I have a question for someone that has experience with th"57 Ford and a newer Ford Crown Vic, how hard would it be to take the power R&P steering system from a 2008, or newer Crown Vic and bolt into a '57 Ford... would this be more trouble than it is worth? The picture is a newer Crown Vic steering.
Looks like a front steer, 57s are rear. If you want a rear steer R&P look at the Focus and Taurus racks. But....in my humble opinion the Borgeson power box (bolts into a 57) is the way to go.
Borgenson had a booth at the NSRA event in Pueblo Co last weekend with a sample of the convertion steering box.Nice work with output shaft resplined to our application and not a lot of column mods . We thought about a rack but this is a lot simpler and cost effective for our needs.
Has anyone here actually drive both types of power steering conversions, that can give a somewhat unbiased options of the handling for both options?
Quote from: TexasFordGuy on 2011-07-07 22:33
Has anyone here actually drive both types of power steering conversions, that can give a somewhat unbiased options of the handling for both options?
That would be a really interesting input. How long has the Borgeson box been available? It's definetly from a supplier with a great reputation...unlike some of the other conversions available. I've already made my decision and purchase of the rack and pinion setup..from yellowagon (John Starks) but I'd still be interested in the comparison. (My unit is still in the box, but looks great, and John's service has been top notch). Also I'd like to see a comparison of the lock to lock difference on all the set-ups. Stock (is '58 same lock to lock?), borgeson and the rack and pinion.
Jon..the Borgeson box may be cheaper, but as far as that goes keep in mind all the components that the rack system replaces other than the box, that won't have to be replaced as you maybe would have to with a box replacement. Also the rack gives more room for exhaust, and definetly has that cool factor...but as I said, it would be really interesting to get a performance evaluation from someone who has driven both as Texas Ford Guy requested.
The Borgeson box has been out for about 10 months . I installed one on my wagon and it was a very easy install and it fits . The box comes with a new pitman arm and bolts. The box is about the same size as the stock box . I have not driven it yet because of my surgery and sill wont be able to drive it for about another 4 months
dgasman,
That box looks like the ticket when I need one. Probably last a lot longer that a rack.
The thing I would like to know is if either upgrades actually take away any of the rudeness that is caused by having the the components behind the wheels, and if so which is the better handling of the two.
Very interesting article, though it is about Mustangs, about using steering box conversions vs a rack and pinion upgrade. I know that they do have a bias due to the fact that they are selling racks, but their case makes pretty good sense. http://www.steeroids.com/html/steering_box_facts.html
From Steeroids steering box facts
Why aren't there steering box conversion kits?
There is a lot of buzz about steering box versus rack and pinion. You can search for kits that convert a rack & pinion car to a steering box and you won?t find such a kit. Unbelievable as it sounds companies are introducing ?new? steering box replacements like the Delphi 600-series power steering box. This is the equivalent to introducing ?new? flint lock rifles and claiming they are some how better than a cartridge fed rifle, it just is not true. If you like old stuff there is nothing wrong with a flint lock, or for that matter a steering box, but beware of an argument that old is better. Let?s examine the dear old steering box and see what the facts are.
Steering Feel
This is a subjective area of discussion in talking about handling, but a very important topic. Modern vehicles have significantly better ?feel? than those manufactured in the ?60?s through the ?80?s. It is not about wear either, it?s about design. If you just look at the number of parts in the linkage between the steering wheel in your hand and the front wheels there is a major difference in opportunity for slop, friction and flex between a modern rack and pinion design and an old steering box design.
On a steering box design the path to the wheels starts with the box itself which has internal gear lash (play). Next the pitman arm with a joint linking it to a center link (track rod) which as two joints for each inner tire rod. In addition to this the center link has a pivot point called an idler arm for stabilizing the end, and finally the tie rod end. Altogether seven separate connections until you are actually turning the wheel, not including the gear lash in the steering box and the clearance for the re-circulating ball bearings inside the box.
Contrast this to a rack and pinion which has gear lash as well, but no re-circulating ball bearings, and has only two joints for the tie rod ends, and two inner tie rod joints. You can see how even in a new setup there are three more points to add play, and friction, and flexing to the feel. This linkage path is integral to another element that is inherent to both designs; on center feel.
