familyman
I used to own a 1976 244DL. Next car was a 1978 244DL. Both had manual steering. The '76 had a brilliant turning circle and was quite light in the steering too. But when I bought the 1978, I noticed I couldn't make the same turns as tight, and, it was heavier. The '76 also wore the outer inch of the tyres more aggressively.
Does anyone know why? What I mean is, were these two changes Volvo deliberately made?
If they did make those changes, is there any reason I couldn't put 1976 steering gear into a later model? And if yes, up to what year can that swap be done - and would I now have the same aggressive tyre wear?
The reason I'm asking is, I'd prefer not to have power steering. I see it as added weight, and another thing waiting to fail. Also, the 1976 was so light, that I could turn it with a couple of fingers - particularly once it had started into a turn. But even back to centre again was easy. In fact, it was only slightly harder to turn than the power steering I now have on the 1991 240GL. There was simply no need for power steering with that car. But perhaps it was a one-off for just that one car!?
Chris
Good question. I spent a lot of learner hours in my father's 75 when it was near new and i never had an issue with steering weight. Fast forward many years and the 78 I bought my daughter was diabolical
Angus242164
Essentially the two cars would have been the same, and I'm not quite sure what to make of the turning circle difference, as that is determined by the internal stops in the rack.
However, wheel alignment settings can definitely affect the feel of the steering and tyre wear, as can tyre width and profile.
Also, manual steering 240's originally had straight ball joints which are the same left and right, whilst power steering models have offset ball joints which give the front end more castor, which changes the feel.
I haven't tried it myself, but people have said that using a manual rack in combination with the offset PS ball joints gives great results.
familyman
Yeah, I don't why the difference @Chris - but it was real. I even remember getting wider tyres on the '76 once - the steering got heavier, didn't like it much and went narrow again later. Then years later I remembered that experience, and ran narrows on the '78, yet it was heavier. The reduction in turning circle was small, but it was there. Maybe it was due to being harder to get it into the turn as quick, compared to the '76 - not sure. As for the '91, it's an even bigger turning circle... I'm so sick of three point turns, after approx. 20 years driving the 76 & 78, it's like I'm 'imprinted' that certain streets I should be able to do in one turn (but can't).
@Angus242164 Sorry, great results in what way?
Angus242164
The power steering racks have less turns of the steering wheel from lock to lock than the manual racks, but that is to do with the ratio of the gearing in the racks, I was pretty sure the turning circle was the same for all models.
As I said I haven't tried a manual rack with the PS ball joints myself, but I'm told the handling feels good and low speed steering heaviness is reduced. I think @Dauntless may be running this setup on his 244.
familyman
Ok, thanks. I wonder if it increases tyre wear.
Spac
The offset PS ball joints give slightly more positive castor, which makes the steering heavier.
More castor effectively gives you slightly more negative camber as you steer away from straight ahead, without any change in camber from straight ahead. It also makes the car more stable and less prone to wandering.
Even for very sedate drivers, it decreases tyre wear. The harder you drive around corners, the more difference you'll notice the reduced wear on the outside edge.
I wouldn't own a 240 without PS. The manual racks are a slower ratio, so you get the worst of both worlds - steering that is relatively heavy AND slow.
The heaviness pretty much forces you to stick with a stock hula-hoop steering wheel, which is also gross.
(I did a zillion kays with a little '87 steering wheel on my first 242DL - I coped, but I wouldn't do it again).
Anthony
Good contribution Spac .
There is a number of evolutions of the racks, but likely not in such as short 76-78 time frame.
Maybe they changed the rack ratio, but I doubt that too.
Newer tyres can explain the lightness / heavyness differences, and also any tyre width increases heavyness.
My wife insisted I convert a manual box to a pwr steer as it required big muscles for parking lot manoeuvres.
Also Volvo 240 is setup for a bit of positive camber, hence wear on outside edge.
I have tested both neg & pos and (surprisingly to me) ended up with a bit of pos as preferred on a motorsport 240. ;)
familyman
> I wouldn't own a 240 without PS.
I really liked the '76 - often spun the wheel with one finger. Well, until the outer inch of the tyres started wearing, anyway. ;-)
> The heaviness pretty much forces you to stick with a stock hula-hoop steering wheel, which is also gross.
I prefer them. :-) The hard ones - not the softer ones. When the '78 was towed away for scrap, I removed and kept it, for when the soft one goes mushy.
> Newer tyres can explain the lightness / heavyness differences, and also any tyre width increases heavyness.
The '76 got heavier with outer edge wear (of course, LOL), but was still lighter than the '78. IPD, allOEM, etc. used to list two different steering racks - CAM and something else... TRW maybe!? Not sure - anyway - I thought maybe that could've been the cause, but if the two years were the same, then they were the same.
Angus242164
Good info from Spac, looks like I got it the wrong way round re: ball joint type/steering heaviness.
There are a couple of different brands of PS racks and also different designs later on in the '80's, but to my knowledge all manual racks are the same.*
*I have noticed one difference, starting in about '78 or '79 the pinion cap design was changed to allow a plastic dust cover to clip on over the lower uni joint, I don't know of any internal changes though.