Sign in to follow this  
toomuchvinyl

Had a fast ratio steering box installed today, AWESOME!

Recommended Posts

After reading the threads "Quick Ratio Steering Box" and "63 Riv Steering Box Replacement", I decided to try one of (telriv) Tom Telesco's steering boxes in my '64. This has been the single greatest improvement that has been made to my car since I've owned it. Some time ago, I had the center link and other front end components replaced as needed as well as the rear track bar bushings. At that time I also has the alignment set to the positive caster recommendation that I'd seen here in the forum. Those things made a marked improvement to the handling of the car but I was still disappointed in the vague steering response. The new steering box has resolved that final issue and I could not be happier. I still have standard shocks on the car as they were not worn out by any means and finances dictate that I cannot spring for a set of the Bilstiens at this time but I'm so pleased with the improvement that I'm not missing them. Maybe a set of those and some new springs someday, but in the mean time I'm well satisfied. 

What I'd call the "Driving Experience" really hasn't changed. The steering effort is the same and as Red Riviera Bob expressed it, the character of the ride and steering are still 100% first gen Riviera. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KongaMan said:

Do you know the specifics of this box: constant or variable ratio, and the actual ratio(s)?

Yeah, what @KongaMan said and does anyone know if the same box will fit my '70? I have what I would call lazy steering and would love an improvement like @toomuchvinyl is describing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KongaMan said:

Do you know the specifics of this box: constant or variable ratio, and the actual ratio(s)?

I don't know the actual specifications of the box other than the number of turns lock to lock which is 2.5. I'll have to defer to @telriv for more details.

 

28 minutes ago, 70rivme said:

Yeah, what @KongaMan said and does anyone know if the same box will fit my '70? I have what I would call lazy steering and would love an improvement like @toomuchvinyl is describing.

Brad, I don't know what the range of model years was that this steering box was used. I did see a reply in the "Quick Steering Ratio Box" (posts #66, #67) that it would fit a '68. Again, Tom @telriv could answer this question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TO ALL,

 

  This is a constant ratio box.  It will FIT ALL full size cars that take a model "808" Saginaw steering box (which the Riv. is a full size).  This includes some JEEP. FORD & MOPAR applications from about '62 to about 1976 as long as the box mounts inside the frame rails & NOT OUTSIDE.

  As stated this is a BOLT-IN SWAP. NO adapters nec. new hoses etc. nec.  Priced MUCH MORE COMPETATIVELY than others available.

 

Tom T. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KongaMan,

   

   Since many of us here don't know your 1st. name we will just have to go by your signature. I feel being on a 1st. name basis is much more personal. We DON'T have to know where you live although it would be helpful if someone was close by & needed any kind of assistance.  How did I know you would ask that question???  Anyho's

 

Since you like facts, figures, percentages, degrees, angles & ALL the other assorted things you always (not to offend you in ANY way in many cases good things) seem to come up with I will say figure it out.  All I will say is the length of the pitman arm plays a big role in the ratio & ALL the "808" boxes installed in MANY different vehicles most have different length pitman arms. The MOST IMPORTANT thing here is the turns lock to lock as no matter what the ratio it's still 2.5 turns lock-lock.

 

 

Tom T.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, telriv said:

All I will say is the length of the pitman arm plays a big role in the ratio & ALL the "808" boxes installed in MANY different vehicles most have different length pitman arms. The MOST IMPORTANT thing here is the turns lock to lock as no matter what the ratio it's still 2.5 turns lock-lock.

 

With all due respect, the pitman arm has nothing to do with the ratio of the gearbox.  That ratio is determined solely by the relationship between the rotation of the input shaft and the rotation of the sector shaft.  To put a finer point on it, ratio is far more important than lock-to-lock when determining how the box performs.  Indeed, lock-to-lock by itself tells us absolutely nothing about how the car will react to a given turn of the wheel.

 

For this box, the input is 2.5 turns; that's 900°.  For the standard gearbox for these cars, the output is ~70°.  The ratio of the two is 12.8.  That's a pretty frickin' quick ratio. ;)  

 

Given that's quicker than the contemporaneous 15:1 quick ratio box, and as quick as the 12.7:1 boxes used on sports cars, one cannot help but wonder exactly what's going on.  Are there internal stops that limit the output?  Let's suppose the sector shaft rotation is limited to 60°.  That would provide a ratio of 15:1 with 2.5 turns -- but parallel parking, u-turns, and the like would suffer dramatically from the decreased turning radius.  Or suppose we restrict it further, to 50°.  Now we have a ratio of 18:1.  Three different boxes, three different ratios, three different levels of performance, but the same lock-to-lock.  Clearly that's not the whole story.

