Print Page | Close Window

steering effort

Printed From: TheAMCForum.com
Category: The Garage
Forum Name: Suspension, Steering, Brakes & Wheels
Forum Description: What makes it stop, turn, and smooths the ride
URL: https://theamcforum.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=93631
Printed Date: Mar/29/2024 at 1:17am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: steering effort
Posted By: Ralph G.
Subject: steering effort
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 9:47am
The biggest complaint I have with my '68 AMX concerns the power steering. It is so feather light and devoid of feel that driving on winding roads is almost scary. (I have read old road tests that complained of the same thing.) I'm thinking of installing one of those adjustable valves that reduce the amount of steering assist. Does anyone here have any experience with using one of them? Alternately, I have considered replacing my power steering box with a factory manual or (preferably) a quick-ratio manual box. Do these units have any better road feel without raising steering effort to unbearable levels? The car is used for car show and highway cruising use, so parallel parking is not much of a concern. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks!



Replies:
Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 10:48am
I had a manual box on my 71. It must have been a quick ratio, as it was a bear to drive in the parking lots, or from making a standing u turn at the light.

I could live the manual box away from city driving, but that is it.

I had fairly good feel with the GM box on my 73, but I too expected better sporty road feel. It was no better than driving any other GM full sized car of that period.

-------------
71 Javelin SST body
390 69 crank, 70 block & heads
NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons
78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low
50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension
79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles
Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker


Posted By: tyrodtom
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 11:15am
Any manual steering box is going to give you better road feel,   but the quicker steering they have, the more muscle it's gonna take.

How much is too much effort to steer is a personal choice,  everybody's is different.

You might be happier converting to one of the more modern Saginaw, faster steering power steering boxes.  Plus I think their effort can be adjusted. 

In my opinion,  any time you reduce steering effort,  you lose some road feel.
All road feel is you feeling that the front wheels get easier to turn as they lose road grip.

It's still there in a low effort steering system,  it's that the difference in the effort is so small most people won't feel it. 


-------------
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.


Posted By: Ralph G.
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 11:19am
I had a Firebird 400 and a Dodge Super Bee with manual steering back in the day, but I don't know if I want to relive the total experience any more. The Super bee was a real bear to parallel park. And I'm 40 years older now!


Posted By: Sonic Silver
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 11:20am
The front tire size also makes quite a bit of difference in steering effort on a manual car, too.  


Posted By: purple72Gremlin
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 12:30pm
I believe the 1968 & 69 AMXs have a same ratio box. I think 1970 and later have a variable ratio box.......maybe an improvement?  

Also...  caster can make a difference.  more caster makes it harder to steer, but will track better, less caster makes it easier to steer, but will wander.....(All things created equal)


Posted By: Ollie
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 1:17pm
That's the way power steering was in the day. All of them, regardless of the manufacture, were very sensitive.

Steering wheels were bigger to make turning easier too. Silver Sonic is correct as most use tire sizes bigger than in the day.

Its been my experience, that I prefer manual steering. Most of my driving tends to be highway. as tyrodtom says....everybody is different.

Having AMC Fun,
Ollie

-------------
1966 American Convertible -- "The Rambler"..SOLD
1974 Postal Jeep -- "Rapid Delivery"...SOLD
1969 Rambler 220 post car--"Road Warrior"
1989 Jeep Comanche Pioneer, 4.0L, auto, 2wd


Posted By: Ralph G.
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 1:24pm
When I had the car aligned I asked the shop to put in some more caster. I also installed a smaller steering wheel to possibly increase the effort needed to steer the car. The tires are 225/70R14's. Still steers WAY too easy for my taste. Maybe the adjustable valve is worth looking into.


Posted By: Sonic Silver
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 1:27pm
Originally posted by Ollie Ollie wrote:

That's the way power steering was in the day. All of them, regardless of the manufacture, were very sensitive.

Steering wheels were bigger to make turning easier too. Silver Sonic is correct as most use tire sizes bigger than in the day.

Its been my experience, that I prefer manual steering. Most of my driving tends to be highway. as tyrodtom says....everybody is different.

Having AMC Fun,
Ollie
Another thing that I noticed from having several Corvettes with manual steering many years ago was that radials running around 24 psi seemed harder to steer than the bias ply tires back then. I noticed a difference going from a 7.75-15 bias ply to a 195/75-15 Michelin on a 66 Corvette.


