My wife doesn't mind not having power steering in the tank!!!!!

[RobertSmalls]

Wait, wait, tell me again, why are you fabricating your own outer tie rod ends? Are you preserving the original steer geometry? Probably not, if it helps with bump steer.

[Christ]

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls

Wait, wait, tell me again, why are you fabricating your own outer tie rod ends? Are you preserving the original steer geometry? Probably not, if it helps with bump steer.

It helps with bump steer because the rod ends can absorb impact on more than one axis. Yes, the modification still keeps OEM steering geometry, even under load and suspension impact, when done correctly. Some vehicles are designed slightly differently, so that the tie rod ends are directly in line with the mounting location on the hub. For those vehicles, you can offset your steering arm geometry as much as 1 degree or more. I've only seen a couple in my life that were like that, though, and can't think of any specific examples.

Lastly, there is nothing really that requires fabrication, either. It's mainly a matter of installing a bolt, a sleeve, and a couple nuts, then finding a spherical rod end bearing that has the same threads as your tie rods. Get an alignment afterward.

[Seraph]

Would that work with an EPS system? 'Cause thats what i have

[Christ]

It works with just about any steering system, actually. It doesn't matter if it's power assist or not, or how the power is added.

What you're actually doing is removing the OEM tie-rod ends (outer) and replacing them with spherical rod bearings that happen to be the right thread pitch/diameter to bolt onto your original tie rods. Very simple mod, but not worth it for the every day DIY'er unless you're looking for "something more" from it, like slightly easier turning ability when you don't have PS, and a (sometimes) marked reduction in bump steer characteristics.

The average person has no idea what I just said...

[Frank Lee]

I don't either.

Stock tie rod ends "absorb impact on more than one axis" too. Actually I don't see any functional difference- it's like "What is better, a bolt or a stud?"- except regular tie rod ends are often greaseable which is a good thing, and their innards are more protected from filth.

And, where do you find the nice tapered bolts that fit in the tapered holes?





Most effective way to ease Armstrong steering is to pump up the tires; then see that everything in the front end is tight and lubed up; then take weight off the front (rear engine cars have such awesome light manual steering).

[Christ]

Frank, stock tie rod ends deflect on impact, spherical rod bearings don't.

Also, you don't need the tapered bolt, really. What you end up with is a normal bolt through the hole with a nut tightened to "godknowswhat" ftlbs. (I just use grade 8/10 bolts and an impact until it either breaks the bolt or stops turning them, then slap a torque wrench on there and make sure it's more than 150 ftlbs.)

EDIT: If you wanted the tapered bolt anyway, you'd need a welder and a hack saw - you cut your old tie-rod ends open and steal the taper and threaded section from it, then weld a stud to the top of it so that you have a place to bolt your rod end.

The way that the rod ends end up being seated, they're closer to the axis of impact, so less force is imparted on the bearing than would be with a traditional tie-rod end, which has nearly 1/2" or more between the contact with the knuckle and the bearing itself.

I use the setup on limited use cars, though. I can't vouch for wear/tear under normal street use, but it was what it was - a suggestion that I know to work after removal of PS components. None of my street cars have it done, because it's not necessary to me. I don't drive like a maniac with no PS and require instant steering feed back on the streets here at home. On the track, or even in a field, it's a different story.

I've also never had an OEM tie-rod end that was greaseable after my 1979 Plymouth Volare. They're all sealed units, as are ball joints and other similar components.

[Frank Lee]

Still don't see the difference; as on lower pic of my previous post, they are "the same only different"...

I never- OK very very rarely- encounter an impact for that component anyway. Outside of off-roading or hitting something big, it doesn't really happen.

Anyway, here's a lil something about the spherical ends:

http://www.aurorabearing.com/Files/a...Rod%20Ends.pdf

[Christ]

Frank -
The OEM tie rod's bearing surface is perceptibly much further from the point of strain, making leverage on the bearing surface. The rod ends (when done correctly) mount just about flush to the knuckle, with about 6mm clearance to allow flexing. It lessens the leverage that an impact has on the bearing surface. It can also often mean adjustability in the size of the bearing itself.

They're basically the same part, but the design of the tie-rod end puts the bearing's contact surface further from the fulcrum, is all. It's a minor difference that just allows for less deflection, especially after nominal wear has started.

I think the bumpsteer comment was a little outside the normal operational parameter of average people, though. It does, by my experience, make it easier to steer, though.

[Frank Lee]

Both layouts place the ball in line with the rod. The balls-n-sockets on both layouts see the same strain; it is the bolt or stud that has to deal with "leverage".

If you are placing the ball closer to the knuckle, you are changing the geometry. And, you are not putting a nut up there to hold the bolt like you said. Or, you are putting a nut between the knuckle and the joint, keeping the geometry and subjecting the bolt to the same "leverage" as a tie rod end stud, but basically making a neo-tie rod end from what I can tell.

[Christ]

I guess with those images, it does change the geometry. In my head, I keep seeing tie-rod ends with offsets, where the bearing surface is actually higher than the threaded section, so that the threaded section is basically level with the top of the mounting surface after installation.

The way I do it, you're using the open-type spherical, not the studded one. You're just putting a bolt through the hole in the knuckle, put a 5mm thick spacer on it, and then lay the rod end over that spacer, washer, nut, and give it grief (it probably doesn't need to be that tight, but whateva, eh?).

You end up with a nut over top of the rod end, a bolt in a shear config between the spherical end and the knuckle, a spacer separating the spherical and the knuckle, and a nut below the knuckle's mounting surface.

After all that, the bearing is still closer to the mounting surface than with a traditional tie-rod end.