On Center Feel
This is the most noticeable difference between steering box steering and rack & pinion steering. It can be best described by the response you receive while cruising with the wheel ?on center?. The vehicle moves when you steer without lag or play. Even a new steering box with new steering parts will have lag. That is because of the extra joints for motion in the system as described in the Steering Feel Section. In addition to this it is very difficult to ?back drive? a worm and segment gear found in a steering box. Back drive is when the front tires try to drive the steering wheel back to the center position. The incline of the worm gear ( a spiral shaped gear) introduces a lot of friction that must be overcome by the natural tendency of the steering geometry to self center. The result is a vague and drifty with no center feel.
Rack and pinions have a different design with a horizontal ?rack? of gear teeth that are meshed with a pinion gear. This is a much easier physical arrangement to back drive since there is no steep incline to drive against. It is also directly driving the steering with the tie rods with no additional linkage to flex. These facts plus only four steering joints to add friction make the steering try to center itself. This gives the driver a solid, crisp on center feel that is ready to accept steering wheel inputs.
Corvette Owners With Factory Power Steering: In addition to these facts your Vette has a power steering servo valve at the end of the pitman arm. This is not like most steering box equipped cars which have the power boost built into the box. On the Corvette the pitman arm has a joint that moves as you turn the wheel. The force of turning the wheel causes a force sensor to activate the hydraulic ram in the direction you steer, and applies power boost to the to the steering. Every control system has ?dead band?, an area where no control boost is applied. Some dead band is necessary, but this dead band outside the box when added to the natural poor back drive of a steering box makes the on center position vague with a lot of steering wheel ?sawing? to keep the car pointed straight. This only gets worse with age as the joints wear.
Steering Feedback
All of the previous discussion about feel and on center feel is the basis to understand steering feedback. From the basic design limitations of a steering box it is easy to explain why a car with this system has very imprecise feedback to the driver. All the force necessary for you to feel what the car is doing is absorbed in rotary joints and linkage needed to make the system work. If you add wear on those joints you have a steering system that is ambiguous to drive, it is not ?telling? you what you really need to know. This is especially true if you are cornering hard up to the limit of available traction. The last thing you want when the tires are howling is to have no clue what the front end is doing.
Feedback is also affected by the amount of boost your power steering has, if so equipped. This is why a few drivers prefer manual steering over power, but that does not need to be the case. A properly designed power steering system is just as good if not better that a manual system. For one thing fatigue is a factor. That is why most race cars have power assisted steering. Make sure you consider the amount of boost you will get if you are converting. There are ways to limit this with certain pumps. It is well worth the effort to have a car that handles well at speed and that you can easily maneuver to park with the added friction of wide tires, so don?t dismiss the power steering option.
After reading the article I feel it is a sales job for his R & P system. While all he says has validity (some more, some less) he is talking out the side of his mouth. There are kits to do the swap. The old worm and sector been around for years, worked well for years, not the best system but it did the job. For all of his points to be valid (100%) the rest of the suspension system will need serious updating as well!
The geometry and components are no where near the same as what is available today nor is the system as tight as todays systems are. Suspension systems are designed as a whole, not one part at a time. All the individual components are matched to all the other components in the system and work in concert with each other to give the "feel, feed back and centering" he is talking about. Changing one component of the current system (57 Ford for example) is not going to give the same driving characteristics as the donor vehicle enjoyed.
Now having said all of that, I installed a "Butches Rod Shop" rack kit in a friend's 50 Chevy many years ago. I used the kit and a rack, power steering pump and lines from a mid 80s Grand Prix. The kit was well designed, installed with no modifications and worked well. Did the car drive like an 80 Grand Prix, no, it drove like a 50 Chevy except touchier. The turning radius was slightly reduced and the straight down the road feel took much getting used to. I under drove the pump trying to get rid of a "twitch". He loved the in town ease of manuevering but we messed with toe-in and alignment for weeks to get the "twitch" out of the thing. Finally settled on 3/16" toe out, as much caster as could be gotten out of that old king pin system (1.5 +) and zero camber to make it feel right to him.
So....in my humble opinion.....the rack, while good, has no advantage over a later model box, assisted or not.
