The Cal-look Lounge
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 25, 2024, 00:46:24 am

Login with username, password and session length
Thank you for your support!
Search:     Advanced search
351216 Posts in 28657 Topics by 6854 Members
Latest Member: 74meanmachine
* Home This Year's European Top 20 lists All Time European Top 20 lists Search Login Register
+  The Cal-look Lounge
|-+  Cal-look/High Performance
| |-+  Technical stuff
| | |-+  rack and pinion question
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: rack and pinion question  (Read 3424 times)
Glauco
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 511



« on: July 12, 2022, 09:36:24 am »

ok, so hear me out.
I'm in the process of sourcing al the parts for a rack and pinion conversion. I just prefer the predictability of a rack and pinion over the old steering box.
But in my quest to find al the parts it seems that the rack and pinion of a polo 86c is the way to go because the connecting rods are longer and prevent bump steer. witch I understand, BUT:
why do all the big cars have the rack and pinion setup were the rods connect to both the outer ends of the rack? porsche has it, the newer vw's have it. Porsche 924 en 944 that see a lot of trackdays tend to use a golf MK1 R&P because of the shorter steering ratio. Hell, even the mazda guys upgrade the first gen RX7's to golf MK1 R&P//
I understand dat the rods are at an angle on the spindles of a beetle, but this can be overcome with a bump steer kit?
is there an other reason I don't see why aircooled folks prefer the polo rack?

thank you,
glauco
Logged
Eddie DVK
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 867



« Reply #1 on: July 14, 2022, 06:38:34 am »

The only thing I can think of is that the Polo rack fits under the fuel tank, and maybe the golf not.
You have to ask Alex, he sells the brackets on here, maybe he know this.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2022, 10:37:19 am by Eddie DVK » Logged

Regards Edgar

" Type 4, it is a completely different engine. You have to drive one to understand! "
Glauco
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 511



« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2022, 07:13:45 am »

The only thing I can think of is that the Polo rack fits under the fuel tank, and maybe the golf not.
You have to Alex, he sells the brackets on here, maybe he know this.

I found a plausible explanation:
the main reason is that in a golf (and in a Porsche and ...) the lower control arms are almost the exact same size as the tie rods, thus it doesn't matter how short they are, the bump steer is almost nothing.
This doesn't go for a beetle/karmann and therefore a R&P with the bracket in the midle of the car and long steering rods compensates the bump steer as much as possible..

Glauco
Logged
volkskris
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 456



« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2022, 08:31:56 am »

That is the reason exactly. Toe change through the suspension travel is far less the longer the steering arms are on a beetle suspension.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2022, 08:33:56 am by volkskris » Logged
-Alex-
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 683



« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2022, 21:01:35 pm »

Polo rack gives least amount of bumpsteer with long tierods compared to golf or other modern steeringrracks, because beetle suspension arms are longitudal and not transverse like macpherson suspensions or double wishbone. 

With macpherson and double wishbone suspension, the tierods almost move at paraller, so there is little as possible bumpsteering.  For example, mendeola suspension's steering has little or no bumpsteer at all:

Logged

While Cal-Look stands still, looking backwards for inspiration, German Look keeps pushing boundaries further forward Cheesy
Eddie DVK
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 867



« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2024, 11:44:54 am »

I have a question.
Do you have to remove the max steering angel bracket from the beam when placing the polo bracket.
It seems to be in the way.

Regard eddie
Logged

Regards Edgar

" Type 4, it is a completely different engine. You have to drive one to understand! "
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!