.
You appear to be misunderstanding me. I'm not saying that a W&S is better than a R&P in a NEW car design. I fully agree with you that no-one would design a new steering system with an idler arm and drag link. Except for trucks and buses, a R&P is far better in a newly designed car. My 2010 Holden Cruze and my 1983 V8 Holden Commodore both have R&P and I'm quite happy with them and have no plans to change them.
However, my 1974 Corvettes have a power assisted steering system that was designed over seventy years ago, and since then, more modern integral power steering boxes have come onto the market. I have chosen to utilise one of these that has been designed by a company that has been in the steering business for 98 years, is a member of SEMA and its products are endorsed by both the NHRA and NSRA.
I hope that I have explained myself to your satisfaction.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
05-02-2012, 07:52 PM
#16
Drifting
Thanks for the response.
We certainly are. However, you appear to have been misinformed about the size of the Borgeson integral steering box. Its size is not "immense." In fact, it is no wider than a factory steering box. If a commercially available header will clear a factory box, it WILL CLEAR a Borgeson box. Due to the fact that the power ram is built into the front of the box, it might be necessary to slightly relocate the front brake hose distribution block on pre-'74 cars. The control valve on the input side of the box requires a slight shortening of the collapsible steering shaft on post 67 cars. And that's all.
Due to the fact that you are designing your R&P from scratch, I take it that you were not satisfied with some aspects of the commercially available R&P systems. You know what, I'm 100% with you there. You might have not liked the thickness of the mounting bracket, the bump steer that might come from a CTO rack, or the lack of turning circle inherent with some kits.
By your cordial response to me, I can see that you have not taken my comments as insulting, which they weren't, but as perhaps constructive criticism, which they were. For example, I read only last month here on the Forum where a member had purchased and fitted a R&P from one of the vendors a few years ago, but claimed that it had worn out and was looking to find from which car it had come so that he could replace the rack!
I suggested that he go back to the original vendor of the kit and ask them, but I got no response. I hope that your system works out well and am looking forward to reading all about it.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
05-02-2012, 08:06 PM
#17
Drifting
Say it isn't so.
mrvette,
This is less about the truth than the different ways we look at things. I believe that you have a R&P on your car that you designed and built yourself. Good on you. You obviously have the skills to do that and I'm sure that you are happy with it. However, not everyone has your engineering and fabrication skills and some people have resorted to purchasing a commercially available kit.
And some of these people have complained here on the Forum that they were dissatisfied with some aspect or other of the kit they bought. Several other people both in the USA and Europe and even Australia have designed and fitted their own design R&P systems. Did they do this because they were not prepared to pay the price asked by the vendors? Or were they dissatisfied with the engineering standards of the commercially available kits? Only they know, and I won't try to put words in their mouths.
What I like about the Borgeson kit is the total modular design of it. Every part designed by the GM engineers back in the sixties is used and in its original location. Except for the box itself. The original turning circle, bump steer, if any, etc. is as it left the factory. But the box itself makes the car steer like a modern car, and I like that.
I hope that this clears everything up, if not, let me know.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
This is less about the truth than the different ways we look at things. I believe that you have a R&P on your car that you designed and built yourself. Good on you. You obviously have the skills to do that and I'm sure that you are happy with it. However, not everyone has your engineering and fabrication skills and some people have resorted to purchasing a commercially available kit.
And some of these people have complained here on the Forum that they were dissatisfied with some aspect or other of the kit they bought. Several other people both in the USA and Europe and even Australia have designed and fitted their own design R&P systems. Did they do this because they were not prepared to pay the price asked by the vendors? Or were they dissatisfied with the engineering standards of the commercially available kits? Only they know, and I won't try to put words in their mouths.
What I like about the Borgeson kit is the total modular design of it. Every part designed by the GM engineers back in the sixties is used and in its original location. Except for the box itself. The original turning circle, bump steer, if any, etc. is as it left the factory. But the box itself makes the car steer like a modern car, and I like that.
I hope that this clears everything up, if not, let me know.
Regards from Down Under.
aussiejohn
05-03-2012, 11:57 PM
#19
Intermediate
Thread Starter
Member Since: Feb 2006
Location: Lubbock TX
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mrvette,
What I like about the Borgeson kit is the total modular design of it. Every part designed by the GM engineers back in the sixties is used and in its original location. Except for the box itself. The original turning circle, bump steer, if any, etc. is as it left the factory. But the box itself makes the car steer like a modern car, and I like that.aussiejohn
What I like about the Borgeson kit is the total modular design of it. Every part designed by the GM engineers back in the sixties is used and in its original location. Except for the box itself. The original turning circle, bump steer, if any, etc. is as it left the factory. But the box itself makes the car steer like a modern car, and I like that.aussiejohn
If you could buy a rack system that did eveything that you liked as you mentioned above or could make one at half the cost of a Borgeson unit would you do it? You probably would and a lot of other Vette owners will too. I'll re-emphasize; "linear motion is linear motion no matter how its accomplished." You can swap one for the other.