Steering Ratio
Thread Starter
Racer
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
From: Rochester NY
Steering Ratio
I understand the two holes in the steering arms allow you to change the steering ratio in C3s. My stock '75 has the tie rods in the forward set of holes. I am changing the tie rod ends and wonder what the difference is in handling between using the front vs. rear hole set up.
The rear set seems to have a plug (aluminum) in it. Can it be drilled out to accomodate?
As always, thanks in advance!
The rear set seems to have a plug (aluminum) in it. Can it be drilled out to accomodate?
As always, thanks in advance!
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 124
From: Wichita KS
Re: Steering Ratio (HDFLH67)
I understand the two holes in the steering arms allow you to change the steering ratio in C3s. My stock '75 has the tie rods in the forward set of holes. I am changing the tie rod ends and wonder what the difference is in handling between using the front vs. rear hole set up.
The rear set seems to have a plug (aluminum) in it. Can it be drilled out to accomodate?....
The rear set seems to have a plug (aluminum) in it. Can it be drilled out to accomodate?....
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,001
Likes: 112
From: Saginaw Michigan
Re: Steering Ratio (Matt Gruber)
The Chevrolet shop manual says that vehicles with power steering should NOT have the tie rods installed in the rearmost (longest arm) holes. They never gave the reason but I always thought that something (between the control valve, hoses, or the assist cylinder) might interfere with something underhood when you turned the steering wheel from full lock to full lock.
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,013
Likes: 79
From: central FL, near the beach.
Re: Steering Ratio (Jim Shea)
well it does seem to use all the hose turned max.
unless the reasons are given, i have no idea what they were thinking. could simply be they want it assembled as they designed it. like: NEVER INSTALL STRAIGHT PIPE IN PLACE OF THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER :lol:
my guess is they worried the ram would not have enough stroke. But, after 14 years, mine seems OK :yesnod:
[Modified by Matt Gruber, 10:24 AM 2/17/2004]
unless the reasons are given, i have no idea what they were thinking. could simply be they want it assembled as they designed it. like: NEVER INSTALL STRAIGHT PIPE IN PLACE OF THE CATALYTIC CONVERTER :lol:
my guess is they worried the ram would not have enough stroke. But, after 14 years, mine seems OK :yesnod:
[Modified by Matt Gruber, 10:24 AM 2/17/2004]
Le Mans Master
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 6,001
Likes: 112
From: Saginaw Michigan
Re: Steering Ratio (Matt Gruber)
The shop manual does allow for the manual steering to be installed in either steering arm hole. It advises that effort will be substantially higher if you use the rearmost hole with manual steering. So they must have had a reason.
I wonder if big blocks might have had some kind of interference, and the warning just carried over after the engine was dropped in 1974.
I wonder if big blocks might have had some kind of interference, and the warning just carried over after the engine was dropped in 1974.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Explosive Corvettes Ever Made: Power-to-Weight Ratio Ranked!
Joe Kucinski
150 hp to 1,250 hp: Every Corvette Generation Compared by the Specs That Matter
Joe Kucinski
8 Coolest Corvette Pace Cars (and Replicas) of All Time
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvette Engines RANKED by Peak Torque (70+ Years of Muscle!)
Joe Kucinski
Corvette ZR1X Will Be Pacing the Indy 500, And Could Probably Race, Too!
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Corvettes Coming to Mecum Indy 2026!
Brett Foote
Top 10 C9 Corvette MUST-HAVES to Fix These C8 Generation Flaws!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Revolutionary 'Corvette Firsts' Most People Don't Know
Joe Kucinski
5 Reasons to Upgrade to an LS6-Powered Corvette; 5 Reasons to Stay LT2
Michael S. Palmer
Race Director
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 11,520
Likes: 13
From: CORVETTE 77 385 C.I. TEXAS
Re: Steering Ratio (Jim Shea)
This 2 position setup has been known by performance enthusiasts a long time.
I knew it before I had a Vette & it was on the list to check & put in the fast position if not. For performance the fast position would be used since at speed there is no need for the slower position.
The slow postion was to make manual steering easier as mentioned. No need w/ PS therefore PS would use the fast position.
Since the 2 position setup has been known by performance enthusiasts a long time, it could have been moved from the factory position on some cars. Of course some could have put the PS one in the slow position by mistake.
I knew it before I had a Vette & it was on the list to check & put in the fast position if not. For performance the fast position would be used since at speed there is no need for the slower position.
The slow postion was to make manual steering easier as mentioned. No need w/ PS therefore PS would use the fast position.
Since the 2 position setup has been known by performance enthusiasts a long time, it could have been moved from the factory position on some cars. Of course some could have put the PS one in the slow position by mistake.
Race Director
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,013
Likes: 79
From: central FL, near the beach.
Re: Steering Ratio (Ganey)
well, it's only~15%.
if it was 1.7 vs. 3.4, THAT would be dramatic.
for comparison, i recall some manual cars that were 4.5 in the 60's.
.
3.4 is a bit more precise on high speed lane changes, imo, than 2.9. But for autocross i would recommend the 2.9.(or 1.7 LOL)
if it was 1.7 vs. 3.4, THAT would be dramatic.
for comparison, i recall some manual cars that were 4.5 in the 60's.
.
3.4 is a bit more precise on high speed lane changes, imo, than 2.9. But for autocross i would recommend the 2.9.(or 1.7 LOL)