Posted By: one bad rambler
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 1:57pm
Originally posted by Ralph G. Ralph G. wrote:

The biggest complaint I have with my '68 AMX concerns the power steering. It is so feather light and devoid of feel that driving on winding roads is almost scary. (I have read old road tests that complained of the same thing.) I'm thinking of installing one of those adjustable valves that reduce the amount of steering assist. Does anyone here have any experience with using one of them? Alternately, I have considered replacing my power steering box with a factory manual or (preferably) a quick-ratio manual box. Do these units have any better road feel without raising steering effort to unbearable levels? The car is used for car show and highway cruising use, so parallel parking is not much of a concern. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks!
  Since the 80`s there have been car manufactures that have played around with pump pressure while driving....they based it on engine rpm...if you let the car idle and turned the wheel it would be easy but as you increased the engine rpm the steering would require more effort giving more road feel...I think the power steering in my 68 AMX is terrible...between the size of the steering wheel and the light effort...I have man. steering in my 68 American...64 American and i wanted it in the Concord but i was over ruled 

-------------
68 AMX 390 4 Speed,68 American,64 American 2 Door Wagon Altered Wheelbase,78 Concord Build 360,727,8.8


Posted By: tomj
Date Posted: Apr/15/2018 at 11:03pm
manual steering is sensitive to scrub angle, which is the first thing to go when wide wheels are installed without re-choosing the backspacing so that scrub angle is accommodated.  this link shows it pretty well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius" rel="nofollow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius

with power steering you can pretty much ignore it, but depending on the combination of wide tires and spacers etc you could really feel it. the older cars with really skinny tires that always had manual steering, high box ratios and giant steering wheels were really easy to steer (but not much else).

the rest is taste i guess. i like the driving feel of manual boxes and don't mind the wrastlin'



-------------
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5
http://www.ramblerLore.com



Posted By: LakesideRamblin
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 1:01am
Love my manual steering (rebuilt my Saginaw box on my 69 Rambler - non-quick ratio) and all stock rebuilt suspension front and back. Feel the road baby with manual steering. Caveat, it is a personal preference.

-------------
LakesideRamblin
69 Rambler 360
73 Javelin 360
"If you could kick the person in the pants responsible for most of your trouble, you wouldn't sit for a month." T. Roosevelt


Posted By: farna
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 6:35am
I think you are on the right track with the adjustable pressure valve. Then you can tune the steering to something you can live with, and easily change it for the type of driving you're doing. Going to a car show in the city? Dial in a little more pressure. Nice country twisty road drive? Dial it back some...  Near $100, but should be worth it. 

-------------
Frank Swygert


Posted By: Wrambler
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 9:05am
This works for saginaw pumps.
Take the high pressure hose off. There will be a valve and a spring under the big nut.
The pressure valve lives in there.
  Two ways to make it better, valve from a CJ. Or take one apart and save all the little shims sitting  under the nut on the end of the valve. Then take yours apart and add the spacers from valve one. snug it up good and fill it up with fluid and work the air out of the system.

I did this 15 years ago and that along with a 73 steering box have made my care pleasure to drive, its cheap, invisible and reversable

This works on any Saginaw box. Flaming river or one of the other aftermarket steering places sell a kit to drop the line pressure when running the high press saginaw pump with a ford rack

I'm running a Wrangler pump on my serpentine belted 4.0L it puts out around 800 psi verses the 1100 or so the other XJ boxes run. 


-------------
Wrambler
69 AMC Rambler
4.0L, 5 speed
2015 Grand Cherokee Limited
2019 Chrysler 300


Posted By: akimmet
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 10:00am
Pump pressure isn't the problem.

Alignment makes a big difference in steering effort. Try dialing in as much caster as possible with your trunions. Sadly the trunions usually prevent setting the caster high enough.

If an alignment doesn't help, look into an aftermarket upgraded steering box. Look for one with at least a .210" t-bar for a more modern car feel. The stock size is probably a tiny .165". Increasing the t-bar size is the correct way to increase steering effort in an integrated power steering box.

If you can afford it, a Delphi 600/670 box has a better spool valve design than the old Saginaw 800 boxes.


Posted By: Jav Dog
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 3:56pm
Is it possible to lessen the steering assist with a larger size pulley on the power steering pump?  Or does anyone make a pressure reducing kit for the Eaton power steering pumps?


