Pablo

iTrader: (1)

.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

.

RaverRacerX

what controls the electronic part of it?

90camaro355rs

subed, very interesting

tomsaddy

iTrader: (4)

I've got to do some more research to be sure, but I those that I've looked at so far have a steering control module with a torque input (torque sensor is connected to the input shaft of the rack), speed input (one wire), and three wire motor output (plus power and ground, of course). If I can figure out what the speed input is supposed to look like, it might not be that complicated.

My only concern would be the feel (too soft / too firm) but that might be tunable by playing with the steering input signal.

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

Tomsaddy, you may be onto something for sure here. It does appear that the honda civics at one point did start coming with a factory CTO rack, and I found that 2001-2005 was a hydraulic rack which I would much prefer over the electric. The easy way to make it work would be to fabricate a bracket setup that mounted to the front of the rack and utilized my existing inner and outer tie rods. I for the life of me though just can NOT find any illustrations showing if that rack is a front or rear steer mounted rack!!! Frustrating, especially with the popularity of hondas. The other concern would be how the "feel" of that rack is. being in an economy car like a honda, it may not have the sporty feel that you'd want in a trans am, but the few hondas I've driven did have very nice steering to them.

eseibel67

This thread is interesting, however fabrication is a bit beyond my skill set. I used to work for a rebuilder, and CTO racks on old Cavaliers and Intrepids were rear steer. The racks were mounted on the firewall, would imagine the Hondas are the same. Will try to find a pic.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

This thread is like the "I'm going to buy my daughter a unicorn" thread.

Lot's of discussion, come back in three years none of these people will have put a rack in their car.

I've actually done this, by using an aftermarket k-member, power cobra rack, a number of flaming river steering joints. I ripped it all out and went back to a box and stock k-member a few weeks later.

It didn't handle like a Corvette, it didn't handle like a 4th gen. All it did was guarantee I had less header clearance on the driver side and constantly chasing bump steer. I ended up getting custom made spindles at one point, but decided not to run them. (it would be illegal anyway, you can't weld on a spingle/steering arm/tierod).

At one point, I decided to pick up a vette rather than try to make a turdgen handle like one. Perhaps in Florida or California that would be a good buy. Here in New England, with rack & pinion and 275mm front tires all the car did was rip the steering wheel out of my hand every time I hit an imperfection in our crappy roads.


-- Joe

eseibel67

Found a pic. That 04 Civic is definitely rear steer, the steering arm is on the strut, not the splindle.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I've got two in the lot. I'll go take some pictures when it stops raining.

-- Joe

tomsaddy

iTrader: (4)

Damn...forgot about checking if it was rear steer. That may have shot my options for electric, but here are some options for hydraulic:
http://www.unisteer.com/bolt-in-rack...k-pinions.html

I'm pretty sure that at least the Torino and Maverick are front steer. Probably some others as well.

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

I am still very deep in the planning on how exactly to do this correctly. As you found out the hard way, there is a lot of R&D into designing and fabricating a rack and pinion to do what it's supposed to and do it well on these cars. I'm not just going to slap something on and hope for the best, so it's going to take some time. I am almost set on a CTO style rack at this point but I still need to get the knuckle situation figured out, and the geometry has to be perfect before I pull the trigger on any parts. I already spoke to flaming river who were not all too helpful honestly, but maybe I'll try unisteer as well to see if they have something close to my needs.

Yea, found out unfortunately that the honda rack is a no go. Some of those setups on the unisteer site are very interesting. I just can't fathom spending $2K on a custom setup that may or may not work as good or better than factory. I do plan on at least calling them and seeing if they have any info or maybe even any racks that will fit my requirements perfectly.

Pablo

iTrader: (1)

I spent a few dozen hours researching this. The easiest way I see this working is by doing it like the unisteer kit for second gens. I combed over the specs on just about every rack you can think of and can tell you that the CTO rack that most of these aftermarket guys base their kits on is the same kind of rack that is in a few dozen cars across brands. I think it may be originally a design from TRW or Delco. It is fundamentally one design that is slightly modified for front or rear steer, length, ratio, etc.

