Okay, here it is in a nut shell. I have this '57 Ranchero that I have put a '95 Mark VIII 4.6 twin cam in and was going to go with the Cavalier power rack and pinion.
I've had two strokes and have had to learn to walk and talk and all of the other crap that goes along with it all over again.
I have the Cavalier rack and would like to just put a nice later model power steering box in this car and be done with it. I'd like to drive it before I'm dead... :005:
Anyone know of a later model power steering box that's a bolt in replacement? It would make my life so much easier to bolt it in with the OEM steering linkage and be done with it than to fab up the bracketry and find a column etc.
I was told a '70's F150 might work, I was also told that multiple power steering boxes from later model Ford cars will work... Anybody know which ones???
There are multiple HIGH dollar rack units out there and of course the Borgeson $650 and up boxes. Unfortunately, I don't have that kind of cash lying around these days.
So, I am forced to find a low dollar fix for my high dollar situation.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Who's R & P kit do you have? If it's John Starks', it's pretty much a bolt on kit. I'm puzzled by the "needing brackets made"? I think what the guys in the know are going to tell you is that the '57's steering column is unique to that year only, and whatever you end up with is going to need similar column mods to what the R & P that you already have is going to need.
If you end up going with the rack setup, pick up some MM to AN banjo fittings from www.purechoicemotorsports.com for the rack end of the hoses. It makes fitting the hoses much easier.
Sorry to hear about your stroke, that's a real bummer. If you typed that opening post, that's a really good indication your well on your way to recovery.
Off subject, but do you have the 4.6 running? You probably know that's what I put in mine.......best decision I made on the car, and that's after almost 25k miles.
I just reread your post, and I'm now understanding you don't have a rack KIT, just the rack, and that's the reason for the bracket needs?
Rich, yes I had to learn to type all over again too. I am now a two stroke, just like my favorite motorcycle, Kawasaki H2 750.
Not something I would suggest trying for yourself. Everyone has something....
I am trying desperately to get this car in a state that I can drive it and possibly even paint it and make it look like it should. It's coming along fairly well here of late, we had to replumb our house, copper pipe where I come from, Chicago area, lasts for 120 years, here in Arizona, it lasted exactly 38! That was a major setback to this build. I am back at it again and helping a friend build his '59 Ranchero at the same time. So, I have plenty to keep me busy, but I just need to figure out what I'm gonna use for power steering.
I can't afford any of the kits and have to use what's left of my brain to come up with a good fitting and proper acting power steering box for this car. Don't know if I will fab the necessary bracketry for the rack or will I go with a new power steering box out of a ????
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for chiming in and helping with the MM and AN banjo fittings. I forgot about the metric fittings on that rack... But, I believe the Mark VIII power steering pump is metric also, have to make sure, confusion is my constant companion these days. Now I'm battling Leukemia and the Chemo is a real pain to have to deal with as well.
Like I said, everybody has something.... :005:
Like Rich says, short of full new kits there isn't really a bolt on that won't require some mod's or fabrication at this point. Even if you put a later 61-64 steering box in it (which does bolt on) your pump would need to be restricted since the pressure is higher than the old Ford stuff.
That part might not be too difficult since GM pumps were always tuned down in pressure for early Mustang R&P in street rods with SBC motors.
But then you have the steering column to deal with. So column swap would also be needed. You could get an aftermarket one with GM wiring on it for about $250, or maybe a 61-64 column would work just as well and save a few bucks. Either would probably require mod's too, though.
I did bolt all the refurbished 63 stuff on my 57, (except automatic column which I still have). Then I got a 58 parts car with PS system all intact and so swapped that in with rebuilt slave and hoses instead. That allowed me to keep my stick on the column, where I thought I might be unicorn hunting for a 61-64 stick column that would probably still need more mod's to fit 57 pedal bracket and dash.
I would think the fastest (if steering linkage clearances are still roughly the same, is to use a 58-59 complete PS system (again, assuming stock linkage clears the 4.6 oil pan and exhaust), restrict your pump down to about 700 PSI and make custom hoses.
