Judging from the pictures, it seems to me that the angles of the joints wouldn't be as extreme if the rack was turned up by 45 degrees. Although that may lead to other issues.

 

Have you driven it yet? What's the effort like? What did you have before?

 

By pulling the column out 1", you've increased the u-joint angle, causing the u-joints to bind every half turn. The angle is already steep, and you made it steeper.

Jim, I can tell you that turning effort is very easy (sitting on the garage floor turning wheel side to side). Any easier would be unwelcome.

 

Judging from the pictures, it seems to me that the angles of the joints wouldn't be as extreme if the rack was turned up by 45 degrees. Although that may lead to other issues.

Most notably, issues related to clearing the oil pan.

 

Can you measure bump steer?

 

By pulling the column out 1", you've increased the u-joint angle, causing the u-joints to bind every half turn. The angle is already steep, and you made it steeper.

Jim, I can tell you that turning effort is very easy (sitting on the garage floor turning wheel side to side). Any easier would be unwelcome.

Yes, I was aware that it would increase the u-joint angle. =( I just wonder if it's acceptable or not. From the cab, I can't feel any drag in turning the wheel ( with the tires detatched ), but if I turn it underneath by hand, I do feel a slight drag every 1/2 turn, which is due to the u-joint angle. I'd like to know if others have this as well, or if there will be zero drag with the column only out 1/4" - I didn't ever test that.

Seems to me that I could reposition the mounting holes for the R&P so it sits about 1/4 to 1/2" closer to the driver side framerail to give me more clearance with the header. What other problems would that cause if any?

Thanks ya'll!

 

Holy crap Mber... is that your engine?

 

Have you driven it yet? What's the effort like? What did you have before?

No, I haven't driven it yet. I need to set the toe and install a new speedometer sending unit before I pull her down. That will happen tomorrow night if the weather cooperates.

 

You would have to shorten one tie rod to compensate. Or have a car that turns sharper one way or the other. I would not recomend the first. It would cause weird things to happen when the suspension moves.

 

I have about 1/2" more thread on each side ( which will get larger when I set the toe since they're both pointed out atm ) so I'd just run the thread in further on one side, and less on the other.

 

By pulling the column out 1", you've increased the u-joint angle, causing the u-joints to bind every half turn. The angle is already steep, and you made it steeper.

Jim, I can tell you that turning effort is very easy (sitting on the garage floor turning wheel side to side). Any easier would be unwelcome.

Is that with the engine in or out? What size tires?
About the 1/4" versus 1" issue, am I right in thinking that modifying the headers to clear is the better way to go than changing the geometry?
Luckily I have a set of new and cheap headers for my car that I won't have any trouble cutting and welding on to make it work. I'll send them out for coating after I make them fit.

 

The offending tube is right next to the collector so it won't bend safely, and I don't want to reduce airflow in that tube by denting it. I also can't bend the entire collector since it will run into the head like Speedfreak's ( see THIS thread ).

I could possibly modify the firewall to lower where the column comes out of it by 1/2" then bolt in a strap to the firewall above to hold it firm. I would have to lower the column brace under the dash 1/2" as well to compensate and not change the u-joint angle.

There are a few options - will have to drive it and see if any are necessary. After the motor / exhaust settles from driving it a bit, I'll see what's needed. I'm thinking moving the R&P itself 1/2" to the drivers side is the cleanest approach since all modifications can be done off the car.

 

Holy crap Mber... is that your engine?

Not mine, but goes in the 65 I'm building for a customer. Isn't it purty?

Car has roller 5.0 with Performer RPM heads, Mass-Flo EFI, new T5, 4wheel power disc brakes, R&P steering, etc etc. It's gonna be one sweet car.

I'll probably hate my car when I'm done with this one.

 

Is that with the engine in or out? What size tires?
About the 1/4" versus 1" issue, am I right in thinking that modifying the headers to clear is the better way to go than changing the geometry?
Luckily I have a set of new and cheap headers for my car that I won't have any trouble cutting and welding on to make it work. I'll send them out for coating after I make them fit.

Engine in, junker 195 tires.

Definitely better to modify headers than alter geometry in my opinion. Since your headers are uncoated, easy decision.

