One More Power-Steering related Question

>snip<

_______________________
Guess my cat must've gotten all your tongues - or the cables to your
keyboards.
>snip<


Chris, you've probably gone further/deeper into this topic than many of
us are capable of or interested in going, i.e. more theory and less
practical application. What you've described is so close to products that
have already come-and-gone.
Why don't you investigate the earlier ps systems on like cars of the
50's. Several (iirc), including the ever-so-popular '57 Chevy, used what
many of us referred to as "part-time" systems. Some actually felt almost
like conventional steering on the open road/at higher speeds. Worked
somewhat as an introductory design for consumers set in our ways. [[Hard to
comprehend today, but during that same period many were quite reluctant to
buy pickups (and cars) with overdrive trannies--due to possibly the fact we
did not understand it.]]
Such an investigation should at least let you know the idea has, or has
had, merit.
s

On Jan 5, 12:01*pm, "sdlomi2" > wrote:
> >snip<
>
> _______________________
> Guess my cat must've gotten all your tongues - or the cables to your
> keyboards.
>
> >snip<
>
> * * Chris, you've probably gone further/deeper into this topic than many of
> us are capable of or interested in going, i.e. more theory and less
> practical application. *What you've described is so close to products that
> have already come-and-gone.
___________________________
"Practical application" is precisely what I'm aiming at here! Problem
is SD, at the same time I'm trying to get my head around some power-
steering fundamentals. I guess that's what's got you and others
stymied.
_________________________________________
> * * Why don't you investigate the earlier ps systems on like cars of the
> 50's. *Several (iirc), including the ever-so-popular '57 Chevy, used what
> many of us referred to as "part-time" systems. *Some actually felt almost
> like conventional steering on the open road/at higher speeds. *Worked
> somewhat as an introductory design for consumers set in our ways. *[[Hard to
> comprehend today, but during that same period many were quite reluctant to
> buy pickups (and cars) with overdrive trannies--due to possibly the fact we
> did not understand it.]]
_________________________
I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, SD, seriously.
____________________________________
> * * Such an investigation should at least let you know the idea has, or has
> had, merit.
> s
________________________
Alright, in plain English:

Can a 2008 Kia Optima be fitted with a lower capacity/lower assist-
granting power steering system without gutting the whole front end of
an otherwise fine - and still very much under warranty - midsized
sedan?

And I promise I won't take anymore shots in the dark at trying to
understand what "torsion bars" or any other individual members of a
power-steering system do. Promise!

-CC

ChrisCoaster wrote:
> Now that I'm driving a car with conventional power steering, I'd like
> to ask this:
>
> Are there any LEGAL and SAFE ways to modify any conventional hydraulic
> PS system to reduce the amount of assist it generates, even if only
> moderately??
>
> -CC

I've never been inside a Rack-and-Pinion power steering box, but (for
example) the old Chrysler recirculating-ball boxes were (conceptually)
very easy to modify. There are two reaction springs (they are 1-turn
springs that look like oversized lock-washers) that govern the amount of
assist that gets applied. Actually doing the mod requires dis-assembling
the steering box and replacing the springs, which most shadetree
mechanics back off from (I've overhauled one once, its a pain to get all
the tolerances set back correctly, but if you're patient its doable.)
For most people its easier to just pay Firmfeel.com or some other
company that sells modified boxes. Its perfectly safe and legal, and at
least in the case of the old Chrysler boxes you can get a very broad
range of assist levels, from "pinkie finger" to barely boosted.

I'm absolutely certain that there are similar springs in the control
section of all conventional power steering systems. Whether or not they
are practical to replace, and whether or not stiffer replacement parts
are obtainable is a different story.