But, by the time you found a 58-59 setup and reconditioned it, you could probably have finished your Cavalier rack install anyway. Maybe best to stick roughly to the original plan at this point.
There is a thread on "Squarebirds" website showing a Cavalier rack installed on 58 Fairlane and that info should be transferable to yours if engine swap hasn't complicated linkage clearance issues. That install even retained the stock column (cut off above steering gear, bushed on firewall end and shaft end ground to a "D").
But, it still required multiple U joints and a stabilizer Heim joint to connect to the rack. Retained the stock outer tie rod ends as well though, but with hardened Heim joints used as inside tie rod ends. He used a later Mustang PS pump on the FE and new straight sprint car tie rods available cheap from Speedway.
Similar do-it-yourself swaps have been done on 58-60 TBirds, though usually with the stock motor in place. A guy in Iowa sent me pics of his homemade brackets with Cavalier rack on a TBird that are very similar to those made for the Fairlane R&P swap shown on the TBird site. He used an aftermarket tilt column.
Said the hardest part was positioning the rack to make the mounts for it. For both those conversions, the rack mounts were attached thru idler arm and steering gear original frame bolt holes and the stabilizer Heim attached to existing frame holes for Z bar (which presumably, you won't need either with an automatic).
This forum has discussed tons of options for manual to PS swaps. It is a very popular upgrade. I've searched several times for a cheap swap. I've done both the R&P and OEM swaps. Both swaps have pros and cons. If you use the SEARCH feature, you can spend most of the day reading the previous posts with PICs. So far, there is no cheap PS swap. Access to a free donor car would be the cheapest. But a OEM swap can still be expensive. Sending out the steering valve for a custom rebuild is about $350-400. Hoses will kill $100. So even with free OEM components, this swap can easily eat more than $450. The R&P swap is a good option but the rack is the cheapest part. Lots of fabrication, lots of little expensive parts.
For the OEM PS upgrade on the Raunch Wagon, I found a $100, '64 Galaxie for a donor and thought I had scored. After valve rebuild, hoses, cylinder, cylinder install kit, idler arm bushings, turn signal switch, horn buttons, rag joint...well, so much for a cheap swap. The OEM '57 PS pump had a 700# relief valve where as the '64 Galaxie relief valve is 1000#. The Raunch Wagon sports a '96 E150 351W PS pump with NO flow/pressure modifications and steers great.
Gary, does your Raunch Wagon have a John Starks R&P set up..........or is the R&P on another '57 you own? The reason I ask is I have a 351 EFI Motor from a '95 F150 and a John Starks R&P for my Ranchero, and will need to plumb it and a Hydro Boost at some point in the future and wondered if the factory P/S pump ('95 vintage ) would work............assuming it is the same as a '96 and second assumption that the Raunch Wagon has the R&P etc.
If it won't work.........do you know what will work?
Thanks
John
The wagon has OEM '64 Galaxie components. The '57 Custom has R&P that I made before kits were available (Wirth-it was around but availability was sketchy at best). The Custom is equipped the Caviler style rack and '76 Lincoln donated Bendix hydraulic brake booster and PS pump with NO pressure/flow reducer. The wagon has a '96 E150 351W with the E150 pump, '64 Galaxie PS valve, and '97 Mustang GT hydraulic brake booster and NO pressure/flow reducer. I think your combo will work...at least I would try it. If you want documentation, put in a call to the engineers at Cardone Remanufacturers. Tell them what you have and ask for compatibility. I've called them twice and they were super. They even researched and emailed '57 PS information.
Thank you Gary. Great information and Yes, I'll make that call to Cardone.
?
Did I get your name wrong?
I was just acknowledging your comments and one of the several layers of software decided to change my response to a question mark.
John.............mine has a Starks R & P, a Mustang hydroboost, and the ps pump is the stock Lincoln 4.6 with no pressure reducer. Works great. The first week of driving the car, I blew out the Cavalier rack, but I'm sure it was a faulty rack. I replaced it with the same and no issues after 25k miles.
