Saginaw conundrum.

[PhilC64]

This is my first serious post regarding the 40 I recently purchased. When I inspected it, I found it to have a somewhat questionable Saginaw conversion. I don't readily have access to the cruiser so I'm going from pics I took to explain what I have.

During all the searches I've done here regarding the conversion, I've never seen this type of setup. My concern with it is that it is canted at an angle and has an unusual mounting setup.

What is not shown is the Borgeson joint at the snout of the unit which is attached to a solid shaft going towards the steering column.

The questions I have are:

Is the angle of the Saginaw unit a real concern?
Is the angle of the shaft coming off the borgeson joint a concern?
If I leave it as is what potential problems will I run into?

 

[General Sherman]

Don't sweat it...The angle is fine, the box mounting looks fine, i would prefer a slip joint in the shaft to allow for flex in the frame but many people run a rigid steering shaft with out a problem. Keep an eye on the steering shaft and column to be sure they don't bend during a major flex of the frame. You should be fine.
N

 

[inkpot]

Howdy! Mount looks like it may be home made. It may be mounted crooked to get the end of the Box straight with the steering column. The Borgsen joint should be OK, as it really does not have much torque going thru it, unless the PS pump dies. It also looks like the pitman arm was heated and bent to lower the TRE to reduce bump steer. That has also made the effective length shorter, which may reduce the steering angle. It may also limit you to a very large steering radius. You might want to check into an aftermarket pitman for safety and effectiveness. John

 

[PhilC64]

Thanks for the input folks. I'm going to leave it for now and see what develops as time goes on. I will have to go with a high steer from the looks things though. I'm sure you'll be hearing more from me as time goes on!

 

[65swb45]

I disagree. I see a serious issue here.

From the first pic, you can see that the mounting plate is not secured to the framerail, but spaced out from it. Based on the spacing, I'd have to wonder if both sides of the 'spacer' were accessable for good weld penetration.

Further, and of more concern is the fact that the mount is anchored to the original frame channel, which is NOT BOXED the entire length of the framerail to the crossmember. In it's stock configuration, in which it only had to support a center arm bracket, which was also secured to the main crossmember, this would be adequate. But IMO, it is NOT adequate to secure a power steering gearbox.

At a minimum, that frame channel should be fully boxed and braced to the main crossmember to use that setup.

Without seeing the rest of the setup, I cannot comment on whether it would be worth the effort.

Proceed with caution.

Mark A.