Rack and pinion is an expensive indulgence on these cars IMHO. A stock steering setup in good condition works as well, and in the case of some, better. Some of the R&P connections to the steering column are downright scary.

The stock steering was sufficiently good to dominate SCCA B production.

 

Wow - some real haters out there!

I've had:
- stock power steering - very little road feel
- manual R&P - Flaming River - great road feel and no slop, but interfered with my mechanical clutch and was a lot of work for a daily driver that sees parking structures and parallel parking EVERY day
- power R&P (current) - Randalls Rack - great road feel and no slop and better turning radius than my ol' fox, but I get pump grown at full lock

In all, I really like the Randall's Rack, but it's not cheap (as indicated above). I do know, however, that it has been and will be reliable.

 

TCP rack and pinion. Never go back to 40 year old front steering.

 

Hmmm… Sounds like you're hating OEM steering due to "age". Anything in perfect operating condition, age doesn't matter. Operating like new spec is all that matters.

Here's remarkable story about quality overcoming age-

Upgrades to extend B-52 Bomber's lifespan until 2044

 

I never had R&P.

I went the Borgeson route and so far happy with the feel.

RME

 

Rack & Pinion

I used the UNISTEER power R&P on my 67 Mustang Fastback and I love it. I certainly didn't want 1950's techology in the steering with the leaky slave cylinder, etc. It is the same steering technology as my 57 Chevrolet had on it. So hate all you want, I LOVE my R&P!irate:
Willy

 

Everybody seems to think R&P is some recent invention. BMW had it in the '30's and the '51 MG saw it introduced into the U.S. The concept itself predates the automobile and was used in high-wheeled tricycles.

 

1974 mustang II was the first mustang to have the "modern" rack and pinion. that was 39 years ago. 39 years is a long time. imo rack and pinion is not modern either. how about an electric motor mounted on the frame with an arm attatched to the spindle, now thats modern.....NOT ! and how about getting rid of the round tire because that show aint modern. my 06 f350 has a recirculating ball type steering and its only 7 years old so i guess the 65 mustang steering is just as modern now as it was then. btw rack and pinion is cheeper to manufacture.

 

I put a randalls rack in my 70 and love the way it feels and works. It does have slighly less turning radius but have never found that to be a problem. It was a very straight forward install but it was one of the first things I installed when doing my ground up restoration. Here is a few pictures of the install. I think the CPP unit would be a good alternative over the Borgensen unit if you want to stay with a conventinal steering box.

 

I'm sure a well sorted original equipment power steering setup on my car would have been just fine. However, I love the feel of the TCP manual rack, guaranteed to never leak!

 

I have stock 16:1 manual box and roller idler arm and 3.5* caster. Steers great, no wondering or slop, great road feel, light steering effort on the road and the wheel returns. No problems. $200 vs ?.

 

With all the vendors out there that sell the rack set up for these cars deciding which is the right one or best one is hard. I think the makers want to sell a bunch of racks but are not that concerned with R&D and whether the racks really work that much better than the stock set up. With wide tires on the front, that most guys are going with, the rack takes about the same effort to turn and is not any better than the stock set up. What I have found is that the racks that I have driven increase the turning radius and that affects daily drivability much more than any gain you would get with better "Road Feel".

It is like rear disc brakes. The numerous problems I have seen with guys trying to get rear disc brakes to work is unbelievable. When they do get it sorted they don't stop any better than stock rear drums. It is a lot of money and effort just so that you can say I have rack and pinion or I have rear disc brakes. Sounds cool, in practice not so cool.

On my cars I run stock manual front steering, stock rear drum brakes. I keep it serviced and eveything works great. If you like the rack then I would run the rack. I know how guys love to upgrade thier cars. For me if I want to upgrade that much I will buy a new mustang.

 

For me if I want to upgrade that much I will buy a new mustang.[/FONT][/COLOR]

I understand and respect that plan, but it's not for a lot of us. Instead of going point by point I'll say this: If my Mustang doesn't ride, turn, stop, and go in a similar manner as a current Honda Accord, I'll sell it the same week I complete it. I don't want a trailer queen, I don't want a weekend cruiser, I don't want a car to drag to the local Dunkin Donuts for a cruise night. I want a Mustang that looks vintage, but is a real joy to drive.

John

 

Ive thrown nearly the book at the front end on my 66... adj solid strut rods, open tracker roller bearings everywhere..lowered, rebuilt box by a very repitable company, etc.

My first complaint is that I should have gone with a quick ratio setup..it takes too many damned turns, and is completely counter productive to the otherwise good handling car I built.

My other complaint is that 245/45/17 tires up front with a manual box downright sucks..at one point, during some testing, I brought the rear around on a right turn...between the manual steering and excessive turnimg radius it was absolutely impossible to counter steer quick enough...i stopped , sitting sideways..

I dont like the feel of these arcaic steering box setups, and i feel that my car is being held back. If I had a quick ratio power steering setup, that would be fine..but in all reality, it still doesnt compare to a rack setup.