Posted By: billd
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 5:54pm
Originally posted by tomj tomj wrote:

manual steering is sensitive to scrub angle, which is the first thing to go when wide wheels are installed without re-choosing the backspacing so that scrub angle is accommodated.  this link shows it pretty well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius" rel="nofollow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius

with power steering you can pretty much ignore it, but depending on the combination of wide tires and spacers etc you could really feel it. the older cars with really skinny tires that always had manual steering, high box ratios and giant steering wheels were really easy to steer (but not much else).

the rest is taste i guess. i like the driving feel of manual boxes and don't mind the wrastlin'


Too bad that article, like so many in wikipedia, don't go into other very important areas. They ignore some of the other effects of the SAI vs tire center intersection - whether it's above or below the pavement, how much, how it impact brake steer and more.
The article isn't bad ........... as far as it goes but my fear is that it would lead some to make changes that just plain aren't safe. 

I sort of find this thread interesting as IMO, AMC power steering was the least easy steering of that era.
If you have the power steering on your AMC - you need to go drive a Plymouth of the same era! NO ROAD FEEL AT ALL.
I hated mid and full-size MOPAR PS back then. A butterfly could land on the steering wheel and send you off the road.


-------------


http://theamcpages.com" rel="nofollow - http://theamcpages.com

http://antique-engines.com" rel="nofollow - http://antique-engines.com


Posted By: Sonic Silver
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 6:25pm
Originally posted by billd billd wrote:

Originally posted by tomj tomj wrote:

manual steering is sensitive to scrub angle, which is the first thing to go when wide wheels are installed without re-choosing the backspacing so that scrub angle is accommodated.  this link shows it pretty well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius" rel="nofollow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius

with power steering you can pretty much ignore it, but depending on the combination of wide tires and spacers etc you could really feel it. the older cars with really skinny tires that always had manual steering, high box ratios and giant steering wheels were really easy to steer (but not much else).

the rest is taste i guess. i like the driving feel of manual boxes and don't mind the wrastlin'


Too bad that article, like so many in wikipedia, don't go into other very important areas. They ignore some of the other effects of the SAI vs tire center intersection - whether it's above or below the pavement, how much, how it impact brake steer and more.
The article isn't bad ........... as far as it goes but my fear is that it would lead some to make changes that just plain aren't safe. 

I sort of find this thread interesting as IMO, AMC power steering was the least easy steering of that era.
If you have the power steering on your AMC - you need to go drive a Plymouth of the same era! NO ROAD FEEL AT ALL.
I hated mid and full-size MOPAR PS back then. A butterfly could land on the steering wheel and send you off the road.
I agree that Mopar was the worst, however Ford wasn't much better. I would put AMC and GM on about the same level. Firebirds, Camaros, 442's, etc weren't bad.


Posted By: billd
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 7:01pm
I concur......

-------------


http://theamcpages.com" rel="nofollow - http://theamcpages.com

http://antique-engines.com" rel="nofollow - http://antique-engines.com


Posted By: purple72Gremlin
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 7:30pm
Originally posted by Sonic Silver Sonic Silver wrote:

Originally posted by billd billd wrote:

Originally posted by tomj tomj wrote:

manual steering is sensitive to scrub angle, which is the first thing to go when wide wheels are installed without re-choosing the backspacing so that scrub angle is accommodated.  this link shows it pretty well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius" rel="nofollow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius

with power steering you can pretty much ignore it, but depending on the combination of wide tires and spacers etc you could really feel it. the older cars with really skinny tires that always had manual steering, high box ratios and giant steering wheels were really easy to steer (but not much else).

the rest is taste i guess. i like the driving feel of manual boxes and don't mind the wrastlin'


Too bad that article, like so many in wikipedia, don't go into other very important areas. They ignore some of the other effects of the SAI vs tire center intersection - whether it's above or below the pavement, how much, how it impact brake steer and more.
The article isn't bad ........... as far as it goes but my fear is that it would lead some to make changes that just plain aren't safe. 

I sort of find this thread interesting as IMO, AMC power steering was the least easy steering of that era.
If you have the power steering on your AMC - you need to go drive a Plymouth of the same era! NO ROAD FEEL AT ALL.
I hated mid and full-size MOPAR PS back then. A butterfly could land on the steering wheel and send you off the road.
I agree that Mopar was the worst, however Ford wasn't much better. I would put AMC and GM on about the same level. Firebirds, Camaros, 442's, etc weren't bad.
I remember the Fords and mopar being the worse for steering.....


Posted By: tyrodtom
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 8:37pm
Not only did the Chrysler system have no feedback,  or at least any that I could feel,  you could turn the wheel faster than the pump could supply fluid to turn the front wheels ,  when you got into that condition the wheel got harder to turn.
Sort of a unpleasant surprise in the middle of a turn.

  I run into that trait on mid 60s big Mopars driving too fast on curvy roads.   I encountered in more than one,  so it wasn't a mechanical fault in just one car.