 

If this box offers the full range of movement and has a quicker ratio than any factory box or anything offered by the myriad rebuilders, that's something.  But if it's compromised in some way (e.g. turning radius) that's something else.  Might not be a dealbreaker, but it's still something that should be part of a comprehensive description, no?

 

Edited by KongaMan (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only stops that are limited are the built in stops of the vehicle. Time for others to report their experiences. OR, better yet buy one & find out. Then you can do ALL the testing & theories you want until your hearts content. THINK AGAIN ABOUT PITMAN ARM LENGTH & THE ROLE IT PLAYS IN THE OVERALL SHEME OF THINGS. But, then again I'm sure you'll find something to knock or complain about. ALL I'm trying to do is help those out there that would like to upgrade & improve what they ALREADY  have. I just finished a '65 Riv. GS yesterday with the H2 option, faster ratio 15-1 ratio & he is EXTREMELY pleased with the outcome.

  Again, just my thoughts. 

 

 

Tom T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, telriv said:

THINK AGAIN ABOUT PITMAN ARM LENGTH & THE ROLE IT PLAYS IN THE OVERALL SHEME OF THINGS.

 

I've thought about it plenty. The question is not the overall scheme of things; it is the box itself.  The pitman arm doesn't have any more to do with the ratio of the box than does the diameter of the steering wheel.  To wit: not a thing.  Which is probably why every rebuilder out there uses ratio as the primary descriptor and differentiator: because the ratio is determined solely by the internal components of the box.

 

This would seem to be a pretty simple mathematical exercise: a ratio is the relationship between two numbers.  If you know any two of those numbers, you can calculate the third.  If you know only one, you know nothing of the others.  And so it is here: "2.5 turns" tells us nothing about either the ratio or the output travel.  If you've got the same travel as the standard box and 2.5 turns, you've got a ratio <13:1.  If you've got 2.5 turns and a 15:1 ratio, your U-turns become 3-point turns.  If you've got the same travel and a 15:1 ratio, you need 3 turns.  Where am I wrong?

 

Let's look at a similar situation.  Suppose you need a new rear end for your car.  A guy says he has one for you that's a drop-in fit.  You ask "What's the ratio?".  He says, "It depends on the transmission."

 

You gonna buy that rear end based on that?

 

 

Edited by KongaMan (see edit history)
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the length of the pitman arm does have an effect on how quickly the front wheels will go from full left to full to fight and back.  A 2 inch arm moving 90° only moves about 3 inches.  A 2 foot arm moving 90° moves about 3 feet.  Theres a lot of difference between moving a spindle 3 inches or 3 feet.  I know these figures are not representative of a cars front end geometry but they do provide a visual picture of how length effects travel.

 

The throw on a crankshaft determined the stroke of an engine, put rod length effects output.  Kind of the same principle.  If it works, don't question it.  😁  if you like it, enjoy it.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RivNut said:

But the length of the pitman arm does have an effect on how quickly the front wheels will go from full left to full to fight and back.  A 2 inch arm moving 90° only moves about 3 inches.  A 2 foot arm moving 90° moves about 3 feet.  Theres a lot of difference between moving a spindle 3 inches or 3 feet.  I know these figures are not representative of a cars front end geometry but they do provide a visual picture of how length effects travel.

 

Absolutely true, but the effect of the pitman arm is independent of the gearbox.  You’ll note that the FSM specifies both the aggregate ratio of the entire steering system and the ratio of just the box.  As no one is talking about changing pitman arms or any other steering components (are they?), it is the ratio of the box itself which is of interest and will determine the change in steering response.

 

On a more general note, how can one speak of a “quick ratio” box while refusing to specify the ratio? “2.5 turns” is not a ratio any more than “Yankees 6” is a final score. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend of mine and I used to meet for dinner on Tuesday evenings at a restaurant that was usually almost empty when were were there. We would have a leisurely dinner and take about an hour and a half discussing a wide range of scientific and computer related topics. The waitresses were very good at stopping by to keep our coffee cups filled and would catch bits of our conversations. Usually they stood and talked between trips to our table.

 

One evening a very young girl topped off our coffee and asked "Are you really rocket scientists?"

 

Interesting how those memories just come to mind.

Bernie

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/5/2018 at 11:08 PM, toomuchvinyl said:

After reading the threads "Quick Ratio Steering Box" and "63 Riv Steering Box Replacement", I decided to try one of (telriv) Tom Telesco's steering boxes in my '64. This has been the single greatest improvement that has been made to my car since I've owned it. Some time ago, I had the center link and other front end components replaced as needed as well as the rear track bar bushings. At that time I also has the alignment set to the positive caster recommendation that I'd seen here in the forum. Those things made a marked improvement to the handling of the car but I was still disappointed in the vague steering response. The new steering box has resolved that final issue and I could not be happier. I still have standard shocks on the car as they were not worn out by any means and finances dictate that I cannot spring for a set of the Bilstiens at this time but I'm so pleased with the improvement that I'm not missing them. Maybe a set of those and some new springs someday, but in the mean time I'm well satisfied. 