The reason why you want a CTO rack is because you want the tie rod pivot points to stay in the same place as where the center link holds them. The distance between these points is 15 9/16" on a stock centerlink. An end takeoff rack this short may not even exist, and even if it did, the input shaft routing would be "challenging". Some aftermarket guys sort of turn an ETO rack into a pseudo CTO with a bracket that connects both ends. I believe this is still problematic as far as input shaft routing goes.

The "cavalier" rack is the CTO rear steer, and the "intrepid" is front steer. You can see this if you look at pictures of the racks. You will see that the input shaft housing either rests on top or on bottom of the actual rack. The bottom position is a front steer rack. The only front steer racks that I can find of this type came in mopar products from around 93 and up. The length is 34 5/8". The number of turns lock to lock is 3.2 and the throw is 6 7/8". The only thing that changes appears to be the mounting configuration in later years, only a minor difference. The aftermarket guys seem to stick to the rack that looks most like the 93 to 95 intrepid rack.

I found this link in my research: http://webpages.acs.ttu.edu/jikelly/Howdy%20Dude.htm

This rack is almost perfect except the rack mount holes for the tie rods are on the front of the rack. You would need to either build a bracket that curves around the back of the rack to mount the tie rods, or, do what I suspect unisteer does: put the rack and pinion gear itself from the cavalier rack into an intrepid rack which then places the bolt holes facing rearward. You then need to cut the housing of the rack, rotate 180, sleeve the housing and weld. The hydraulic portion appears to be confined to the passenger side and thus is not affected by this operation.
The final problem with this rack is the width. The distance between the front sway bar legs on a thirdgen (the parallel portion) is 33 inches. It cannot fit between these legs. As you move further rearward and inline with the centerlink, the space is just about 34.5". This is not especially problematic at ride height because the sway bar legs would be mostly up and out of the way. It does get very tight if you jack up the car and I'm not sure you could get it to fit without excessively lowering the rack and then having to get crazy with your tie rod to rack mount.

Some of the cavalier racks are shorter in length. There is one as narrow as 32 inches. The catch is that it is of course rear steer (possible work around) and the lines for the hydraulics enter through the end of the housing effectively making it longer. Could be mitigated with tight 90 degree fittings. Anyway the rear steer issue could be resolved by simply making a hybrid rack from the intrepid and shorter cavalier rack. I am not sure what it is exactly that allows the cav rack to be that much shorter so that is just a guess.

The other option is based upon the fact that Vauxhall sold right hand drive Cavaliers in the UK and thus produced a car with a mirror rack to the one in the US. I confirmed that this rack is unique and sold by REMY. If infact this rack is the 32" model, one could simply flip it and use it as a front steer in a LHD car (this has been done with other racks).

Look at the A1Cardone catalog and you will see all of the variations of this rack (except for RHD cars). The 93-95 intrepid rack is 22-324. There are maybe a half dozen "cavalier" racks starting at 22-103, 104, etc. Lengths of the racks are in the catalog. Images are on the orielly auto parts website and others. You'll see they are all the same rack and identical to what the Unisteer and AmericanOnlineImports (retro rack) are based off of. Retro rack even has dimensions on their webpage.

The reason I believe that this is the best option is because it places the rack input shaft in a position that is very close to the factory steering box. I don't think you would need to do anything to the K member except add a spherical bearing (as in the unisteer second gen kit) to support the steering shaft. Could be bolt in using existing K member brace holes. Look at how the unisteer second gen camaro (or chevelle) kit is put together. I believe this is the blueprint on how to do this.

I don't have easy access to a cheap (or returnable) intrepid rack to test fit but you guys in the states can probably borrow one from the auto parts store pretty easily. Maybe the 34.5" rack is workable, just a tight fit.

tomsaddy

iTrader: (4)

Any updates?