-------------
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.


Posted By: 304-dude
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 8:53pm
Probably one reason why my aunt totaled my grand parents less than a few weeks old Charger when she was in her late teens.



-------------
71 Javelin SST body
390 69 crank, 70 block & heads
NASCAR SB2 rods & pistons
78 Jeep TH400 w/ 2.76 Low
50/50 Ford-AMC Suspension
79 F150 rear & 8.8 axles
Ford Racing 3.25 gears & 9" /w Detroit locker


Posted By: Sonic Silver
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 9:13pm
Originally posted by tyrodtom tyrodtom wrote:

Not only did the Chrysler system have no feedback,  or at least any that I could feel,  you could turn the wheel faster than the pump could supply fluid to turn the front wheels ,  when you got into that condition the wheel got harder to turn.
Sort of a unpleasant surprise in the middle of a turn.

  I run into that trait on mid 60s big Mopars driving too fast on curvy roads.   I encountered in more than one,  so it wasn't a mechanical fault in just one car.
You should have driven a big Mopar that I once owned. It was a former police car that was driven by a Virginia Highway Patrol Lieutenant. At the time, state employees could bid on state property at the auctions. This man bought his unmarked car for his personal use after he retired.

   So, when I got it, it was a one owner. This was probably mid-1980's. The car was a 2 door 1967 Plymouth Fury I . The Fury I was the cheap, stripper model. It was a 2 door post. The car was black with a blue cloth interior and rubber floor mats instead of carpet. It was the good 440 Magnum engine with the high perf heads and exhaust manifolds. The engine serial code for the engine was the same as was in a GTX that year.

    The only options were a certified speedo, power disc brakes, and an inside trunk release. The steering was manual. It had a 2.76 open rear. The man said he had driven it at 140mph.

   That car was impossible to maneuver in a tight area. It had about 6 turns lock to lock.  You had to experience it to believe it.


Posted By: tyrodtom
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 9:28pm
I never owned a car with power steering until I was about 30. 
Manual steering was what I grew up with,  if I drove a power steering car,  it was someone else's. 

So I was used to having to get you back into the wheel to steer at low speeds.
The 2nd place I worked at 17 had a 2.5 ton truck, manual steering.


-------------
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.


Posted By: Sonic Silver
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 9:37pm
Originally posted by tyrodtom tyrodtom wrote:

I never owned a car with power steering until I was about 30. 
Manual steering was what I grew up with,  if I drove a power steering car,  it was someone else's. 

So I was used to having to get you back into the wheel to steer at low speeds.
The 2nd place I worked at 17 had a 2.5 ton truck, manual steering.
My dad had a 1955 Ford F350 stake bed that he bought new, and kept after he went retired from his building material business in 1963. That was a bear to drive with no power steering. I sold it in about 2000.


Posted By: tomj
Date Posted: Apr/16/2018 at 9:52pm
Quote https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius" rel="nofollow - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrub_radius

Quote They ignore some of the other effects of the SAI vs tire center intersection - whether it's above or below the pavement, how much, how it impact brake steer and more.


off-to-one-side is exactly the same as above-below-ground; what they call "positive" is below ground.  the line shows reaching below the surface. that link is simply a brief definition of scrub angle. it does not claim to be a chassis tuning guide.

can anyone point out incorrect information in the article?



-------------
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5
http://www.ramblerLore.com



Posted By: akimmet
Date Posted: Apr/17/2018 at 10:17am
Originally posted by tyrodtom tyrodtom wrote:

Not only did the Chrysler system have no feedback,  or at least any that I could feel,  you could turn the wheel faster than the pump could supply fluid to turn the front wheels ,  when you got into that condition the wheel got harder to turn.
Sort of a unpleasant surprise in the middle of a turn.

  I run into that trait on mid 60s big Mopars driving too fast on curvy roads.   I encountered in more than one,  so it wasn't a mechanical fault in just one car.


This is the reason why it is better to adjust power steering effort with the t-bar and not with pump pressure.


Posted By: 6PakBee
Date Posted: Apr/17/2018 at 7:03pm
One thing I've seen criticized repeatedly about the '60's era Mopars are 1) brakes (too touchy) and 2) power steering (no road feel).  I've driven that era a LOT, the compacts, intermediates, and the land barges, and never had a problem with any of them.  But that's just me.  Big smile


-------------
Roger Gazur
1969 'B' Scheme SC/Rambler
1970 RWB 4-spd Machine
1970 Sonic Silver auto AMX

All project cars.

Forum Cockroach



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net