Sounds like 57fordsforever need to setup a test lab and have the manufactures shoot this out :002:
lot of good points to consider on both sides. The Lincoln Mark viii's had a setup that would automatically adjust the steering response according to the highway speed. That provided a car with manuverability in the parking lots without the over-touchyness at high speeds. Probably much too complicated to adapt to the '57 R & P systems. As Bill said, though you can't expect to replace one component of a system and get a radically improved setup....steering is just one component of handling. As for me, I'm hoping to just improve on parking lot manuverability without it being too touchy at high speeds...too touchy meaning, in my case, no more touchy than a late model car. I'm expecting it to be different and will be taking some gettin use to..but that's the whole point isn't it?
Actually, ..lol..it's been so long since I've actually driven my '57, no matter what it drives like when I get it back on the road will be something I'm not "use to".
Has anyone that has done the R & P conversion on their '57 Ford experienced the same problems Bill brought up with the '50 Chevy?
I'll ask again..does anybody know if the new boxes, such as the Borgensen, have a quicker lock-to-lock than the stock boxes? Rich
TFG & FBB.
That's ome interesting stuff, thanks for posting that.
the information i have say the new boxes are a 16 to 1 ratio with about 3 1/2 turns lock to lock[my ranchero is about 5 turns]
I've installed Johns R & P steering on my '57 and it's a bolt in kit liked advertised,it's also a very well built and I've put over 1500 miles on it! Ford blue Bloods 2nd paragraph describes it exactly--- does it drive like a new Mustang?--No! Did it lose some turning radius?--Yes (curb to curb on a 2-lane-no, it's a 3 pointer on a 4 lane yes of course). Is it twitchy--Yes-I'm constantly turning the steering wheel right and left a few degrees to keep the steering wheel centered!(I'm running the stock Ford powersteering pump)Would a 1 1/4"front sway bar help it? Would I do it again---Noo(my own personal opinion)for the money spent--R&P kit,special hoses,alignment,etc.,I'd just rebuild the entire frontend and add power disc brakes and any left over money would go back into the car else where! Would someone else's experience be different? possibly? But I followed the instructions by the numbers and can't find anything in the assembly wrong and had a couple of frontend experts check it out and they both gave it a thumbs-up.Not to be negative on this only informative,so anyone with a different experience chime-in,always willing to learn! KID
I started out with a GEARHEADS CRUISER PRODUCTS 605 box 'P.O.S' AND IT COMES WITH no CUSTOMER SERVICE. next we installed a wurth-it rack.BEEN DRIVING CAR FOR ALMOST 4years with no trouble.The car drives as good as my late modle CROWN VIC. If this dosen't do it I can show some pictures of GEARHEADS workmanship,that should do it
Kid if you can get about 6 degrees positive caster in the alignment that might help. That ol 50 just wasn't set up to put that much caster in it and that might have helped a lot with it. That much caster will grab the tar strips in the road and increase the slow speed tight turn steering effort some. After the caster is pushed out then play with the toe-in/out.
Bagboy..what are you using for a pump? Rich
Ford Blue Blood, Thanks for the tip! right now I'm running 1.3 degrees positive caster on both sides with 0.15 positive toe both sides and 1.3 degrees positive camber again on both sides. So you think going to 6 degrees positive caster and playing with the toe-in/toe-out will help the twitchiness at speed and how will it effect tire wear?Also what range would I be looking for as far as toe-in/out? Again, thanks for the tip! KID
Changing the caster will not effect your tire wear. I would definately get rid of the positive camber! Get the camber to zero or even 1/4 negative! That may be one contributor to the "twitch". As far as toe goes it's a crap shoot, start with the minimum stock specs call for, drive it, make an adjustment and drive again. Always use the same road for your test drives to make sure what you are doing is giving what results.
Ford pump 60's ,off 68 must. I think
Also forgot to mention....make sure your pulley sizes match the original. Running the pump too fast will make things wierd and too slow will increase effort.
Bill: Would a too large of a pump pulley cause the problem Kid is having..being too touchy? Logic would tell me it would if too small a pump pulley increases effort required. Rich
Crank pulley vs pump pulley. Generally speaking the pump is driven at a lower RPM then the crank......crank pulley is a smaller diameter then the pump pulley. Running the pump faster would raise the pressure and would give him the symptoms listed. Still need to bring that camber in to zero or a very small negative.