On Jan 6, 11:07*am, Steve > wrote:
> ChrisCoaster wrote:
> > Now that I'm driving a car with conventional power steering, I'd like
> > to ask this:
>
> > Are there any LEGAL and SAFE ways to modify any conventional hydraulic
> > PS system to reduce the amount of assist it generates, even if only
> > moderately??
>
> > -CC
>
> I've never been inside a Rack-and-Pinion power steering box, but (for
> example) the old Chrysler recirculating-ball boxes were (conceptually)
> very easy to modify. There are two reaction springs (they are 1-turn
> springs that look like oversized lock-washers) that govern the amount of
> assist that gets applied. Actually doing the mod requires dis-assembling
> the steering box and replacing the springs, which most shadetree
> mechanics back off from (I've overhauled one once, its a pain to get all
> the tolerances set back correctly, but if you're patient its doable.)
> For most people its easier to just pay Firmfeel.com or some other
___________________
I checked out firmfeel.com and like what they have to offer. They do
seem pretty MOPAR focused though, I could call them and ask if a "#2"
or #3 steering box might achieve what I'm aiming for with my Korean
import.
___________________
> company that sells modified boxes. Its perfectly safe and legal, and at
> least in the case of the old Chrysler boxes you can get a very broad
> range of assist levels, from "pinkie finger" to barely boosted.
>
> I'm absolutely certain that there are similar springs in the control
> section of all conventional power steering systems. Whether or not they
> are practical to replace, and whether or not stiffer replacement parts
> are obtainable is a different story.
_______________________
Thanks again for the website tip. Really though, without making a
fool of myself trying to analyze and ASSume what this part of the PS
pump or that part of the steering box or another part and a third of
the rack does, I'll just say:

I want the simplest solution that will modify my steering system in
such a way that more effort("elbow grease") is required from me to
steer the car, and less supplied from the PS. Perhaps a "foreign auto
repair" or other specialty shop in town knows of such a solution that
is compatible with this Hyundai/KIA product.

I will add this though: My GUT tells me that the most obvious
solution is a smaller capacity PS pump with smaller fluid volume that
can fit or be made to fit within the system of belts & pullies
presently under my hood. Just swap the thing out, don't obsess over
"torsion bars", "springs", or Nixon's secret tapes(!), and enjoy the
tighter feel of a lowered-assist PS system. Tell me if my gut is
misleading me.

-CC

ChrisCoaster wrote:
_
> I checked out firmfeel.com and like what they have to offer. They do
> seem pretty MOPAR focused though, I could call them and ask if a "#2"
> or #3 steering box might achieve what I'm aiming for with my Korean
> import.

I just listed them to indicate that the process is possible and has been
done, at least for one technology. I seriously doubt they could help you
with a Korean rack-and-pinion car.


> Thanks again for the website tip. Really though, without making a
> fool of myself trying to analyze and ASSume what this part of the PS
> pump or that part of the steering box or another part and a third of
> the rack does, I'll just say:
>
> I want the simplest solution that will modify my steering system in
> such a way that more effort("elbow grease") is required from me to
> steer the car, and less supplied from the PS. Perhaps a "foreign auto
> repair" or other specialty shop in town knows of such a solution that
> is compatible with this Hyundai/KIA product.
>
> I will add this though: My GUT tells me that the most obvious
> solution is a smaller capacity PS pump with smaller fluid volume that
> can fit or be made to fit within the system of belts & pullies
> presently under my hood. Just swap the thing out, don't obsess over
> "torsion bars", "springs", or Nixon's secret tapes(!), and enjoy the
> tighter feel of a lowered-assist PS system. Tell me if my gut is
> misleading me.
>

If you could plumb in a pressure regulator, it *might* achieve what you
want. But the thing is, I'm afraid that you would wind up with a system
that feels over-assisted up until the point where the pressure limiter
kicks in, and then feels under-boosted after that. If you were to put a
pressure gauge on your PS pump's supply line, you'd see that the peak
pressure depends both on how fast you're trying to turn the wheel, and
on what resistance is being encountered (ie whether you're scrubbing the
wheels against concrete with the car sitting still, or rolling forward
on wet oily asphalt). So if you set the limit so that it feels right on
dry concrete, you're going to feel completely unchanged from the way it
does now on wet asphalt, and if you set it for wet asphalt, its going to
feel like a dump truck on dry concrete.

The reason the reaction spring replacement works in the old Chrysler box
is because it is actually changing an analog gain factor in a
closed-loop analog control system. Lowering the feed pressure or volume
from the pump is trying to elicit a behavior inside the closed-loop
control system, but by applying a strictly open-loop input. Not ideal or
desirable.