 

I have about 1/2" more thread on each side ( which will get larger when I set the toe since they're both pointed out atm ) so I'd just run the thread in further on one side, and less on the other.

That will shorten the radius arc of the steering rod on one side and lengthen it on the other. Now you'll have opposing bumpsteer issues on both sides. There's a reason they placed it where they did on the car. They would have loved to make the u-joints easier, but you have to consider the whole picture.

 

Can you measure bump steer?

I haven't measured bumpsteer, but bumpsteer is caused by the the steering arm arc moving in a different plane than the spindle. The Unisteer steering arm pivot points are at the same location as the original manual steering centerlink/inner tie rods, so there should be no issue.

 

I have about 1/2" more thread on each side ( which will get larger when I set the toe since they're both pointed out atm ) so I'd just run the thread in further on one side, and less on the other.

That will shorten the radius arc of the steering rod on one side and lengthen it on the other. Now you'll have opposing bumpsteer issues on both sides. There's a reason they placed it where they did on the car. They would have loved to make the u-joints easier, but you have to consider the whole picture.

I agree, depending on how the wheels are turned, it will change geometry a little since the angle will be greater on one side and less on the other. Not sure how much a degree or so will effect steering.

If all hedders were the same, I could see them adjusting mount position somehow, but since they're not, it looks like they just mounted everything centered and parallel to the ground and found a set of hedders that did fit then exclaimed, "it works" and called it good! haha

 

Can you measure bump steer?

I haven't measured bumpsteer, but bumpsteer is caused by the the steering arm arc moving in a different plane than the spindle. The Unisteer steering arm pivot points are at the same location as the original manual steering centerlink/inner tie rods, so there should be no issue.

IIRC, I read somewhere before buying my set that the kit "eliminates" bumpsteer.

 

From the cab, I can't feel any drag in turning the wheel ( with the tires detatched ), but if I turn it underneath by hand, I do feel a slight drag every 1/2 turn, which is due to the u-joint angle.

I had the same issue. On closer inspection I found that the u-joints were making internal contact below the cross as they went thru their arc. It took some wiggling to get the column back far enough to prevent that from happening. Those oints need a little more internal clearance.

I have some Borgeson joints that I think would work better at those angles, but I can't find a Borgeson joint that will fit the peculiar Maval spline.

 

From the cab, I can't feel any drag in turning the wheel ( with the tires detatched ), but if I turn it underneath by hand, I do feel a slight drag every 1/2 turn, which is due to the u-joint angle.

I had the same issue. On closer inspection I found that the u-joints were making internal contact below the cross as they went thru their arc. It took some wiggling to get the column back far enough to prevent that from happening. Those oints need a little more internal clearance.

I have some Borgeson joints that I think would work better at those angles, but I can't find a Borgeson joint that will fit the peculiar Maval spline.

I made sure there was no internal friction in my application, but I do think there is some binding happening due to the angles... I just don't know if it's enough to worry about. I don't fear it binding completely - just wearing out prematurely. :crazy:

 

Any u-joint is going to cause uneven rotational movement if it operating at a steep enough angle.
Even if it's not hitting physically, it will speed up and slow down as it rotates. The shallower the angle, the smoother the rotation.
I had a long conversation with a Unisteer engineer before I bought my kit, as they are local to me. According to him, there is no noticable bumpsteer with this kit, and like Emberglow said, if the pivot points are close to the original, and the tie rods are not at an angle relative to the direction of travel, there shouldn't be a problem.

 

Any u-joint is going to cause uneven rotational movement if it operating at a steep enough angle.
Even if it's not hitting physically, it will speed up and slow down as it rotates. The shallower the angle, the smoother the rotation.
I had a long conversation with a Unisteer engineer before I bought my kit, as they are local to me. According to him, there is no noticable bumpsteer with this kit, and like Emberglow said, if the pivot points are close to the original, and the tie rods are not at an angle relative to the direction of travel, there shouldn't be a problem.

Turning the linkage by hand, was there any noticeable drag in your install?

 

I haven't installed mine yet, as my stang has bigger issues I need to deal with first.

 

junker 195 tires.

Hey! }

 

junker 195 tires.

Hey! }

junker 195 tires that came off of a future track champion 68 Mustang. These babies are collector's items! They would look particularly good on an Eleanor.