Hydraulic Assit Steering- Another Idea Never Attempted

[rustystud]

just sarcasm! the first power steering I built was in 1997 and used a 710, the only box I have ever found that will just barely fit on the outside of the frame. I know the hf54 has been used quite a bit, but I have never been a fan because of the linear control valve. very old school, everything newer has a rotary valve with an internal torque shaft to set the point where PS starts. there is a newer ross box, but I got one and it was a full inch thicker and the pitman arm would have to be custom made, more expense.
tom

Sorry, I thought you used the Ross gear box. Does your 710 have any issues with tires hitting when using the "mega tires" everyone and his dog are using now-a-days ? Also, do you have to beef up the frame much more then using a "inside the frame" box ? Last question, is it true you will not be making anymore steering kits after you sell out of your present stock ? If the last is true, your really putting me on the spot ! I want your overdrive unit, but I really NEED a power steering system. I just can't swing it right now . Plus I have to convince momma first Money Money Money , why does everything cost so much MONEY lately. I just got the news that I need a new crown, my wife needs a new crown and insurance won't pay !!! Sorry for ranting there

 

[rustystud]

then it would not be a torque generator, it would be a control valve. there used to be a steering box that looked exactly like the stock one but had a valve with 4 ports on it right at the top of the box. I have only ever seen one and it was NOS, don't know what it was made to fit, but it was at a mil surplus place.

I have an old 1964 IHC Loadstar 1800 series that has that same system. The valve is mounted on the top, actually the steering shaft goes into the valve. The hoses go to a ram that pushes on the pitman arm. Only problem is the pitman is 4" longer then stock style arm. I'll try and get some pictures tomorrow. Of course it's suppose to "rain like a cow pissing on a flat rock" tomorrow, but that's Washington
I forgot to mention the truck was military surplus. It was used to move heavy equipment around the base. It has a 2 speed differential, 8.43 and 6.50 ratios (or something like that ) Top speed is 40 mph with the
392cid engine, and a Clark 285 transmission. The first time I drove it, I thought something was broken ! The guys laughed at me and said "she's working fine you just need to adjust your expectations". I didn't think it was funny and I had to tow it back home . It was in Medford Oregon, I'm in Woodinville WA.

 

[m-35tom]

Only problem is the pitman is 4" longer then stock style arm.

that would not be a problem, it would be an advantage since it would make it steer faster and you no longer need the mechanical advantage.

 

[jesusgatos]

Here are the pics. Since these were taken, I have removed the rear track bar and bulked up the front one some more. Most of the components are PSC. I think I saw something in this thread about possiblity of full hydraulic. DO NOT DO IT, sure it will be easy to turn, but take it out on the road people behind you will think your hammered drunk. Not to mention the safety hazard of having no mechanical connection. Thats how my set up originally was and why the builder even let it leave his shop like that is beyond me.

Would strongly encourage you to reconsider the way all those heim-joints are mounted. Should not be in single-shear like that. Would me much stronger/safer if they were mounting in double-shear. Looks like you're a capable fabricator, so can't imagine that it would be too much trouble. Definitely worth it.

 

[rustystud]

Here is some pictures of the steering system on my 1964 IHC Loadstar.

 

[m-35tom]

Here is some pictures of the steering system on my 1964 IHC Loadstar.

i see you have the early IHC rust prevention package

 

[RHudson85]

Would strongly encourage you to reconsider the way all those heim-joints are mounted. Should not be in single-shear like that. Would me much stronger/safer if they were mounting in double-shear. Looks like you're a capable fabricator, so can't imagine that it would be too much trouble. Definitely worth it.

How would I change the config to load the bolts in double shear?

 

[jesusgatos]

How would I change the config to load the bolts in double shear?

Posted this picture in another thread a long time ago, and it's a good example of a fabricated pitman arm with a heimijoint mounted in double-shear. See how it eliminates any kind of bending loads on the hardware. Much stronger/safer. Tierod-ends can get away with being mounted in single-shear because they have those tapered studs.

Would also not be a bad idea to tie those high-steer arms into the tierod mounting holes in the stock steering arms while you're at it. Those kinpin cap bolts were never designed to see the kind of loads they're subjected to when they have steering arms mounted to them and they have been known to fail.

Was just looking at your pictures again and had not noticed that you're still using the double-ended ram? That's something else that should probably be addressed. See, the double-ended ram with two short end-links is going to fight the straight tierod. They're each trying to swing the tires through slightly different arcs, which causes a bind/deflection, and that's going to be very hard on your heim-joints. Best case scenario is that they wear out prematurely. You've got a couple options though:

1) Remove the straight tierod. You don't need it. The double-ended tierod with those end-links is perfectly capable of serving as the only mechanical link (tierod) between the two front tires. If you ask me, this would be the best/easiest solution. The only downside is that the Ackermann geometry is going to be slightly better with a straight tierod. When I ws designing the steering system for mah deuce, I modeled the steering geometry and the effect that mounting the same double-ended PSC ram in different locations would have (closer to the axlehousing = better).