What I'd call the "Driving Experience" really hasn't changed. The steering effort is the same and as Red Riviera Bob expressed it, the character of the ride and steering are still 100% first gen Riviera. 

Sir, I’m in the boat you were in. I put Bilstein’s on and the rebuilt steering box I got from Tom Telesco. Measurable improvement at low speed up to 60 mph. I took a round trip 660 mile drive in my 63 Riv on Interstate 80. The road is in good shape. At higher speeds the car did want to track straight. The car would drift out of its track. I’m replacing track bar bushings and sway bar bushings Tom Telesco recommended. Also, I’m going for the same alignment specs you have. Thank you for the report!

Red Riviera Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Red Riviera Bob said:

Sir, I’m in the boat you were in. I put Bilstein’s on and the rebuilt steering box I got from Tom Telesco. Measurable improvement at low speed up to 60 mph. I took a round trip 660 mile drive in my 63 Riv on Interstate 80. The road is in good shape. At higher speeds the car did want to track straight. The car would drift out of its track. I’m replacing track bar bushings and sway bar bushings Tom Telesco recommended. Also, I’m going for the same alignment specs you have. Thank you for the report!

Red Riviera Bob

Can someone chime in the "alignment specs"? I am putting in a new custom made adjustable trac bar this week in my 68. It will have rubber bushings. I also had the front suspension rebuilt, (tie rod ends, tr sleeves, control arm bushings, sway bar bushings, ball joints and new center link). I also put new shock absorbers on it last summer, both front and back.

I have not yet replaced the front or rear coil springs.

 

I have heard the front end alignment should be slightly modified when new trac bar bushings are installed. What are the recommended alignment settings?

Edited by NC68Riviera (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NOT TRACK BAR BUSHINGS BUT RADIAL TIRES!!!  You want to go as far positive on CASTER that you can go WITHOUT making modifications.       ( but mods are fairly easy)  Usually will top out at around +3 degrees, but more if possible safely. Camber around 0 degrees +or-1/4 degree. Toe in the middle of the stock specs.

 

 

Tom T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, telriv said:

NOT TRACK BAR BUSHINGS BUT RADIAL TIRES!!!  You want to go as far positive on CASTER that you can go WITHOUT making modifications.       ( but mods are fairly easy)  Usually will top out at around +3 degrees, but more if possible safely. Camber around 0 degrees +or-1/4 degree. Toe in the middle of the stock specs.

 

 

Tom T.

Tom,

Thanks for this info. I am having the front end aligned on my 68 this week so this info will come in handy at the shop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents, SOHCAHTOA. Who remembers that one? While some of you are figuring out the angle to the dangle apply your high powered math skills and let us all know about Mr.Pittman. 💤💤

Just funning of course.

 

The gear box I got from Tom T improved the handling significantly AFTER it was revealed I did not have the bolts holding the steering box on the car tight enough. I torqued the 3 bolts to 70 lbs.and the car tracks much better. Lesson learned is I need to use a torque wrench more often at this stage of the game. I want to make sure I don’t kill myself because my steering bolts came loose.

RRB

 

Edited by Red Riviera Bob
Words left out (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 12:41 PM, telriv said:

NOT TRACK BAR BUSHINGS BUT RADIAL TIRES!!!  You want to go as far positive on CASTER that you can go WITHOUT making modifications.       ( but mods are fairly easy)  Usually will top out at around +3 degrees, but more if possible safely. Camber around 0 degrees +or-1/4 degree. Toe in the middle of the stock specs.

 

 

Tom T.

What is the benefit of this?

 

What is the price for your constant ratio gear box?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RivNut said:

Sine Opposite Hypotenuse

Cosine Adjacent Hypotenuse

Tangent Opposite Adjacent

 

😎

That's funny, looked familiar when i saw the post. Thanks for the reminder Ed!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2018 at 8:04 PM, RivNut said:

Sine Opposite Hypotenuse

Cosine Adjacent Hypotenuse

Tangent Opposite Adjacent

 

😎

 

 

 

On 7/14/2018 at 12:01 AM, 70rivme said:

 

Ed, 100% correct ! Well done, not well finished, but well done. Get the fork. One of your packages came today. It was a small package with all the right stuff.

Many thanks.

RRB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Red Riviera Bob said:

 

Ed, 100% correct ! Well done, not well finished, but well done. Get the fork. One of your packages came today. It was a small package with all the right stuff.

Many thanks.

RRB

How about "Some old hippy caught another hippy tripping on acid"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this