Originally Posted by Chagjr

Im going to jump on my sword here. What I find on this forum is a lot of fragile egos. I’m not suggesting the information given is wrong, but a lot of people who come to the forum are not looking for the text book information, worse case scenario problem solving.

A lot of the problems that people encounter owning these cars were common occurrence repairs on any given day up until the mid 90s. A lot of people (shade tree mechanics), car enthusiasts, and all mechanics in the 1960s possessed this knowledge.

There were Carburetor shops, distributor shops, Paint shops everywhere. It appears some members here consider themselves the arbiters of information on these C3 corvettes. When any car enthusiast from that time period understands the information given here applies to any make and model in this time period. Yes there are some specific nuances to a Corvette like small, not easy to access spaces to make repairs and the independent rear suspension.

No one should be challenged when sharing information here at The Corvette Forum. If a simple fix is suggested, and works out for someone, the hobby becomes less complicated. I know a lot of you watch Road Kill Garage, these guys understand how everything functions and make their seat of the pants repairs based simply knowing how it works. The complex repairs can be made later.

I bet a lot of C3s sold today that have set for a least 20 years are victims of simple repair's. No one needs to justify their C3 acumen by telling us how many years you have been doing whatever, where ever.

I want to mention one more thing, I see everyone likes to tell other posters when they are replying to an older post. When someone is searching on line for an answer to a problem they are having, these older posts show up in the search results. Some of these posts speak to their given problem. It should not be shunned to ask questions continuing an older post. I know many of you mention, “start a new post”, my question is why? If there is new information or technology available, this will come out in the new information given in the continuation of the post.I know everyone wants to be the guru, but being an arbiter of the information and challenging everyone like a rooster is going to kill the existence of these older Corvettes

Originally Posted by Chagjr

Originally Posted by 1979 Corvette Shop Manual

Before any adjustments are made to the steering gear in an attempt to correct such conditions as shimmy, loose or hard steering etc., a careful check should be made of front end alignment, shock absorbers, wheel balance and tire pressure for possible cause.

Originally Posted by grumman41

...
Is it necessary to make any adjustments or take slack out of a rebuilt steering box?
...

Originally Posted by grumman41

I’m currently fine tuning items on my 71 after a long restoration. All steering and suspension items have been replaced or overhauled. The steering box was sent out and “blueprinted” by a reputable rebuilder. I’m getting an amount of steering “free play” that seems excessive to me. Is it necessary to make any adjustments or take slack out of a rebuilt steering box?

if measured at the 12:00 position on the steering wheel I would estimate the distance of free play at one inch. It’s not a complete deadband from turn to turn but doesn’t seem correct. I’m familiar with drive by wire, rack and pinion, etc and understand it he difference in feel and response, etc.
KC

Originally Posted by grumman41

Wow! I wanted to close this out because I found the issue and the post went in many directions that had very little to do with the original problem.
The issue was the steering isolator that had some elongation where the bolts go thru. There wasn’t any distortion on the outer portion and it looked very solid. I tightened the bolts a bit (It improved) and currently driving but have one ordered.

There seemed to be a fascination with the steering box and how it “must” have been overhauled incorrectly. I generally don't like to mention overhaulers names when troubleshooting because inevitably someone will jump to conclusions and I don’t want to despair someone or their reputation during the process. This was overhauled by Bairs and I have had very good results with their services.
Regards,KC

Originally Posted by grumman41

I got this resolved by replacing the rag joint. I replaced with a GM part number 7818568, this unit only has four layers of material verses seven for the original. I can feel a VERY small amount of movement with this rag joint and may have my original rebuilt if someone is doing them with the original stiffer material. Just by comparing my old and new rag joint it appeared that my original. OEM joint may have been a bit stiffer.
Regards, KC

Originally Posted by GTR1999

I got your PM with your name, thank you. Since you kind of opened the door posting about this here, here is where I will reply.

First off, your description sounds like me. The box, if the box is the actual issue, doesn't sound good. People may think I sent you junk from your description and that is something I won't do- BUT I never say never and that is why I wanted to pull your file- ASAP. I don't know of anyone who blueprints boxes other than myself. There are plenty of rebuilders, none build like I do. I actually build for some vendors/vette shops as well- they don't tell their customer I did the work.

So, I just went through my records. I keep files on everyone I work with, as anyone who has worked with me knows. I have no record on you, going back MANY years. I ran your first name in my records, every person with the same first name came up, except nothing on you. So, unless you bought the box from someone else who claimed it was one of mine, it is not my box. If that was the case and you have a name, again I will check it.

Now, there are some out there, both in the past and present day who copy my work, claiming it to be the same and it's not. It is usually low-ball junk that fails or is bad out of the packaging. I am not saying this is the case here, but I would not build a box without any record at all, even for my own car.

The last check I do when I blueprint a box is to mark the high lash position and then check that position for lost motion & arm position. There is no lost motion in any box I build or don't leave my shop. However, I have repaired the work of plenty who have been sold rebuilt boxes and let me tell you, they are not good.

I can't offer you any advice since who knows what was done to that box. Many builds today are nothing but painted and greased, setup wrong from the start or have bad gears.

You cannot set the preload accurately on the car and the preload is not going to change with position as lash will. True center and lash should be one and same in a textbook world, in reality they rarely are, and you need to know where it is to get a box that is truly Blueprinted, along with my other mods. To correctly do this you need to:

1. Remove the box
2. Have the correct tools to measure it
3. Understand what to look for, how it is supposed to work, and then how to address it- this you are not going to get from any manual and I am done posting my procedures since some took advantage of that.

A perfect recent example. I just finished up a 78 box on Saturday, looked great, dialed in better than anything you can buy on the market, but it didn't pass my own inspection. I broke it down to correct it. This was an usual box from the start and there is no one out there I can call for help when I have a new issue, I have to figure it out and correct it, which I did. Point being many pop these out in a couple of hours, regardless of quality and most are clueless on the correct dial in.

If you post a picture of the box maybe I can see something that will help.

Incorrect adjustments will wreck the gears in short order, that is why I told you not to touch it but it's your call. Correctly dialed in these boxes perform better than new. Done fast and cheap-..... well, you get my point.

Good luck.

Originally Posted by grumman41

Not sure why this last post was put here?
KC