Does Kia have a presence in the Autocross world yet? If it does, then
maybe your local autocrossers or those on-line would have a suggestion.
It was amazing to me what became available for the lowly Plymouth Neon
back in the 90s when it was found to be an outstanding weekend autocross
vehicle.

On Jan 6, 5:59*pm, Steve > wrote:
>
> The reason the reaction spring replacement works in the old Chrysler box
> is because it is actually changing an analog gain factor in a
> closed-loop analog control system. Lowering the feed pressure or volume
> from the pump is trying to elicit a behavior inside the closed-loop
> control system, but by applying a strictly open-loop input. Not ideal or
> desirable.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
________________________
No offense intended, but the above paragraph means nothing to my
brain. When my HS science or biology teachers talked like that, my
attention went out the window - literally, four feet from my seat.
It's like dictating foreign policy to some folks in Wash DC - they
simply don't and won't get it. Dumb it down a little, and I might
catch 10-15% of it.

I guess the best thing is to except this modern car as it is, although
installing firmer rack mounts, as the MOPAR site suggested, could
enhance the linearity of the steering feel, such as knowing more
exactly what the front tires are doing as you turn the steering wheel,
without actually tightening up the steering feel. Tighter steering
rack mounts don't rely on analog feeds or closed loops.

-CC

On Jan 6, 5:59*pm, Steve > wrote:
>
>
> The reason the reaction spring replacement works in the old Chrysler box
> is because it is actually changing an analog gain factor in a
> closed-loop analog control system. Lowering the feed pressure or volume
> from the pump is trying to elicit a behavior inside the closed-loop
> control system, but by applying a strictly open-loop input. Not ideal or
> desirable.
>
> - Show quoted text -
________________________
No offense intended, but the above paragraph means nothing to my
brain. When my HS science or biology teachers talked like that, my
attention went out the window - literally, four feet from my seat.
It's like dictating foreign policy to some folks in Wash DC - they
simply don't and won't get it. Dumb it down a little, and I might
catch 10-15% of it.

I guess the best thing is to ACCEPT(not except! - can you believe I'm
actually a Democrat and I spell like that?!) this modern car as it
is, although
installing firmer rack mounts, as the MOPAR site suggested, could
enhance the linearity of the steering feel, such as knowing more
exactly what the front tires are doing as you turn the steering
wheel,
without actually tightening up the steering feel. Tighter steering
rack mounts don't rely on analog feeds or closed loops.


-CC

Chris, you've got the patience of Job--whomever he was But if this
suggestion works, just remember this old shadetree either knew more than he
admitted or he just lucked up on a plus. With your persistence, I feel sure
you can find a front-end alignment tech who will work with you on this.
All this is based on my projects in the past, some that weren't supposed
to work but somehow did. Twice, when I adapted newer p/steering systems
onto older Chevy pickups (Several, seemingly alike in alterations, did ok
w/o this extra step.), they actually had too much assist and caused me to
feel similar to you. What rectified them was to get the alignment set with
"extra" caster. These projects not being everyday jobs, I honestly am not
sure, but I think we set them up giving them more positive caster.
Now, I know my pkp-projects were rwd whereas your Korean-Kar is a fwd.
Nonetheless, it's gonna be a lot cheaper and quicker to try this than to
swap pumps and pulleys or possibly dangerously plumb in pressure regulator
valves. (I wasn't about to mention that several companies mfg adjustable
brake proportioning valves which I use often when upgrading brakes on older
vehicles from single, unsafe cylinders to dual cylinders, or to power using
drum-drum on both ends or drum-disc or disc-disc systems--all this
adjustment is to more nearly correct an un-engineered brake system so that
the "correct" end of the vehicle will break traction first when
emergency-braking.) I think a/p already pointed out that using pressure
reduction, which he may have mentioned as a possibility himself, may have
such a non-linear dampening effect that it could be dangerously unsuspected.
All said, IF the added caster doesn't work, the alignment tech should
give you a price break in changing it back, because then all the bolt heads
should already be clean plus all the 2nd screwing will be taking place along
recently-renewed thread-paths! But my honest feeling is that it will at
least make you more nearly happy with that fine-driving machine. That last
statement I can say with enthusiasm, as a used car operation in which I am
merely a silent partner last year bought & sold several "k" vehicles, the
vast majority having your name on them and the business having only 2
full-time employees. Many smiles were formed by happy Kia customers!
Again, luck to you. And if it works, you will have the whole story! s

