Studebaker steering kinda OT (Conestogaman)

Buy-Sell-Trade, Wanted, Q&A, anything Conestoga!

Studebaker steering kinda OT (Conestogaman)

Postby Mike » 2005 Mar 30 Wed 1:14 pm

Conestogaman,

I didn't want to post anything about Bill (Bills 53 Studelac) steering setup on the other Stude site because most don't seem to realize the inner workings of front end geometry.

The small group here seems to be open to ideas other thAn their own.

The Stock Stude front end has major bump steer. While not as bad as the Chevy II's or the Falcon's, Mustang's, it is bad.

There is a good article in the April 05 Popular Hot Rodding magazine about bump steer and how to rid youself of it. Even that article states what I said weeks ago....it's extremly difficult if not impossible to achieve "no" bumpsteer on an OEM style front suspension.

So while I'll not take away anything from a guy that's trying new things, far from it. And while I don't like the outcome, the body work and the way he did it is very good. BUT....I can guarantee you, that work he did on the front suspension is NOT "correct". Driving down the street or not, it's not nearly as good as he thinks it is.

One major way I can tell....is the location and length of the R&P.

I think most all might agree after reading the Popular Hot Rodding article. I learned some of this stuff long ago, and I find nothing in the article to argue about.

Buy the way...thanks for those pictures. I've been wondering about what it looks like since we started going around and around about it.
User avatar
Mike
 
Posts: 685
Joined: 2004 Dec 18 Sat 3:28 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Still somewhat OT unless you want R&P steering...

Postby Conestogaman » 2005 Apr 08 Fri 12:42 pm

While not an engineer, I do know that as the tire goes over (into?) a bump (pothole), the fixed tie rod will pull/push the steering knuckle as the distance changes between the bellcrank and spindle causing bumpsteer.

The only way to completely eliminate bumpsteer is with a tie rod arm that would lengthen or shorten as the distance changed thru the bump. Maybe someone can invent a tie rod with a computer controlled hydraulic cylinder that adjusts for length as it moves off horizontal (similar to air bag auto-leveling valve on semi trucks).

I think that the mods brought up in the forum

http://www.stude.com/phpbb/viewtopic.ph ... c3925d6629

(as cryptic as they were)started out talking about the website http://home.houston.rr.com/baker53/ but then degenerated to mods that were excessive both in cost and engineering, and would do no better than stock geometry at best and 'could' be far worse. Also it's kinda hard to de-cipher what 'exactly' some of those mods were as I don't 'speak' that particular code.

The Mustang II R&P is a tried and proven hot rod replacement part, but, has the tierod ends at the end of the rack and very short tierods actually making bumpsteer worse on a center bellcrank Stude. This is best used with a complete Mustang II subframe installation. These parts are 'engineered' to work together.

The GM R&P has the tierod ends solidly mounted in the center (like the stock Stude bellcrank) and the whole rack slides side to side. This will return a feel and ride as close to stock as possible and the tierods will be (almost?) the same length as stock.

The only difference from stock is that the rack slides in a straight line and the bellcrank swings in an arc. Otherwise both follow the same path and both have the same center tierod mounts (at the factory location).

What Bill did on his website is (to me) the quickest, most cost effective, and least labor intensive process of installing a R&P on a Stude and still utilizing factory off the shelf parts found at the local Kragen auto parts store, while returning a ride as close to stock as possible... (compromise).

His installation also makes it easier to hook up the steering column shaft. R&P Caddys have a column that makes a hard right turn and drop, as it exits the firewall, and follows it down to the rear mounted rack. This is the column I have selected for my Commander. It also comes with tilt and telescope and steering lock, and cruise control.

There are, of course, other ways to get to the same point (or even less bumpsteer), but then you get into a need for the engineer to run the numbers to make sure everything works as it should, or at least close enough (all things automotive are a compromise between cost and efficiency).

Then you need to do (or farm out) all the cutting, mockup, welding and testing of an untried setup using highly modified parts and not knowing the outcome til it's done.

The results could be less than inspiring. My intention in writing in to the forum was to give those that lurk (I regularly fall into this group) something to look at and ponder as the discussion leads to reversing the spindles, front mounted rack, etc. as opposed to working with off the shelf late model parts that are available just about anywhere.

One thing I did pick up on in the discussion was the convienience of the rack in front of the crossmember (no oilpan clearance needed). It can be done if you move just the steering arm side to side (and add a Quick steer arm while you're at it...) and not the complete spindle.

In this way, (and using the GM R&P) it will come very close to stock, although, admittedly, not completely eliminating bumpsteer without the aforementioned variable length tierods. Also, if the steering arm is tapered (splined, keyed, etc.), there would be modifications needed in that area and then you get into parts that are no longer available at the local auto parts store or Stude reproduction part retailer.

My motivation in posting was not to get into a pissing match, but to offer those less technically minded or dollar challanged, an option for their cars to retain a somewhat stock ride.

8)


Now, here's a bumpsteer nightmare for you...

This is my Chev 4x4 and the very inadequate pitman arm to spindle link.

Image

Yes the link is only about 12" long (or less)...

A Stude suspension doesn't look so bad now, does it?

Sure makes it hard to turn with one tire on a rock and another in a hole...

By the way...I have a crossover steering planned for this truck in the very near future similar to http://www.offroaddesign.com/Dana60crossover.htm

As you can see, even though I am not an engineer, I am well aquainted with bumpsteer and what happens as the suspension 'works'.

I also don't have a lot of $$ to throw at my car so I chose compromises that upgrade and improve my car as well as keeping current and future costs down as I pile the miles onto it in every day, real world, freezing mountains to burning desert travel at roughly 20-30 mph over the speed limit (my foot is kinda heavy).

I applaud those that have gone before me and I shamelessly learn from their mistakes. All I can say is Bill's setup is pretty good, all things considered. I still don't know enough about front mount R&P to be swayed in that direction. Maybe if the other posters took the time to form their thoughts and fill in the gaps....

LOL

Who am I kidding... :roll:

Take Care Mike (and the resta ya)...
Happy Wagoneering!

'54 Conestoga Champion
'54 Conestoga Commander "Connie"
'54 Conestoga "Rusty bucket"
'48 Stude 2R 4x4 monster truck "Tina"
'94 BMW K75 "Red"
'01 BMW R1150GSA "The Cow Killa"
User avatar
Conestogaman
 
Posts: 126
Joined: 2004 Dec 24 Fri 11:06 am
Location: Sack-o-tomato, CA


Return to ALL THINGS CONESTOGA

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests

cron