RS vs IROC Steering ratios
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Devon, UK
Car: 1988 Camaro IROC-Z
Engine: 350 TPI
RS vs IROC Steering ratios
Just a quick question:
My '89 RS had a much tighter turning circle than my '88 IROC-Z does.
It also didn't make the grinds and groans that the IROC-Z does (specifically a grind on full right - I know, I know, full lock should be avoided but we live in an imperfect world).
So, were the ratios different? If I could the steering of my RS onto my IROC, I'd be a happy man.
As part of my quest to get rid of the full-right-grind I suspect I'm going to end up replacing most, it not all, of the front steering set up, so I'm wondering if I should be factoring a new box to the bill as well.
My '89 RS had a much tighter turning circle than my '88 IROC-Z does.
It also didn't make the grinds and groans that the IROC-Z does (specifically a grind on full right - I know, I know, full lock should be avoided but we live in an imperfect world).
So, were the ratios different? If I could the steering of my RS onto my IROC, I'd be a happy man.
As part of my quest to get rid of the full-right-grind I suspect I'm going to end up replacing most, it not all, of the front steering set up, so I'm wondering if I should be factoring a new box to the bill as well.
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 19,282
Likes: 103
From: Lawrence, KS
Car: Met. Silver 85 IROC/Sold
Engine: 350 HO Deluxe (350ci/330hp)
Transmission: T-5 (Non-WC)
Axle/Gears: Limited Slip 3.23's
Re: RS vs IROC Steering ratios
Here's some general steering box info (I'd like to give credit, but I don't recall where I found the info):
• “WS” – 1982-1992 Camaro – 12.7:1 ratio (just like your Z/28, this may be the box that you Z originally had.
• “XH” – 1985-1992 Camaro – 12.7:1 ratio (this box was also installed on Z/28’s and other high performance Camaros; it has slightly more steering effort required than the WS box.) NOTE – I believe this box was used on cars originally equipped with 16” wheels
• “WN” – 1982-1985 Camaro – 14.1 ratio
• “WP” – 1982-1985 Camaro – 13:1-15:1 variable ratio (used in Berlinettas, least steering effort required of all third gen. Camaro steering boxes)
• “JL” – 1986-1992 Camaro – 14.1 ratio (base Camaro steering box)
JamesC
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
From: Devon, UK
Car: 1988 Camaro IROC-Z
Engine: 350 TPI
Re: RS vs IROC Steering ratios
Interesting, cheers for that.
Just wondering because I could turn the RS straight into my driveway, but the IROC needs a kinda 3 point manoeuvre to get her in. I guess the 16" wheels and the different stops are the reason why.
Just wondering because I could turn the RS straight into my driveway, but the IROC needs a kinda 3 point manoeuvre to get her in. I guess the 16" wheels and the different stops are the reason why.
Supreme Member
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,491
Likes: 6
From: Cleveland, Ohio
Car: 89' IROC-Z
Engine: LO3
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 10-Bolt/2.73
Re: RS vs IROC Steering ratios
Thanks for this informaiton JamesC. I am looking into a steering box upgrade and wanted to make sure I don't buy the same ratio box just cleaned up.
Junior Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: Palm Desert, CA.
Car: 87 RS Camaro
Engine: LS6
Transmission: Tremec 6 Speed
Axle/Gears: FAB 9, Floater, 370 True Trac
Re: RS vs IROC Steering ratios
The a-arm steering stops are different between 15" and 16" wheels (IIRC, the steering box stops are different as well). The wider IROC wheels/tires wouldn't help the the 'pushing/jumping reaction either.
Here's some general steering box info (I'd like to give credit, but I don't recall where I found the info):
• “WS” – 1982-1992 Camaro – 12.7:1 ratio (just like your Z/28, this may be the box that you Z originally had.
• “XH” – 1985-1992 Camaro – 12.7:1 ratio (this box was also installed on Z/28’s and other high performance Camaros; it has slightly more steering effort required than the WS box.) NOTE – I believe this box was used on cars originally equipped with 16” wheels
• “WN” – 1982-1985 Camaro – 14.1 ratio
• “WP” – 1982-1985 Camaro – 13:1-15:1 variable ratio (used in Berlinettas, least steering effort required of all third gen. Camaro steering boxes)
• “JL” – 1986-1992 Camaro – 14.1 ratio (base Camaro steering box)
JamesC
Here's some general steering box info (I'd like to give credit, but I don't recall where I found the info):
• “WS” – 1982-1992 Camaro – 12.7:1 ratio (just like your Z/28, this may be the box that you Z originally had.
• “XH” – 1985-1992 Camaro – 12.7:1 ratio (this box was also installed on Z/28’s and other high performance Camaros; it has slightly more steering effort required than the WS box.) NOTE – I believe this box was used on cars originally equipped with 16” wheels
• “WN” – 1982-1985 Camaro – 14.1 ratio
• “WP” – 1982-1985 Camaro – 13:1-15:1 variable ratio (used in Berlinettas, least steering effort required of all third gen. Camaro steering boxes)
• “JL” – 1986-1992 Camaro – 14.1 ratio (base Camaro steering box)
JamesC
TXs
Dennis
Last edited by dennisschreuer; Jun 11, 2015 at 09:18 PM. Reason: misspell
Trending Topics
Joined: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,553
Likes: 806
From: South Ms
Car: 89 Firebird
Engine: 355 TBI
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 10 Bolt.Posi-3.73s
Re: RS vs IROC Steering ratios
Im not sure the part # but I got the fast ratio steering box replacement for my 89 WS6 Formula and WOW what a difference it was from any 3rd gen ive had as far as steering. If I remember right there were several different ones I could order but I went with the performance one that came with my car. But in saying that I replaced almost every suspension part and bushings under the whole car. World of difference
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 233
From: Chasing Electrons
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
Re: RS vs IROC Steering ratios
The problem is the ink, it doesn't last. So it becomes difficult to see the code on the box. RPO codes can help as certain steering boxes were dedicated to certain suspension & wheel/tire combinations.
But it isn't the end all to be all, as a different box could have been installed.
Counting input shaft turns lock-to-lock is helpful. So is using a protractor on the output shaft to measure the center-to-lock angles.
RBob.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
backtothe80s
Suspension and Chassis
33
Sep 5, 2015 12:39 AM
mustangman65_79
Body
3
Aug 11, 2015 03:17 PM