On Jan 7, 9:29*am, "sdlomi2" > wrote:
> * * Chris, you've got the patience of Job--whomever he was *But if this
> suggestion works, just remember this old shadetree either knew more than he
> admitted or he just lucked up on a plus. *With your persistence, I feel sure
> you can find a front-end alignment tech who will work with you on this.
> * * All this is based on my projects in the past, some that weren't supposed
> to work but somehow did. *Twice, when I adapted newer p/steering systems
> onto older Chevy pickups (Several, seemingly alike in alterations, did ok
> w/o this extra step.), they actually had too much assist and caused me to
> feel similar to you. *What rectified them was to get the alignment set with
> "extra" caster. *These projects not being everyday jobs, I honestly am not
> sure, but I think we set them up giving them more positive caster.
> * * Now, I know my pkp-projects were rwd whereas your Korean-Kar is a fwd.
> Nonetheless, it's gonna be a lot cheaper and quicker to try this than to
> swap pumps and pulleys or possibly dangerously plumb in pressure regulator
> valves. *(I wasn't about to mention that several companies mfg adjustable
> brake proportioning valves which I use often when upgrading brakes on older
> vehicles from single, unsafe cylinders to dual cylinders, or to power using
> drum-drum on both ends or drum-disc or disc-disc systems--all this
> adjustment is to more nearly correct an un-engineered brake system so that
> the "correct" end of the vehicle will break traction first when
> emergency-braking.) *I think a/p already pointed out that using pressure
> reduction, which he may have mentioned as a possibility himself, may have
> such a non-linear dampening effect that it could be dangerously unsuspected.
> * * All said, IF the added caster doesn't work, the alignment tech should
> give you a price break in changing it back, because then all the bolt heads
> should already be clean plus all the 2nd screwing will be taking place along
> recently-renewed thread-paths! *But my honest feeling is that it will at
> least make you more nearly happy with that fine-driving machine. *That last
> statement I can say with enthusiasm, as a used car operation in which I am
> merely a silent partner last year bought & sold several "k" vehicles, the
> vast majority having your name on them and the business having only 2
> full-time employees. *Many smiles were formed by happy Kia customers!
> * * Again, luck to you. *And if it works, you will have the whole story! *s
________________________
Sounds like a plan. I'll even invite you along and stick you in front
of the alignment tech/shop mgr so you can hear:

"Wah-wah-mwahh-wah-wah-wah-whahh-WAHHHHHH.."

(That's Charlie Brown's teacher for: "Caster is built in - it can't be
adjusted. Sorry!")

I've heard that happy-horsesiht story from plenty of independents -
not just Town Fairs & Sears places.
Your idea is noble, sdlomi, and I AGREE: Caster SHOULD be adjustable
on ANYTHING STREET LEGAL!!! Tell that to the manufacturers. They'll
just look at you with a blank stare.

As far as the handling/feel of my KIA, you can take it or leave it -
my wife and I actually like it more than the 2005 Malibu. She had
grip that thing with both hands just to keep it in a straight line -
and that was after two alignments about a year ago. The '08 KIA is
definitely a "one-hander", she declares, especially with the grippy
new Mastercraft Avenger LSRs on it. The 4cyl doesn't quite the giddup
n' go that the V6 'Bu had, but seriously: What's a lot of power worth
with little control?

I'll probably just throw in some stiffer after-market steering rack
mounts and be done with it.