Well, after careful consideration and all of the kind helpful posts, I am going to stop beating a dead horse :deadhorse:.
I am going to have to save up my money and buy a Borgeson unit...
It seems to be the quickest way to have power steering and the wheels on the ground.
I appreciate everyone chiming in with suggestions.
Have a Blessed Christmas everyone!
Quote from: dmkberger on 2018-12-06 13:13
I am going to have to save up my money and buy a Borgeson unit...
It seems to be the quickest way to have power steering and the wheels on the ground.
You better have lots of space between your stock steering box & your Lincoln engine. The Borgeson box is wider than the stock steering box. The Ranchero I bought has a stock 390 & the Borgeson box. The top edge of the Borgeson box was in hard contact with the stock 390 log type exhaust manifold.
Don't know how those goofballs managed to put this together.
Keep in mind that you will also have to modify your steering column to fit the Borgeson box. Saw posts in here saying, among other things the steering column's shaft had to be shortened, turned down etc. They used a spendy aftermarket steering column on my Ranchero.
If you can find one of the newer Ford power boxes & steering columns mentioned in this thread you might get off a lot cheaper. No older parts in the junkyards here. I want to get rid of the C6 in my Ranchero & install a 4 speed. I have almost all the parts needed but can not find a used FE stick shift flywheel here. Aftermarket flywheels & their shipping to here gets real spendy.
Here's a ton of links for you to look thru.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site+//57fordsforever.com/smf/index.php+borgeson+steering+box&lr=&safe=off&hl=en&ei=piQMXJqHF-O50PEPioyOeA&start=10&sa=N&ved=0ahUKEwia8u7RhJHfAhXjHDQIHQqGAw8Q8tMDCI4B&biw=870&bih=509
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1&ei=Qh0TW_36A43B0PEPiOyd2Aw&q=Borgeson++power+steering+box+in+1957+ford&oq=Borgeson++power+steering+box+in+1957+ford&gs_l=psy-ab.12..33i22i29i30k1.1757874.1768631.0.1776450.13.13.0.0.0.0.456.2865.0j3j9j0j1.13.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.12.2657...0j0i22i30k1j33i160k1.0.3gZRA2VTmF4
I thought I've read many times the Borg. box was smaller than the oem????
I had one in the car when I got it... I traded it and now regret it.
I am going to measure that same box in the '57 Fairlane it went into and will determine whether or not it will work.
I just want the damn thing to steer so I can move on and get it running and driving...
It is by about 3/8". There are great dimensions out there, remember seeing them somewhere, not sure if it was on their web site. Basically any box/rack from 62 and newer will require steering column modifications. The 62 Bird column I used is stock length, just did a little trim on the end to fit the rag joint on to it.
quote Bill:"It is by about 3/8".............was that in reply to Tom's statement that it is larger, or mine saying I thought it was smaller?
Quote from: RICH MUISE on 2018-12-08 19:24
I thought I've read many times the Borg. box was smaller than the oem????
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y146/TomIII/smilies/Doanno.gif) You may be right, Rich. Not sure thouugh. It wouldn't be the first time I'd got one of these steering box measurements confused/wrong. Might depend on how or where someone measured.
I got to wondering if it was how high the different boxes sat up from the frame caused the clearance problem with my 390 exhaust manifold.
So just before it got dark this afternoon I trudged out in the cold & snow* to
again take some measurements on the ratty '58 Ranchero's steering box.
*(Ha! there must only be 1 or 2" of snow left out there right now after all the freeze & thaw stuff that's been going on here.)
Sort of surprised to find that the '58 box must be 1.5" to 2" shorter from the frame top than the Borg. Can't measure from the same exact point on the frame because of the '58's different shape from the Borg box.
Couple pix with the best measurements I could do. I think the ones of the Borg box are pretty accurate.