Excuse any typos..posting from my phone

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

I dont like the feel of these archaic steering box setups, and i feel that my car is being held back. If I had a quick ratio power steering setup, that would be fine..but in all reality, it still doesnt compare to a rack setup.

Factory power steering was always quick ratio, even on 6 cylinder cars.

 

I had a 70 convert 30 years ago with p/s. Replaced everything offered at that time. That thing always leaked at some point, not to mention wandered all over the road. Never again. Manual TCP rack, zero slop and no leaks, no idler or center links to deal with. But, if your old system works for you and your happy that's great. That also probably means you never drove one with R&P.

 

My Thunderbird SC had speed-sensing power rack. I never got the slightest urge to hack up my 66 for R&P conversion.

If you replaced 'everything' and your 70 PS still leaked, I'm wondering- Ford hoses or NAPA? Did you replace the tube seats? I'd bet $1 that you didn't put the band clamp around the valve body when you were done. A tiny but fatal mistake.

I've done a lot of these, and although my personal car is manual, I have no problem with the Ford/Bendix steering. When I assemble them, they don't leak.

 

me and my gf are going to make a box. she will supply the rack and i will supply the pinion.

btw , nascar still uses a recirculating ball and nut type.

 

I don't understand the leaking thing! In 62 I bought my first vert. 56 Ford Sunliner. 312, automatic with power steering. PS never leaked, automatic never repaired. In 70 put a track built 312, stick OD and 3.90 rear in. Blew the engine in 75, the PS still fine, no leak, never repaired!.1975 bought 70 Torino vert power steering, never repaired (TMK) no leak. 77 bought my current 68 Stang vert. PS etc. No repairs on PS, no leak ever! Junked the 70 Torino vert in 90, it was collapsing from rust, PS was still great, no slop, no leak!

Slim

 

after pricing out various options, a fully rebuilt oem power steering box setup will cost as much a s a manual rack conversion, which at that poiny you may as well jusy oick up a power r&p setup.


Thr dead center that you get with steering boxes is precisely why I will never spend any amount of money on that garbage. It kills all enjoyment in spirited driving. BTW nascar still uses carbs too and they're also losing popularity hand over fist.

Despite how old a r&p setup may be, there's a reason why modern cars, modern pony cars, sports cars, etc ditched the steering boxes decades ago.

 

So you would say NASCAR is losing popularity because they still use carbs and old fashioned steering?

 

Even with the crown vic...whos design was almost the same for decades switched out the steering box in 2003 for a rack and pinion setup..with no body or interior changes....in an effort to keep up with modern demands for our police officers...like it or not, the steering box has no place in an otherwise heavily updated classic imo

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

Nascar is fuel injected now, Obamas epa was all over that.

 

No...steering boxes have that slight amount of play..its not excessive..its minor, but its there...a rack has absolutely 0 slack

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

No...steering boxes have that slight amount of play..its not excessive..its minor, but its there...a rack has absolutely 0 slack

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

my 14:1 Sweet box didnt have any play. took getting use to.

 

14 to 1.eh? Gotta link?

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

14 to 1.eh? Gotta link?

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

Sweet Mfg built them. the 65-up Saginaw box. i was going to adapt it to my 65 mustang but Borgeson came out with their box insted. Sweet doesnt have anymore rear steer boxes now that nascar went to front steer but is the same box used on 71-73 mustangs/cougars and other cars with a 14:1 ratio. they also did 12:1 , 16:1 and 16:1 variable like the stock ford box has and the nascar guys like. my wagom is what i put the 14:1 box on and it was very precise and no slack and was almost too quick when driving over 120 mph, no sudden moves of the wheel or else.

p.s. a guy on the torino forum put one of these boxes on his 68 torino.

 

heres the ford saginaw box that is used in the 71-73 mustang cougar and other fords. this on is in a 68 torino. the box needs to be installed lower. a custom pitman arm is needed. this box can be built with a 14:1 , 16:1 , 12:1 straight ratio and a 16:1 variable ratio like the fords came with. different valving can be used for light or heavy steering effort. the 14:1 was my plan until Borgeson came out with theirs.

 

Mine was simple to install, took about an hour or so by myself. Solid mounting points bumpsteer kit, eccentric eliminators, new tie rods. No interference with my 408c 7 quart canton oil pan or hooker super comps. It is a TCP manual rack. Well worth the 1500 bucks. Best of all, no leaks and instant turning.

 

An excellent source of gearboxes is parts cars which had power steering. Even leaky PS pretty much gave the gearbox a free ride, often leaving the gears and reciprocating balls with virtually no wear. Not to mention that they have the 4-turn ratio favored for performance.

 

There was very low load on the steering box with power steering. Ironically many with power steering think the steering box is shot! May just need grease and adjusting.

 

Read this article..while it is by a rack company, it does a great job of explainimg the differences, and why a gearbox will never feel like a rack setup....especially at center...bottom line is u can set up a gearbox to ne tight, but it will never feel like a rack, nor will it have the responsiveness

http://www.steeroids.com/html/steering_box_facts.html

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App