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

Unfortunately, no. Long story short, my younger brother was recently involved in a very nasty motorcycle accident, and early on it was considered life threatening...in turn, my car has been on the back burner since it happened, and I really have had no interest in working on it. Just too much going through my mind to be tinkering with the car, as I'm sure many of you have been there as well at some point in time.

My brother is on the road to recovery now and has been doing extremely well in the hospital, so I have been in much better spirits as well. I'm sure I'll start getting the itch again to work on the car soon, as I'm already starting to eyeball it as I walk by it in the garage lol!

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

Figured my recent discovery was worth an update on here. Basically, the car is steering 10 times better at the moment with the gearbox setup. I had a combination of issues previously which was blowing my mind as far as getting it to steer like it should. Everything in my front end is brand new and in turn, I expected it to be nice and tight and steer perfect.

Well low and behold, I had a bent rear axle which was causing the left rear wheel to oscillate like a **** while driving. In turn, I'm guessing this threw off the front alignment specs back when I had it done, or the shop I took it to was just extremely incompetent because it still felt like crap after that. I ended up fixing the axle a few weeks back and instantly noticed the car felt smoother driving. Also within the past week, I found a TGO members post who had been talking about doing home alignments using jackstands and string. After lots of adjustments using this method and getting it to where I was satisfied with it, I locked everything down and took it for a ride....and holy crap, what a difference. The car tracks perfectly straight down the road now. No more fighting the steering wheel trying to keep it going straight. Still some center play when coming into a corner, but I can def work with it for the moment. I'm thinking possibly the steering linkage would benefit from a solid piece with u-joints over the rubber rag joint.

But anyways, not to be a let down, but basically I'm amazed at how a few small issues that seemed totally unrelated can turn your steering into a nightmare. I would love to go to a rack setup still, but I just can't find the happy medium for one that will work and drive like stock with little to no bump steer. I'm going to put this on the back burner for now because I just don't want to risk hacking my steering off and being let down with a sub-par feeling rack setup.

SlickTrackGod

THis is such a simple install. you guys have to throw out everything you are imagining mounting one to a kemember up to this point, Just throw out that thought.

You hang this assembly from frame rail to frame rail more forward where the OEM steering box exists in front of the motor. This give you distance for the steering linkage, gives height adjustment for geometry, the custom bracket draglink allows for use of what ever distance take off points you need, and it duplicates the OEM drag link basics in tie rod configuration.

Keep the OEM Kmember.vYou can thank me later

Ps, you would not even need a wonderbar anymore...lol (trivial point, thought I'd throw that in for humor)

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

Lol. Cant say the truth more blunt than that. Whats wrong with the factory stuff??? I dont get it. Whats next ?4 wheel drive Irocs??

whitedevilTA

iTrader: (8)

I've seen those...problem is, almost every CTO style rack I've seen is for rear steer, making it an obvious issue. Don't forget also, the main problem here is not mounting the rack...I could have a rack mounted to my K-member in a few hours with my welder and some measuring. The main problem is finding a rack with the third gens required 6.5 or so inches of travel in it to fully turn the wheels from lock to lock. Theres a lot more engineering involved than simply bolting one of those fancy looking pieces into place. A lot of the muscle car guys who have those setups always seem to only have so-so reviews on them...seems like nobody is completely satisfied with the performance of them.

Base91

iTrader: (1)

Dean may be a little cranky some times but he is by no means the only one. He, amongst several others, is very knowledgeable and has been very good at using simple analogies to make some of the more complex stuff understandable. For some of us who are not in any car related business this is mostly new stuff to learn and we need all the help we can get. As Mr. Berra said "it ain't bragging if you can do it." Well maybe a bit now and then.

