LocostUSA.com

Nice video, I've watched it at least ten times

I think what's happening is that your trying to fix one small error with another error. The tie rod is a bit too long, but by angling it more then the wishbones it gets shorter quicker then the wishbones. It should have a length and an angle that is proportional to it's position between the upper and lower wishbones. That's not a good description, but I think you know what I mean.

I think you need a rack 2" wider... Usually they're too long so maybe that won't be hard to do?

So jacking up your car would be worst case for the bump steer, does it seem less bad when the suspension hits a bump? Like if you take off the nose and step on the frame...

Yes, instead of a longer rack, I also meant to mention shorter tie rod arms... They might work in the standard steering arms...

horizenjob wrote:Nice video, I've watched it at least ten times

I think what's happening is that your trying to fix one small error with another error. The tie rod is a bit too long, but by angling it more then the wishbones it gets shorter quicker then the wishbones. It should have a length and an angle that is proportional to it's position between the upper and lower wishbones. That's not a good description, but I think you know what I mean.

I think you need a rack 2" wider... Usually they're too long so maybe that won't be hard to do?

So jacking up your car would be worst case for the bump steer, does it seem less bad when the suspension hits a bump? Like if you take off the nose and step on the frame...

I did take off the spring and went on both sides of the ride height (+/-2") to make sure there is no toe change.

You are right that correcting the rack may be a better fix. I have to run through the geometry and see. In the mean time, I think I will put the beefed up steering arm in and enjoy the driving season. The part is a bolt-on that I can undo when time allows without damaging or modding any existing parts.

Actually, I went in the garage and took another look at it. I think raising the arm is my only option.

The rack ends are in line with lower and upper arms. the current steering arm point is about 1/2" to the outside of the king pin line.

The big thing wrong with the geometry is that the rack is much higher (as a percentage of distance between lower and upper arms) than the steering arm (relative to upper and lower ball joints). rack is 8" from lower arm, lower to upper is 12"

upper and lower joints are 13" apart, steering arm is 5" from bottom. I'm adding another 2.5" minimum as shown in the vid.

Moving the rack down means also having to find a shorter rack and dealing with the alternator

It sounds like your doing the right things. And finding a useful fix for now sounds good too. It just seems when I look at the video that the tie rod arm is at a much different angle then the wishbones...

Good luck. ( I suppose luck won't have much to do with it, but you know what I mean )

horizenjob wrote:It sounds like your doing the right things. And finding a useful fix for now sounds good too. It just seems when I look at the video that the tie rod arm is at a much different angle then the wishbones...

Good luck. ( I suppose luck won't have much to do with it, but you know what I mean )

ah, I know what you mean about the angle of the arms. The main reason is the C5 corvette uprights have the upper ball joint pressed into the upright, with the arm going underneath. So the actual pivot point of the upper ball joint is about an inch above the end of the uca.

Depending on where the rack is laterally, you may have reverse ackermann.

Since this is a temp fix, combine raising the end with shortening it. This will give you a stronger mount too.

So the actual pivot point of the upper ball joint is about an inch above the end of the uca.