Quote from: dmkberger on 2018-12-08 20:29
I just want the damn thing to steer so I can move on and get it running and driving...
I hear that! From what you're saying it sounds like you do not have a steering box or column at all. Bad news!
Don't know how I lost this but I
finally found the article where they put a Borgeson box into a '57. My Borg box does not have that mounting plate that they show welded to the box.
They go into the modifications needed to the steering column. Just keep scrolling down. Some of the pix may be a little slow to load but they seem to do a good job of describing things.
https://www.hotrod.com/articles/borgeson-universal-power-steering-50s-60s-cars/
The photo of the Borgenson box with the FE shows very little clearance between the iron exhaust manifold and the steering box. One would have to wonder if the heat from the exhaust manifold would not be detrimental concerning the lube inside the box. Even the Hot Rod article, showing a 57 with a 302 and stock exhaust manifolds looks fairly close. I think any headers for a FE engine with the Borgenson box would be problematic. I will try to put up a couple of photos of my 59s stock steering box, with a 428FE, and the FPA headers made specifically for the 57-59 Ford cars.
Quote from: 59meteor on 2018-12-09 23:58
The photo of the Borgenson box with the FE shows very little clearance between the iron exhaust manifold and the steering box.
Actually there is zero clearance. It
is touching the exhaust manifold midway between the #7 & #8 exhaust ports.
It was worse with even more area in contact but by doing some grinding on the box & manifold I had gained a very minimal amount of clearance between them. Haven't quite figured out how that clearance went away after a while but do have my theories. I did run across an old post where someone had the same problem with the stock 390 manifold & an aftermarket steering box.
Quote from: 59meteor on 2018-12-09 23:58I think any headers for a FE engine with the Borgenson box would be problematic.
Some, maybe most, headers would be better since there is some open space where the corner of the Borg box is touching the stock manifold.
lalessi1, aka Lynn, has an FE with FPA headers & does have decent clearance to the Borgenson box.
This short thread covers it.
http://57fordsforever.com/smf/index.php?topic=7501.msg63896#msg63896
After rereading one of his posts there I think I'll try his method of moving the engine over with a 1/2" thick spacer between the block & motor mount.
And, yeah, please post your pix.
Quote from: RICH MUISE on 2018-12-09 07:55
quote Bill:"It is by about 3/8".............was that in reply to Tom's statement that it is larger, or mine saying I thought it was smaller?
The 3/8 was/is the distance from the frame to the outside of the Borgeson box. In other words more clearance. Given the tight quarters involved with the FE and the huge number of different exhaust manifolds for the FE any given installation will be different and should not be construed as the "end of the story".
Example, the 57 Ranch wagon I had had a 360 from a 74 truck. Absolutely no clearance issues at all. The photo doesn't show the clearance real well because the angle is off but there was a good "fat finger" room between the two. 58 Fords and Edsels had FEs in them all day long with no fitment issues. Bottom line.....it just depends....
I know I have more room between my Borgeson and the FPA headers than I had with a '58 box. My '58 box didn't hit the stock FE exhaust manifold. I guess the Borgeson can interfere because of the overall shape???
Quote from: Ford Blue blood on 2018-12-10 07:44
58 Fords and Edsels had FEs in them all day long with no fitment issues. Bottom line.....it just depends....
We know that the '58s with FEs worked fine with the stock steering boxes. Your pic shows a stock steering box.
A member here with only 7 posts, '1958ford', had the same zero clearance to stock exhaust manifold problem when installing a Borg box in his '58 with an FE. Don't know what he did but in his next couple, & last, posts he was looking for headers.
Would be a lot easier to get accurate measurements of how far these different steering boxes protrude into the engine compartment if there wasn't an engine in there. However I'm measuring from above to an inside fender well on two very different cars that have been 'messed with'. No tellin' how well those fender wells are aligned or fitting!
Near as I can tell from that is that the Borg box only protrudes about 5/16" more than a '58 box at its widest point.