-CC

"ChrisCoaster" > wrote in message
...
On Jan 7, 9:29 am, "sdlomi2" > wrote:
> Chris, you've got the patience of Job--whomever he was But if this
> suggestion works, just remember this old shadetree either knew more than
> he
> admitted or he just lucked up on a plus. With your persistence, I feel
> sure
> you can find a front-end alignment tech who will work with you on this.
> All this is based on my projects in the past, some that weren't supposed
> to work but somehow did. Twice, when I adapted newer p/steering systems
> onto older Chevy pickups (Several, seemingly alike in alterations, did ok
> w/o this extra step.), they actually had too much assist and caused me to
> feel similar to you. What rectified them was to get the alignment set with
> "extra" caster. These projects not being everyday jobs, I honestly am not
> sure, but I think we set them up giving them more positive caster.
> Now, I know my pkp-projects were rwd whereas your Korean-Kar is a fwd.
> Nonetheless, it's gonna be a lot cheaper and quicker to try this than to
> swap pumps and pulleys or possibly dangerously plumb in pressure regulator
> valves. (I wasn't about to mention that several companies mfg adjustable
> brake proportioning valves which I use often when upgrading brakes on
> older
> vehicles from single, unsafe cylinders to dual cylinders, or to power
> using
> drum-drum on both ends or drum-disc or disc-disc systems--all this
> adjustment is to more nearly correct an un-engineered brake system so that
> the "correct" end of the vehicle will break traction first when
> emergency-braking.) I think a/p already pointed out that using pressure
> reduction, which he may have mentioned as a possibility himself, may have
> such a non-linear dampening effect that it could be dangerously
> unsuspected.
> All said, IF the added caster doesn't work, the alignment tech should
> give you a price break in changing it back, because then all the bolt
> heads
> should already be clean plus all the 2nd screwing will be taking place
> along
> recently-renewed thread-paths! But my honest feeling is that it will at
> least make you more nearly happy with that fine-driving machine. That last
> statement I can say with enthusiasm, as a used car operation in which I am
> merely a silent partner last year bought & sold several "k" vehicles, the
> vast majority having your name on them and the business having only 2
> full-time employees. Many smiles were formed by happy Kia customers!
> Again, luck to you. And if it works, you will have the whole story! s
________________________
Sounds like a plan. I'll even invite you along and stick you in front
of the alignment tech/shop mgr so you can hear:

"Wah-wah-mwahh-wah-wah-wah-whahh-WAHHHHHH.."

(That's Charlie Brown's teacher for: "Caster is built in - it can't be
adjusted. Sorry!")

I've heard that happy-horsesiht story from plenty of independents -
not just Town Fairs & Sears places.
Your idea is noble, sdlomi, and I AGREE: Caster SHOULD be adjustable
on ANYTHING STREET LEGAL!!! Tell that to the manufacturers. They'll
just look at you with a blank stare.

>snip<

Chris, you stated so correctly above, "Caster SHOULD be adjustable..."),
and I SO agree. Now for the good part: ...the caster IS adjustable...,
somewhat evidenced from 2 quickly gleaned Google hits: (1) >
http://allsaintsseattle.org/index.ph...1&pq=121&pq=41 <
"March 20, 2008 15:15:00. You know the Kia Optima? Not really, no? ..... The
front suspension features fully adjustable caster, camber and toe" (2) >
http://seatbealt.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html < "The Kia Optima is
for those who want it sleek and elegant especially for city .....
progressive-rate coil springs; fully adjustable camber, caster and toe...".
So there! You don't need me, a southern diy'er, to be 'stuck between
you and the alignment tech/shop manager' as they try to tell us the caster
is fixed(as in non-adjustable). Just continue with Google and build your
case. Hopefully they, the Kia guys, did not ASSume non-adjustable front end
parameters in the 1st place! It CAN be done. And I'd bet those
well-trained techs know all about it AND are quite happy to have it so as to
be able to adequately correct so many otherwise difficult-to-resolve
problems. Let's (you and I) not ASSume these cars, or techs, are lacking in
ANY respect. I kinda like them and have learned to appreciate the Koreans'
approach to simultaneously incorporating both theory AND practicality.
Golly! Give them a chance and don't jump the gun. You might somehow
get ideas like "caster is NOT adjustable on these vehicles". And this is
my salutation: Hang in there and you may see some light coming from this
shadetree's end of the tunnel.
s