Base91

iTrader: (1)

But on topic, Flaming River seems very expensive. Just seems like if it was designed once it shouldn't be hard to replicate for a more reasonable cost. Depending on volume.

tomsaddy

iTrader: (4)

I called Flaming River and Unisteer. The most travel you can get out of their racks is 6 inches. This has me pretty close to giving up because I'm not real excited about modifying my spindles and I'm not comfortable with the available aftermarket spindles in a street application. I may be rebuilding my stock box.

Base91

iTrader: (1)

Stock total movement is 6.5 inches? If you've gone with wide wheels/tires you probably don't get all of that anyway so would 6 inches not be usable? Aren't there racks with more than 6 inches of travel?

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I never found one when I did my swap.

The rack option makes sense in a light drag car with manual steering. For a street oriented thirdgen, I don't quite get the problem with the box. I mean sure, my 4th gen outhandles my 3rd gen every day of the week but it's not terrible.

-- Joe

Steve Mack

iTrader: (5)

AGR quick ratio steering box is all you need for best steering .

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

Agreed. I did the box and just did moog everything.

tomsaddy

iTrader: (4)

This is interesting to me, as it's the only thing I haven't been able to solve yet. I know this can be done with a modified or aftermarket spindle, or by adding an additional lever (like a bellcrank) in the system, but all these options are compromises that I don't think I want to make.

Are you saying there's another option?

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I just remember lots of arguments over alignments and steering.

As far as designing a R&P for a thirdgen, I've seen no examples from him. I imagine if he had a solid design he would be selling them right now on ebay.

Unlike most of the people in the thread, I actually did do a R&P in a thirdgen. I reported the issues I have, but I'll list then again here:

1) Rack travel must be around 8" for use with stock spindles
2) Nobody makes short spindles
3) I shortened some spindles for use with a Cobra rack and it freaked me out
4) Angle from column to rack requires some fairly crazy ujoints
5) Header clearance can be an issue with steering column routing

This was all with the wimpy tubular k-member. With a factory k-member, I'd imagine you would have to go with a crazy frame mounted setup like what is available for a 2nd gen camaro:

http://assets1.hubgarage.com/mygarage/drewh/blogs/23188


At the end of the day.. Why?? What exactly is wrong with the box? It's a 3rd gen camaro, not a Z06.

-- Joe

rgauder

iTrader: (1)

I understand that weight reduction is a primary benefit. Looking at what some of these pre-runner guys can do, I''m sure a spindle could be fabricated quite strong.

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

Joe is about the only here who has done it with his experience and what he has found, he has given his final opinion which is well respected. Given that why is anyone trying a second go around? Like he and many here have said, nothing wrong with factory box.

SlickTrackGod

Now as for utilizing an R&P on a 3rd gen. Its quite simple if you have good fabricating skills and the proper thought process on what lacks in the 3rd gen platform. You also need to understand how Ackerman works, what limits it on the 3rd gen as well as other limitations that EVERYONE here have faced with trying to go wider tires with restricted space.

You can leave the stock spindles- Really?- Yes. But every says they have poor ackerman so they need to be shortened and the outer tie rod moved outward? NO. They have clearence issues with hitting wheels-Yes, so you move everything up closer to the spindle and eliminate the tierod ends- use rod ends. I could possible even make this work with the rod end attaching to the TOP of the steering arm and raise the entire tie rod height...How? Throw everything you've been chasing out the window and retrain your thought.

Ok, so we start with the steering arm/outer tie rod and work inward...NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND working from the steering box or R&P like everyone is doing.

What would give better ackerman? Well the drag link connects them so it must be in the arch and throw of the drag link swing that will gain one side in swing rotation and vicaversa for the other steering direction? wrong. Not going to happen with a connected drag link to both tie rods. So what do we do? we SEPARATE them.

OK- so we separate them, now we need to focus on what kind of system would create the proper acceleration gains needed for each independant side to produce Ackerman. THis is where a working model will ned to be played with- but trust me I gaurantee 100% if you get the heights and pivot points correct with the proper bellcrank ratios and angles of axis pivot- also remembering that the bell cranks do not need to swing on a horizonal plane(this may in fact be the key to increasing ratio when considering inner tie rod height to outer tie rod height.

