I have decided to use a `37 Steering box in my `32 , but after mocking it up , it sits a bit too close to the ground ( Prolly would work , but I dont like the way it looks ) SOO , I have decided to shorten the steering sector .... Have any of you done this before ? I dont think any shop around here can help me respline it because of the "Tapper-spline" . I dont like the idea of chopping & reveld it ... My only idea so far : To use a `56 F1 steering arm .. If I remember correctly it had no splines , But instead the sector was square at the end, with a bolt to secure the s-arm .. Right ? ( slot in steering sector to accept the bolt )... Do a F1 s-sector have the same OD as a early Ford sector ? Was `56 F1 the first ( only? ) year without splines on the S-sector ? Any other ideas on this ? Help / suggestions highly appreciated KLAZ ( I cant move the steering-box upwards .. It will hit the manifold .. ( Obviously not in that pic )
I can't figure out what's going on between your steering collumn and steering box. And do you really want the sector shortened or just for the end of the pitman arm to be in a different position? I ask because I don't understand what you want to gain by using an F1 steering arm. What about heating and bending the pitman arm you have?
Hi Grimlok .. Heating/bending the stock `37 pitman will still leave the sector itself too low ... Sorry about the bad pix , but the nut that secures the pitman is actually closer to the ground than the bottom of the front axle ... Nuther pic ...
If your solution is to shorten the pitman arm, there's no reason not to weld, have a pro do it with a scarf joint/diagonal cut. I've lengthened pitman arms for dirt track, for quicker steer. Just remember with shorter pitman, steering will be more sluggish, that is, it will take more turns of wheel lock to lock.
B29chevy .. Guess my bad English is working against me I want to chop the steering sector and sector-housing about 1.5" ... Resplining will be a problem ( because of the tapper-spline ) , so I thought it might be easier to fit a `56 F1 pitman ( No splines (?) .. I had a `56 F1 box in my `34 , but I cant remember excactly how the pitman was mounted on the sector .... Do you think the sector could be cut & welded in the same manner as you have done with pitmans ?
why not rotate the box closer to the angle that it would be mounted in a stock 37. the reason i think you are out of room is that your runnning the sector perpendicular to the ground if you can rotate the entire box counterclockwise untill the pitman's stock angle is paralell to the ground then i think that would get the nut and end of the sector shaft farther from the ground. with your universal in the column i think you "should" be able to do this but in the end its just a thought and i cant clearly tell what room you have without the car infront of me ................................................................................................. also...i dont think shortening the shaft would be a major problem...many people lengthen them maybe if you go this route... try to machine one end so it has a nub and then put a hole in the other to align it good luck zach
SUHRsc .. I started this with what you said , but the steering shaft hit the Edelbrock-heads , and when I tried moving the shaft to the left for head-clearance ,then, I could not get my hand between the steeringwheel and door ...
Okay. Disconnect the u-joint you have now. Mount the gearbox where you want it. Mount the steering post/wheel where you want it. Then with the one u-joint, run the shaft back where it will miss the manifold through a pillow block. Immediatrely behind the pillowblock hang a u-joing, short shaft to another u-joint on the end of the steering column..
b29chevy .. Thanx for getting involved ( Everything is where I wants it , ... Problem is that the lowest part of the steering box is lower than the scrub-line .. this is probably the only way to go :
b-29 prolly has best answer. 56 f-100 has a square shank with a clamp bolt. i think the shaft dia is same 1 1/8. heavy duty trucks had 1 1/4 shaft .why not just use f-1 or f-100 thru framerail?
Can you simply raise the engine to gain clearance at the head or are you using the stock K frame? Don't think an F100 arm is gonna adapt or make much difference even if it did. Would recessing the mount into the frame help any?
Good point; Loosen motor mounts, a little shift, here and there, and 3 u-joints so's your knuckles don't rub the door frame.
Your BRAINSTORM is sure gettin`me closer to solve my problem THANX Guys !! I have a stock `32 X-mbr ..Using Stock front `32 engine-mounts ( cut&welded to lift the engine ca 1/2" ) : Engine( 59AB /`48 sideshift gearbox with `32 rear engine mount) is located where it should be . Jetmek : Qoute : " 56 f-100 has a square shank with a clamp bolt " .. Are you sure ? .. You see , When chopping the steering sector on my `37 Box , it would be much easier to grind a square-patern to fit a `56 F100 pitman , than a cone-spline .. Pic incl. manifold :
klausufer, im positive about the differences in steering boxes. ive got several of each. earlier f-1 sector shaft was interchangealbe with the 37. f-100 was a square shank at the end. i think the 37 sector would be hard to grind down and would be too small to properly fit the f-100 pitman arm when you were done grinding. dont think it would be a good idea. if you cant make it would with the other guys suggetions look into mounting it like stock 32
what about a model-A pitman arm if you go that route...to keep it "old" not sure when the rest of your car is but from the looks of the block letter heads and 32 front mounts it looks 40's to me but i guess the u-joints are throwing it off a bit anyways if your going to cut it short and go square i'd mill it...not just grind it do you think making it shorter is going to hinder its strength at all....with the force now on a shorter box would it cause any cracking problems with the box? what if you just move with box back so that your coulmn passes behind the rearmost corner of the head....i was thinking of running cross steer in the car i am building right now and thats what i was going to do...seems i had enough room infront of the oil pan...but mine is a 49 motor if the pans are different and if its too tight you could put a seal right above the box and run the bare column past the motor and have a bearing/bushing at the firewall and have the column start there good luck zach
Looking at this again I don't really see a big problem. SUHRsc and b29chevy are correct. Personally, I didn't catch the fact that your OK with a joint or two when I made my first response. Thought you were trying for a solid steering shaft.(column) Your first pic had the column shaft almost parallel with the ground. SUHRsc suggested you turn it upward and you turned it till the shaft hit the head. Just turn it back a little and run one or two u joints like B29chevy said. I think you'll get by with just one...but it depends on the angle naturally. That way the tierod part of the pitman arm will be in the correct position, while the nut will be above the scrub line. If I were doing this, I'd make my flat box bracket and clamp it to the frame for finer adjustments than just a tie-wrap. I'd also have the header and engine mounts in place. LOOKS very do-able to me...I think the looseness of your mockup is working against you during your setup! Bottom line though, as SUHRsc said... "in the end its just a thought and i cant clearly tell what room you have without the car infront of me." Best of luck!