2) re-mount the double-ended ram using a clevis-type mount so that it would actually be mounted like a single-ended ram. This would allow you to preserve the better steering geometry that a straight tierod gives you, and would be better than using an unbalanced single-ended ram (steering force/speed is different when turning left/right). Alternately, you could devise some type of shackle or swinging link that would allow you to use the existing ram mount and attach one end of the ram directly to the straight the straight tierod without causing anything to bind.

If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Happy to help. There's also a ton of great tech on all these topics over on Pirate4x4 if you want to do some more research.

 

[rustystud]

i see you have the early IHC rust prevention package

Yes it does That was one of the faults of this great engine. I say great since I worked at IHC (for 3 yrs before they went bankrupt) and can testify to the gas engines extreme durability and longevity. Almost all the small blocks had a forged crankshaft, the blocks where made with a high nickel alloy (extremely strong) and they used steel gears for the cam timing (no chain to wear out). I remember this one customer who wanted his engine refreshed after 150,000 miles. After removing the heads, I checked the cylinders for wear prior to removing the pistons. There was almost NO ridge wear ! I went to one of the senior mechanics and told him the engine had been rebuilt even though the customer had bought the truck new and had said " the engine had never been touched except for belts. The senior mechanic told me that was
normal for IHC engines due to the high nickel content. In the end, we just installed .002" over bearings on the crank and rods, and new rings on the pistons after a ball hone to the cylinders. We never even removed the crank from the block, just lightly sanded the journals using the starter to turn the crank. Afterwards the engine ran great and I never saw that customer again. The customer was right about not changing anything but the belts since I had to remove the old hoses with a saw! My knife would not even penetrate it ! The hoses had petrified !!!
The valve cover gaskets was another story though ! Terrible quality, they always puked oil everywhere ! I often wondered if they did this as a rust prevention .

 

[RHudson85]

Posted this picture in another thread a long time ago, and it's a good example of a fabricated pitman arm with a heimijoint mounted in double-shear. See how it eliminates any kind of bending loads on the hardware. Much stronger/safer. Tierod-ends can get away with being mounted in single-shear because they have those tapered studs.

Would also not be a bad idea to tie those high-steer arms into the tierod mounting holes in the stock steering arms while you're at it. Those kinpin cap bolts were never designed to see the kind of loads they're subjected to when they have steering arms mounted to them and they have been known to fail.

Was just looking at your pictures again and had not noticed that you're still using the double-ended ram? That's something else that should probably be addressed. See, the double-ended ram with two short end-links is going to fight the straight tierod. They're each trying to swing the tires through slightly different arcs, which causes a bind/deflection, and that's going to be very hard on your heim-joints. Best case scenario is that they wear out prematurely. You've got a couple options though:

1) Remove the straight tierod. You don't need it. The double-ended tierod with those end-links is perfectly capable of serving as the only mechanical link (tierod) between the two front tires. If you ask me, this would be the best/easiest solution. The only downside is that the Ackermann geometry is going to be slightly better with a straight tierod. When I ws designing the steering system for mah deuce, I modeled the steering geometry and the effect that mounting the same double-ended PSC ram in different locations would have (closer to the axlehousing = better).

2) re-mount the double-ended ram using a clevis-type mount so that it would actually be mounted like a single-ended ram. This would allow you to preserve the better steering geometry that a straight tierod gives you, and would be better than using an unbalanced single-ended ram (steering force/speed is different when turning left/right). Alternately, you could devise some type of shackle or swinging link that would allow you to use the existing ram mount and attach one end of the ram directly to the straight the straight tierod without causing anything to bind.

If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Happy to help. There's also a ton of great tech on all these topics over on Pirate4x4 if you want to do some more research.

View attachment 466001 View attachment 466002

Ok, I follow you. I never really thought about setting up the pitman arm for double shear. I guess because that is the way I have always seen pitman arms, I am considering it though.

As far as the tie rod is concerned, I like it there for added strength, yes the geometry is a little off, and the bind is so small that I can overcome it by hand.

The last point about the high steer arms, they do not see much load at all, the ram puts out most of the force needed to turn so I'm really not worried about them. I plan on re-doing the suspension work at some point which is where I would go ahead and mount the ram like shown in your animation.

Thanks for the advice.