Bell Crank, Yes Bell crank. But Plural. TWO OF THEM, one on each side in place of the drag link.

You position a CTO rack forward of the kemember up more closer to the radiator- this gives you the angle for the steering shaft. You use a REAR STEER rack...HOWEVER...you use it in a forward steering mounting. The key here is the beell crank movements will REVERSE the direction of steering.

Play with tht idea. If you guys are clever enough, You will get it to work. You will gain wheel clearance issues, you will have proper Ackerman, no added unsprung weight, front chassis bracing with a new cross member, and a VERY precise steering system that is innovative and one of a kind.

Good luck.

IROCZ1989

iTrader: (1)

Informative. But can you answer this one. Obviously its alot of work. All said and done, gains worth the price over stock ?

On another note I dont think people are questioning your expertise. You seem to know your stuff. My opinion your delivery of said info, leaves alot to be desired. Take care.

SlickTrackGod

The average rack new is going to cost minimum $800. the better units are around $1500 when were are talking all out off road racing durability- not needed here. I think the OP's intention was to find something take-off that is used.

Build the system first with a working model of metal and/or wood framing. It is simply an inexpensive model that is full size of spindle swing geometry etc that you have a baseline to work the sterring geometry to. Start off the spindle steering arms and work towards the bellbranks with a fixed rod in place of the R&P. get the geometry and swing correct then buy a rack the size of the rod you are working with (all the while keeping to specs of known rack options that are inexpensive.) Its like playing with Lincoln Logs or lego. Think of it as play time and just keep tinkering and learning all the while focusing on geometry and ratios. You will learn a lot. I can not teach this over typing.

As for being a lot to be desired? I was very precise. If you can not understand it? then it goes exactly to my post about the gift I have of being able to understand imaginary objects working in front of me. Some people have this, most do not. I do not put people down or look down on them, I try and help see this, but I also know most never do or will. It is a gifft few people have in this world. It is like understanding roll centers and roll axis- most go WHAT? My best use is a pencil stabbed through a Kleenex box. They will understand visuals, but not until I physically show them. In 5 mins, mopst people are so overloaded their head hurts because the thought is very complex. I live this daily, I have for years, You have not.

SlickTrackGod

Because the geometry would be off. moving them closer towards the front of the car in inner tie rod mount geometry would 1) put the lateral angle of the tierod (lateral meaning in reference to the chassis) and cause bump steer. 2)You would need a longer tire rod which is bad, you would decrease the radius of the inner tracking wheel even more then currently exists, and 3) you would not be able to have the "gain" ratio needed to correct the proper ackerman gain as the wheels turn (kind of redundant answer to #2 but want to clarify the initial goal we are after.)

What a lot of people probably fail to realize is the angle of the tierods right now coming off the drag link are intentionally angled forward as they travel laterally towards the spindles. This angle flip flops as the wheels steer more towards lock. The engineers tried to increase this in order to help with some ackerman. By moving this forward only defeats this and makes things worse.

tomsaddy

iTrader: (4)

I did consider bellcranks as a possible option (including what Joe suggested with idlers), although I didn't follow the though all the way through to using a RHS rack...I like where you're going there.. The downside for me is additional failure points and locations for additional free-play in the system. I suppose both could be overcome with skilled design and fabrication.

I was getting close to abandoning the idea, but I think I'm gonna stick with it. Thanks Slick.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

I was hoping after the last round of banter the topic would move more towards perhaps diagrams or actual discussion of the technical details of putting a R&P on a thirdgen.

Instead we have more pictures of people, testimony of credentials, and a lot of chest pounding.

Frankly, I don't get what you guys are getting worked up about.

If you guys are going to actually discuss how to make it work, post a diagram, or an actual picture of a part fine. But if this is going to go another week of preaching and obviously off-medication drivel I'm locking the thread.

-- Joe