American cars are designed on purpose to under steer (older and general transportation types) as it is the easiest situation to get out of. The car will not turn, the front end "plows", to correct simply slow down, this is done by the suspension design. (or lack of) As the body rolls in a turn the outside wheel actually tilts out on the top, the inside wheel tilts in at the top, net result is reduced tire contact.
The positive camber actually exagerates the action and starts it earlier. 1.3 is a butt load of camber either way and will cause excessive tire wear.
Bill, You got me curious so I went out to check the pullys,I have a stock '57 pump running a 3 3/4"-4" pully measuring acrossed the face (lip to lip) and a 7"--3 groove crank pully(also measured across face) are these right?Now to find a good frontend aligment person,most use computer programed alignment machines that don't go back to '57.The settings I gave was set after I gave the alignment specs out of the '57 shop manuel to the tech! So your saying he blew it on the settings listed? KID
Bill...trying to dot my I's and cross my T's, I've got more questions popping up in my head..
First... are the front end alignment specs you were talking about for '57 Fords in general regardless of steering set-up, or adjustments to help the over sensitivity of the Rack and Pinion set-up?
Second...trying to understand the whole pump vs. pulley thing...with the Rack and pinion in mind...I'm assuming some things here
A) different pumps may operate in different pressure ranges (although most I'm guessing would be the same range)
B) I would think you would normally want to use a pump operating in the range the (Cavalier) rack was made for, but since the rack is being used on the '57's rather than a cavalier, would that still be the case?
C) With pulley size affecting pump pressure output and therefore "touchyness" of the R & P, it seems to me that engine rpm would also affect it..which means the faster your going, the touchier the steering response..backwards it seems from what you would want. (brings to mind the Mark viii setup again). That seems like it would also mean that if we had two '57's with identical setups except for drivetrain gear ratios resulting in different rpm's at a given speed than the other, that the one operating at the higher rpm's for the same mph would have a touchier steering setup...meaning that what would work for one car may be a little different for another? It would seem like the pumps should have been designed to operate within the same pressure range at a minimum rpm thru the higher rpm's and regardless of pulley sizes or rpm's... or even better..less pressure the higher the rpm's.. Rich
Also..
Kid: LOL.. One of the things I thought I was going to miss on my '57 with the change-over to Rack and pinion was the fact that I sort of enjoyed the old car feel of having to constantly be moving the steering wheel.
The reason I keep thinking about the Mark viii set-up is my plans are for the 4.6 dohc out of a Mark...so I'm wondering if there is anything I can do to also transplant the automatic steering response adjustment feature of the Mark viii...or if I'm going to get it anyways if it happens to be a function of the Markviii steering pump. Also...I'll be using a hydro-boost brake booster which is powered from the steering pump..so I'm wondering if that will affect the R&P? If it is only the Mark viii steering pump that is what controls the touchyness of the response, it seemps like they would be a good choice for all those with R & P setups.
Nothing in life is simple is it...I need another nap. Rich
Lots going on here.....Kid first, not sure of the pulley size as I do not have a power steering 57 to look at. My 351C setup in my 36 is the same size pulley on the crank and the pump. Could be right, the book calls for 700 - 900 psi output from the pump. Alignment specs given on page 4 - 4 of the book call for caster to be 1/2 - 1 1/2 degrees, camber 1/2 - 1 1/2 degrees and toe 1/16 - 1/8. The small caster spec is to ease the steering effort. Not sure where your guy got the specs from but they don't make sense, going with the stock specs but increasing the caster is the way to go in my mind.
Rich, The front end specs should be the same reggardless of the steering system used. Changing them from stock will have predictable effects, some good, some bad. Increasing caster tends to make the car track straighter with no input, the wheel returns home after a turn easier, but steering effort is increased. And as is the case with most everything....more is not necessarily better....3 - 6 caster, 1/4 - 1 camber and toe all need to be taken with a grain of salt. Those numbers should put you close to a comfortable drive.
