Jump to content

Power Steering: "Chrysler Constant Control"


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

I had constant control on my '57 plymouth which had very low miles and I racked my brains to figure out why there was so much play. Constant control succeeded I believe the coaxial type which was tighter generally.<BR>It is worth recalling that a certain amount of play was built in to these power steering units,even contemporary road tests by Tom McCahill and others comment on the sloppy steering which made the cars subject to changing direction with sidewinds and lord knows I tried to adjust out the play,I even replaced the spool valve which didn't do much either.<BR>I just accepted this as the inevitable consequence of driving one of these large boats, even a '72 Rolls silver shadow had loose steering on american market cars which bears a striking similarity to Chrysler products, the factory called this the "sneeze factor" by the way.<BR>Maybe someone else can comment on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone out there had experience doing "field adjustment" on Chrysler's "Constant Control" Power Steering set-up from the '60's?<P>I've had several (4) higher mileage(80,000) Chrysler products from 1960 to '64 with this power steering set-up that all seem to have "play" in the gearbox itself: with the engine off, there's a signifgant amount of free-play noticeable at the steering wheel.<BR>Otherwise, the units work fine. The rest of the steering linkage (ball joints, tie rod ends, etc) is all snug.<BR>Would adjusting the "sector mesh" with the "screw & locknut" on the steering box cover help remove this play, or is this problem the result of wear inside the unit, necessitating overhaul?<P>This seems to be a common problem with this particular steering gear; I'm wondering if there's a common and simple remedy? confused.gif" border="0 <P>Anybody else "been there & done that"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I spoke to a guy who had a tranny shop and rebuilt power steering units as well.<BR>Specifically the Chrysler unit in question is indeed a "no feel" one, i.e. a certain amount of play was engineered into them which would {in the factory's opinion} be loose enough to avoid any sudden small jerks of the wheel being transmitted to the wheels, very dangerous on account of the lack of feel or feedback.<BR>Nowadays we are all of us accustomed to the "feel" in power ASSISTED steering like my wife's toyota so something like the Chrysler feels deliberately loose.<BR>Some systems, like Ford's where a hydraulic cylinder directly operated the tie-rod were much tighter but Chrysler's constant control was developed for some of the largest, heaviest cars made and one other fellow told me it was designed specifically to act in unison with the recently introduced torsion bar suspension.<BR>This is what I have been told, read and experienced with my own Chrysler products but I in no way claim that it is entirely accurate! grin.gif" border="0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

LI Stellite,<P>"No feel" steering; that's a pretty accurate way to describe it. shocked.gif" border="0 <P>Now to try and explain this concept to my wife, who is just itching to drive the '64 Valiant convertible, with Constant Control(!) power steering. rolleyes.gif" border="0 (Her driver is a '94 Accord!)<P>The front suspension is pretty snug as far as ball joints & tie-rod ends go, and the car doesn't wander or fight the wheel; it's just that "15 minutes" (if we think of a steering wheel spoke as the minute hand of a clock) of "no-feel" that tends to not inpsire confidence in handling of the car!<P>By comparison, my '61 Plymouth Belvedere, which had manual steering, had very snug steering, and a nice sense of "control".<P>I appreciate the remarks from period test drives too; saves me some aggravation of trying to correct a "problem" that might just be part & parcel to the system.<p>[ 04-22-2002: Message edited by: DeSoto Frank ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe me, I would'nt accept it at first either until I read contemporary test results, spoke to rebuilders and actually drove a couple of super low mileage Imperials.<BR>Somebody said we should accept the things we cannot change and constant control certainly fits the description, hey at least we have the wisdom to know the difference! shocked.gif" border="0shocked.gif" border="0

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...