:deadhorse:
Tom, just a thought... I have seen on this forum that stock Y block motor mounts should be turned around when used on an FE. I used mine in the stock direction???
Found the dimensions for the Borgeson box. While this box it the one used on midsized Fords (Must, Fairlane, etc.) it is the exact same box as the one used for 52 - 62 full size Fords. The flange is the exact same thickness for both kits so the measurements from this one will translate directly to the box used on the 57/58s.
I have stock 57 and 58 boxes off the frame I can measure... I will do it tomorrow.
Quote from: lalessi1 on 2018-12-11 08:18
Tom, just a thought... I have seen on this forum that stock Y block motor mounts should be turned around when used on an FE. I used mine in the stock direction???
My mounts are in the same way as yours. It wouldn't change the clearance to the steering box in any case.
Quote from: lalessi1 on 2014-11-22 09:06... I looked at the mounts when I got them and it appeared to me that they wouldn't move the engine forward or backward very much. ...
Likewise. I bought some mounts before buying this car since I planned to swap a 390 into the '58.
Quote from: lalessi1 on 2014-11-22 09:06
... the metal face to the front and the open part to the rear. That puts the left valve cover about 1/2"-3/4" from the firewall and the fan about 1" from the radiator. ...
Same here. Base of left valve cover about 3/4" from the firewall.
But there is no room for a fan spacer as is shown in your pic here in the post I got those quotes from.
http://57fordsforever.com/smf/index.php?topic=5360.msg41391#msg41391
This seems strange since our engines seem to be in the same position fore & aft. I may be mistaken but I don't think Ford ever made different length water pumps for FEs. Are our radiators mounted differently? I believe my stock radiator is in the original position.
It will be interesting to compare your stock box's dimensions to what Bill gave us for the Borgeson.
390, no fan spacer.
An oem radiator for the six cylinder would have been mounted forward of the 8 cylinder radiator. I think by 1 1/2 or so, but that's just a guess. Moving the 8 cyl radiator forward an inch or so is a simple process, particularly if the car doesn't have the hood installed.
All of the core supports are the same, it's a matter of the flanges on the 6 vs the 8 radiators that place them differently.
Tom, your engine does seem a lot more to the front than mine. not knowing where the interference between the box and the manifold was I was just thinking out loud.
The 6 cylinder radiator has the mounting flanges flush with the front face of the radiator, the 8 cylinder rad has flanges flush with the rear face. The stock radiator can be moved forward until it hits the splash pan. I did that with mine to accommodated the A/C, PS billet brackets. The engine pic is before that was done. I looked at measuring the '58 box last night and measuring it accurately will take a little more effort than I thought at first.
Quote from: lalessi1 on 2018-12-12 09:05
Tom, your engine does seem a lot more to the front than mine. not knowing where the interference between the box and the manifold was I was just thinking out loud.
The 6 cylinder radiator has the mounting flanges flush with the front face of the radiator, the 8 cylinder rad has flanges flush with the rear face. The stock radiator can be moved forward until it hits the splash pan. I did that with mine to accommodated the A/C, PS billet brackets. The engine pic is before that was done.
With my left valve cover being about like yours at 3/4" from the firewall I think our engines are in the same place fore and aft. The pic I posted in reply #18 shows right where the box and the manifold meet. Before I did some grinding on the manifold & the box it was worse. The box was in contact for about a whole inch instead of that one point at the corner.
I still can't figure where the tiny amount of clearance I had after grinding things down disappeared to.
Oh, you got your 6 & V8 radiator flange locations mixed up there.
I'm sure you know that the 6 cylinder radiator flanges are flush with the back of the radiator to make room for the longer six.
I started wondering if maybe you took this pic of your engine after you moved your radiator forward but before installing the A/C, PS billet brackets but it looks to still be in the original position. You fan spacer is at least an inch thick & with my engine at 3/4" from the firewall there's no way my engine could move back an inch without firewall mods.
