HJ Ute Power Steering Conversion

[Dr Terry]

The shorter steering arms really didn't change the toe out on turns, both had perthitic angles. The short and long arms both had approximatly .5 degree toe out at 20 degrees. The short arms were for a quicker turn in due to the slightly quicker overall ratio. Holden failed miserably with the steering geometry. RTS or not.

The only way to improve this angle is to have the tie rod end hole in the steering arms further apart/outboard of the lower ball joint. But the brake disc clearance is not large enough to allow this for any worth while change. If they made the cars rear steer (behind the ball joints) moving the hole centres in would have been easy and they could have got the perfect steering angles. The Torana's suffered badly for the same reason. Doing a full lock U-turn in any of these vehicles and you will experience major tyre scrub and tyre squeal. I'm not sure what the overall difference in the turning circle between the two are, may depend on the steering box lock to lock turns and travel. I didn't think these cars had stops on the steering arms.?

Totally agree, but I've found this to be worse on the longer wheelbase cars.

For example the 4-cyl HB/LC/LJ/TA Toranas toe-out on turns is almost OK, but when GM-H extended the wheelbase for the 6-cyl LC-LJ they didn't allow for the Ackerman angle change, so they are so much worse.

HQ-WB same. The 111-inch wheelbase sedans & coupes aren't too bad, but the LWB cars, utes, p/vans etc. are far worse, because nothing was altered in the front end geometry to allow for the increase in wheelbase. The One-Tonners with their 120.6-inch wheelbase are terrible.

On my own One-Tonner I have bent the steering as far out as clearance will allow & it has helped.

BTW the official spec for turning circle is 12.1m for the SWB cars, 12.3m for the LWB & 12.8m for the One-Tonner, with no difference listed between p/st & non-p/st cars.

Dr Terry