Here's a 1937 Dodge pickup I built a few years ago. It's on a 1987 Chevy S10 long bed chassis. Steering was an issue, the S10 manual steering box would have extended past the body about 3". I wanted power rack and pinion steering. All the racks I found were too wide and would cause bump steer. I found a 1996 Dodge Intrepid rack that used a center tie rod mount, the tie rods were extra-long with no chance of bump steer. I also adapted the 1996 Intrepid pump as GM used a different operating pressure. The inner and outer tie rods are from a 1970 Camaro. The truck has about 20,000 miles with no steering issues. The steering effort and response is very good. Specs: 1994 SBC 350 1987 S10 long bed chassis 700R4 transmission 1991 S10 Blazer 2wd differential with disc brakes Wilwood remote mount master cylinder A/C universal with a Sanden type compressor Bell Tech drop spindles Bell Tech drop rear leaf springs
That's a neat rack and apparently a good solution for your issue. Any pictures of where the steering column / shaft enters the rack?
This should probably be moved to the off topic section before it gets deleted. Its been a while, but as I remember, the steering column entering the rack was at a better angle then most racks. An Intrepid steering rack is for a front steer, where the tie rods are in front of the spindles. In the mid 1990s GM used a very similar steering rack on the Caviler and other GM cars. The GM rack is a rear steer, where the tie rods are behind the spindles. Both racks used the same center mount inner tie rod connections (they were interchangeable as units, but the inner tie rod ends themselves were different). Also, both racks were on vehicles that exceeded 4,000 lbs, this is not cheesy light weight stuff. The center connection with the plate to bolt on "other" inner tie rods is not a part from any auto factory factory, but the two mounting studs on the racks were the original inner tie rod mounting points. The "center plate" solved a lot of issues, and the vehicles original center link may be welded to it so the vehicles original tie rods and adjusting sleeves could be used. I played with this set up way back in the very early 2000s. Most of the minor challenges we faced back then have been addressed in the time since. I thought it would have been a good option for adding power steering back then, but I went a different direction and quit following its development. Back then, stuff like this could be posted on the HAMB.
So are you saying because the tie rods are so long (since it looks like they basically start at the center) that it doesn't have bump steer? I always thought the tie rod had to pivot at the same point as the suspension.
@Jay A Driggars very nice truck! Glad to have someone not only have a solution, but experience with it after install. Good info! @gregsmy It's my understanding that they should follow the same arc so there is no change in length thru the sweep. Same inner height, same length. However, a longer one is going to change less than a short one. So the amount of change is going to be small. Very rough paint of the idea.
They kind of altered the bump steer theory when the control arms have different lengths as well. Originally both the upper and lower control arms were equal length, so the inner tie rod position had to match the control arm pivot points. As the upper arms remained the same length, but the lower arms grew longer, the need for matching length tie rod assemblies was reduced. The truck has a bracket bolted to the racks inner tie rod positions, and the inner tie rods from something older was bolted to that center piece. If there is a concern about bump steer, one could simply weld the center link of the vehicle from which the remaining suspension is from, to the center bracket instead of bolting the inner tie rods to the bracket, and bolt the vehicles original tie rod assemblies to the vehicle's center link. As far as the tie rod assemblies and center link would matter, you would be using all the stock components except you are replacing the steering box with the power steering rack. I did a Caviler rack on a 39 Plymouth frame with original suspension perusing power steering. The 39-49 Mopar suspension had short upper control arms and longer lower control arms, the Caviler rack had the inner tie rod connections at the center of the rack, about 3" apart. I used shortened (about 4" at a real welding shop) Intrepid tie rods that connected to the center of the rack and the spindle arms on the Plymouth. There was no bump steer at all, but there was an increase in the turning radius (took some getting used to) and the 5th Ave PS pump put out too much pressure, the car was a bit twitchy at 75-80 mph. The car drove great at 60-65 mph. After the car was gone from my possession, ways to reduce the PS pressure to the rack were developed. I'm sure I'm forgetting some details, that was 20 years ago.
Interesting. Looks like something that could work for Ford I beam suspension to replace the steering box.
Steering racks on I beam, or any solid axle has some specific issues that need to be addressed. The Rack & Pinion steering set up was designed for independent suspension, a whole different suspension set up then a beam or solid axle is. There are probably much better racks for beam axles then the Intrepid or Caviler racks.
I don't have any pictures of the column and steering shaft, but I'll try to get a couple posted soon.
The Jalopy Journal