The pic you posted was my 390 and that pic was taken when I still had the '57 box, no clearance issues... My valve cover pic shows the bolts I used for the accelerator pedal... the valve cover hit the screws, it is that close. Yea I had the front and back reversed on the radiator stuff...whoops. The other issue that clouds the whole conversation is that I had to put the brackets that hold the engine back on the crossmember, they had been "modified" when I bought the car. I have seen the factory oval air cleaners on 3 x 2s and 2 x 4s (factory intakes) cut to clear the hood latch on SOME cars but not all. It makes me wonder what is going on. Maybe there is a difference between 6 cylinder and 8 cylinder cars????
I always thought the 6 and 8 mounts were the same, then someone corrected me and said the offset of the studs is different, by how much I don't know..
So, today my fairly expensive Borgeson power steering box showed up and after all of the worry and sleep loss, EVERYTHING FITS like it was made for this swap!
Steering box fits the car like, well it WAS made for it! The exhaust manifold I had theorized would work and then fretted over forever, fits like a glove!
BIG load off my mind and I can move on like it never happened, I've heard that in advertising somewhere....
I have never had a car I could buy parts for out of a catalog before. I've always had weird cars that no one makes parts for and have had to make my own or modify something from another car.
This is Kinda nice, look in the catalog, order the parts you want and wait a few days, then bolt them on to your car. So simple and yet, so weird...
My '29 REO Flying Cloud, no parts made for it, have to make your own or buy used and rebuild them or the fabrication starts. My '51 Plymouth restomod, make 'em or fab 'em.
This is really kinda fun!!!!
Thanks for all of the suggestions and help in my time of indecision and fear of what might happen... :burnout:
Tell me about the '29 REO. I ask because I have a photo of my Father's boyhood home with what I've been told is a '29 REO in the driveway. How well versed are you on REO's? If I sent you a photo could you tell me, if in fact, it is a REO, regardless of the year.
Thanks
John
Quote from: KYBlueOval on 2018-12-14 04:31
....'29 REO ...
1929 REO Flying Cloud pix.
https://www.google.com/search?q=1929+REO+Flying+Cloud&client=firefox-b-1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjj67nZg6HfAhUhLX0KHWquANUQsAR6BAgEEAE&biw=870&bih=509
Thanks for the photos. As I said, " I've been told it is a '29 REO", but I've had my doubts. The car in my photo is a four door open car, and the photo is shot showing the passenger side, thus no badges showing the name, model etc.
I'll see if I can find a REO club.
Thanks again
John
Here is a shot of my 1929 REO flying Cloud Standard Brougham. It's been in my wife's family for 68 years. It sat in a barn for 53 of those and I've had it since my father in law passed away in April of 2005. It looked fairly close to what you see here when we pulled it out of the barn. It took two days to dig it out.
I put gas in it, put a battery in it and on 22 September after spinning it over and over and changing the oil and lubricating EVERYTHING on the engine and trans, I turned the key and it started!
Nice car, we drive it some and take it to shows, but mostly it just sits and looks cool!
The "Patina" on the REO is covered only with linseed oil. No clear coat...
Quote from: lalessi1 on 2018-12-11 16:59
I have stock 57 and 58 boxes off the frame I can measure... I will do it tomorrow.
I finally measured the '58 box... The Borgeson box dimension is 2 5/8" from the mounting face of the flange to the edge of the box on the engine side (based on the dimensioned photo and a little arithmetic). The same dimension on the '58 box is 2 3/8" as best as I can measure. The "57 box is still in the attic...I will get to that one later.
Not to be disagreeable, but I read that as 1.25 + 1.125 = 2 3/8" flange to outside edge of the box, might be looking at it wrong.
We are talking about the other side... (I made that mistake at first too!), I think...
The part to worry about is the nub on the right side of the photo, top of the box where the cap bolts down to the body of the box. That is the "trouble" spot with the exhaust manifolds.
You are correct sir. I was looking at the picture completely backwards. Gotta love senior moments! Thanks! I did measure the '58 box correctly so apparently in that dimension they are the same.