Pumps and pulleys, I believe the new systems run at a much lower range then the older systems did. I have a number stuck in the back of my head but can't reference it, that the Muzstang II rack is in the 3 - 400 range.
Yes, the ideal set up is to use the same pump and pulley ratio as the donar vehicle. The 50 Chevy I did I used all the parts from the donor but did swap the pulley on the pump to match the ratio from the Grand Prix.
The pumps all have a pressure relief valve on the output fitting to keep them in a specific range of pressure and flow. But if the pressure increase to a point beyond the valve limits it will reflect into the system as a higher pressure. Doing a little math with pulley ratios will show a great RPM increase in pump speed with just a 1 inch increase in crank pulley size. Not sure how the Mark VIII did there variable ratio steering. My 98 LSC had a vacumn booster,some of the earlier 4.6 Mustangs and the Terminator had hydro booster, not sure the MK VIII ever did....
Hope evryone is thouroughly confused now....
Lots of great info, Bill. Thanks. You and Gary (Canadian Ranchero) are like having a set of interactive encyclopedias. I've got to print out this thread and put it in my "Rich's '57" book for reference when I get to that point.
P.S. You are correct, the Marks did not have hydro-boosts..I got mine of an '01 (?) Mustang. I'll see if I can find out more info on the variable steering system in the Mark.
i agree with the more caster to help the steering feel.i have been researching using the mark varyable assist p/s system,but am not sure if it is compatable with the hydra-boost.96-02 mustang do not have the varyable assist,so not sure if the lower pressers will operate the hydro-boost properly.more research is needed
When it came time to set the camber, caster and toe in on my ranchero, we went to the ford shop manual. They had different settings for squad cars, wagons and other vehicles. We went with a setting close to the squad/ambulance. 3/4 degrees negative camber, 1 degree positive caster. This car has manual steering and drives quite well. I have gone through the suspension and steering, everything isn't new , but its all tight. I did have a bit of slop in the box, I adjusted some out. I think I set the toe in about a 16th out. I always felt if you had a loose end in the steering, that it would increase the toe out on the highway. We set everything ourselves with a camber/ caster gauge common to circle trackers. And a simple toe gauge. How did you arrive at 6 degrees positive? On dirt late models we would put a ton of negative caster on power steering cars, when you turn right it dropped a ton of weight on the left rear. Mark
70 Boss 302 SCCA B sedan, with the other mods 6 gave a real good tire patch and even heat build across the tread on most "skill" tracks and really worked well on high speed tracks. Pretty much by the "book" from Ford. Many newer Hi Po cars run 4 -5 from the factory.....
we are only saying to use more caster on a rack or p/s box change over that has vague or twitchy steering.if you have stock manual steering stay with the stock caster
Yes, if you tried to run 6 degrees with the stock worm and sector you would truely understand "power steering by armstrong"!
I realize this is a very old post, but it's a subject that's still current, and as they say, "I've Been There & Done That".
In the late '70's I built a crewcab '57 Ranchero to tow my race car. I swapped in a 460 so it would have enough power to get the job done, but this motor is very heavy and I knew steering effort would be an issue. My solution was a, at the time, late model Ford truck power gear. This box actually fits very well, with one of the stock bolt holes in the right place, I added a bolt hole, and welded a tube on top of the frame for the 3rd one. I used a old tie rod ball & taper to reforge the taper in the steering arm the opposite direction so the cross link would work.
However, with the 460 being so large the stock exhaust manifold wouldn't clear the Ford truck gear, so I built a set of Tri-Y headers. With almost any other engine this wouldn't be necessary, such as a FE, a Y-block, or a Ford small block.
I've also done several Chevy Caviler rack & pinion swaps in '54 to '56 Fords. As others have pointed out one of the problem with these early front ends is a lack of positive caster, there is also one other problem when using a rack, the steering arms are to long. On the '54 to '56's it's easily solved by machining custom steering arms, because the stock arm is removable, but not so on the '57 to '64's.
I once had a '57 Custom 300 with Fatman spindles, they are fabricated from steel stock, so he should be able to build a set with shorter steering arms.
As for the caster problem, so far I've never found a good solution, I've looked at moving the upper control arm bracket rearward, but haven't had the opportunity to try it.