Look at it this way, since you've already "outdated" the car with a u-joint, why not just use a Vega box and be done with it. Anybody who sees the u-joint will know instantly that it's not "traditional", so you've popped the cherry and they probably won't be any more harsh on the Vega box. Why aren't you using a side steer F-1 or F-100? Looks like you have an unsplit wishbone, and they leave plenty of room for a box out the side of the frame. Personally (even though you didn't ask), this would be the way I'd build it. I agree with the guy who said that F-100 pitman arms have a pinch bolt and some splines on the bottom. But I think the F-100 sector diameter is larger, so you couldn't fit it on the shortened '37 sector anyway.
Hi Klazufer, slightly o/t ... what are the manifolds from that you are using? They look good. Another question(on topic) why don't you use a '32 or F1 box? Do you think crosssteer will be better ? I'm building a '33 and have no intetion to change the steering , as it works good. Thanks Michael
Have you considered using the late box as a draglink box, mounted in the '32 stock position? This would require draglink pointing UP, but I'm guessing from the pictures car is low enough that this would result in level draglink. Flange (or bracket) would have to be added, but entirely traditional and greatly reduced effort from '32 box. By the way, U-joints in steering were not entirely unheard of in the early fifties. I don't know for sure what joints they used, but the nearest surplus store or aircraft scrappery would have been a likely bet...or maybe an old forklift steering even.
Hey Klazurfer -- I don't know if this will help, but here's a couple of pix of how I mounted my '40 box in a Deuce chassis. It's raised (note the tab) on the frame rail to get the stock pitman arm in the right place. I splined the shaft and coonected it up with u-joints to a splined Limeworks column. Borgeson now has u-joints the give you an extra 5 degrees of kink, so you may not need an intermediate joint or support. I think you're gonna have to raise that engine up. It looks to me like it's sitting way too low -- and causing you the majority of your grief. Just my 2 cents.
A buddy put a 40 box in a Deuce, he shortened the sector and the housing,...fit perfectly.....Ken Gross did the same on his Deuce roadster.
Klaz- please make sure you can connect the exhaust system up to those headers AND GET FULL PEDAL STROKE (I assume floor mounted pedals). I had some manifolds like that and was well into making up the system when I found the pedals wanted to occupy the same space. I managed to juggle engine height, steering box position, column clearance to (iron) head, and clearance between wheel and door in my 34 coupe, it was a very tight fit. Mart.
Too ALL who have replied : Thanx a LOT for your input alchemy : "since you've already "outdated" the car with a u-joint" Yes , I know , ... Not proud of it at all HotrodMicky : The Manifolds do look good , dont they! But they are also the root to all problems that I have run into conserning the steering-gear set up. I bought them on ebay ( seller told me thay came from a racing-boat ( "skiboat" ) , but several hambers told me they probably came from a stationary-engine , and thay are probably right. Before i bought those manifolds , I had Fenton-headers & a `32 steering-box , and I probably should have stayed with that idea ( se pic below ) Bruce : There is no room for a steeringbox in the stock location , not even my modified`32 box ( It has 1/2" taken off the sector housing ) I like what you said about steering U-joints used in the early Fifties ... I dont feel to good about using one , So that sure gave me some comfort Detonator : Thanx for posting those pix , they are saved! , and will come in handy when I start working on the set up. I was hoping I should be able to pull this off with only one u-joint, but time will tell . penfifteen : Ken gross has a 2 piece steering shaft with a u-joint hidden just inside the firewall . I was thinking of doing the same on my car , but as it turned out , I could not make it work ( Mainly because I need to make room for the shift-link parts .. See the enclosed pic . ) Mart : I have tried it out , And as you said , it sure is a thight fit ! The sideshift box and shift-links did not make it easier I had to heat`n bend the pedals a bit , but it should work out with ample room for all pieces to work together in a desent manner This pic shows my old set-up :
This shouldn't be hard? '32 rails, F1 or F100 steering box, and any year Ford flathead. This is done all of the time but you don't have enough room for a stock '32 box? Something doesn't make sense. There has to be a way to make it fit without resorting to a u-joint? I would think you could use a version of my mount - seen here - with the sector poking through the frame rail and everything else fitting into place with no chopped up collumn or u-joints. Good luck man. I'll be interested in seeing how this turns out.
Grimlok : Thanx for the link ,... I somehow missed that post Sure would be great if I could use that idea !! will try it tomorrow , and let you know how it turned out . Skidmarks : Thanks for the info KLAZ
The Jalopy Journal
