I'm just getting started on my steering rebuild. I'll be replacing the non-tilt with a tilt, new collapsing shaft, coupling, pump (rebuilt), hoses and steering gearbox. I've got a rebuilder that will exchange my box for the identical, Saginaw 800 rebuilt to 12.7:1, new everything, piston, gear, bushings, seals, powdercoated- about $300 [not including $75 core charge and shipping]. I feel fairly confident he turns out a good product, having talked to him over the phone-haven't seen the operation.
On the other hand I can buy the new copied unit from AGR [through Summit]; it's a new casting [I guess they bought the tooling from GM to produce new ones?] that gets cad plated and aluminum plate style caps at the adjust screw top and front sides. The front end has a finned aluminum cover and overall it claims to have improved performance due to oversized bushings and Stainless ball bearing assembly. It costs $330 through Summit[not incl. shipping]. No core, so I keep my core to have rebuilt later as an original part backup.
Each side has it's merits; AGR seems to have a reliable product as well- I know they've been around a while now out of Texas.
Well, seems to me either way appears to be a good choice, just need to decide which is better.
These are good problems to have.
I love this stuff.
Welcome your comments, suggestions. Thanks,
Patrick

One of the best guys that I know is up in Sun Valley, Ca. Name of the place is Lee Manufacturing - (818)768-0371. I've talked to the owner (Tom Lee) on the phone a couple of times and he is very knowledgable about his product and steering systems in general.

I know a few guys with the AGR and they are happy, but before I spent that kind of money on a mass produced box; I would talk to Tom Lee and see what he could do.

Hey Brian,
Thanks for the ref to Lee Manuf.; I know of their existence, just didn’t know they were putting out gear boxes.

Actually I read a Chevy HiPerformance article on just that subject and they referenced his operation as having all the parts for retrofit of the new Saginaw 800 system. I think it has the benefit of giving you variable ratio = to 12.7 through a little higher, for whatever reason or good that’s supposed to do- not sure really, but that’s why I never thought to call them.

I’d have to see some really major improvements with little or no mods needed before retrofitting in a part that wasn’t originally designed for the A Body years were talking. If you know of anything else to offer on this, I appreciate your time on it.

Thank you.

I installed a 12.7:1 gear box out of a 1992 Caprice police car (RPO 9C1). It made the car much, much more enjoyable to drive. I would do it again in a heartbeat.

I wasn't going to do the swap, but I stumbled across the donor car in the junkyard and the rest is history.

Bryan,
Thanks for the info; can you characterize what the impovement is over the old Sag 800?

In the Chevy HiPerformance article I last mentioned regarding the new Sag 800, the article pointed out that the turning radius would be reduced by about 15% vs. the original Sag 800 as A bodies of our years came with. Have you observed this? If so, did you or were you interested in correcting back to the original turn radius? [and how did you?]

I do like the idea of replacing an obsolete design with a better original GM part; sort of like the Hi-torque starters. That was an expensive starter, but now I know why. It was lighter ( almost 50%) and more energy efficient than its old counterpart.

You got me thinking now. I'll be talking to Lee on Monday. I'll let you know how it turns out.
Feel free to comment or suggest, I'll be checking back.
Thanks again.
Patrick

First off, I have to say that 80% of what I know about this swap came from my correspondences with JimL82 from this site, he is a wealth of information. The other 20% came from my experiences in the swap, others' experiences that I've helped and general correspondance with others, such as Tom Lee.

My observations about the 12.7:1 steering box. The original power steering box on my car was too light and had virtually no road feel. This new box has a good bit of road feel and I like the fact that the ratio is quicker, this is especially nice since I have stiffed up the suspension a bit and no longer slid across the seat when taking curves.

Now, about your question concerning steering radius. Will your steering radius increase by x% if you use one of the later model boxes. The answer is no, if you choose the box cafefully.

First, you’re car originally had a steering box with an output shaft travel of around 40 to 43° (depending on the year) so, ideally you want the new steering box to have about this same amount of output shaft travel.

Okay, now down to the dirty, since you are looking for a quick ratio (I’m presuming 12.7:1) steering box, you will need to find one with approximately the same amount of output shaft travel as your original box had (around 40° to 43°). To confuse matters even worse, GM did not use any type of external identifiers other than either a sticker or a grease stamping of a 2 character alpha code. As you can imagine, lots of times the sticker is missing, painted over or the grease stamping is worn and illegible or worn completely. Regardless if you are looking for this, it will either be on the aluminum top cover or front cover.

The cars you will be looking for are:
1985-1988 Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS – Stamped “YA” – 39° 15mins
1988-1996 Chevrolet Caprice/Impala SS – Stamped one of the following codes – “CP, CT, DU, FB, HL, KW, MX, TW, or WZ” – Most likely you’ll find these quick ratio (12.7:1) boxes on a police optioned car (RPO 9C1) or an Impala SS) The RPO codes F41, FE, FE1, or FE2 may also yield a 12.7:1 steering box.
1994-1995 Buick “full size” – Stamped one of the following codes – “FK, KL”
1992-1998 Jeep Grand Cherokee – Any steering box from these years Jeep Grand Cherokee will be a quick ratio (12.7:1) power steering box that will bolt right into you’re car. (There may be an exception with the 1996ish Jeeps with speed sensitve steering systems, but, to the best of my knowledge, Jim has yet to get back to us regarding this.(refer to the alpha codes listed on the spreadsheet fround at this website) - http://www.corvettefaq.com/a-Car.asp

While the steering box from a Camaro may sound lucrative, they do not have the output shaft travel as your car does originally; their output shaft travel is typically around 32° to 35°. This may have been what the article was referring to (Using a Camaro/Trans Am box and the radius increasing). This will increase you’re turning radius and make the car harder to maneuver in general. I would shy away from the use of a Camaro box for this reason and that they will not be any cheaper or easier to locate than one of the boxes I provided above. Out of the above mentioned boxes, I would choose either the Caprice (or full sized Buick) or Jeep Grand Cherokee boxes because their output shaft travel is around 40° to 43°. The Monte Carlo SS box is a good box, but they are fairly hard to find, at least in this neck of the woods and it still doesn’t have the output shaft travel that your original box had. (Turning radius will increase slightly) If you were to find one you would probably have to pay a premium price because it came from a Monte SS (much like the prices IROC or GTA boxes (or parts in general) command).

So no, my turning radius did not increase since I used a steering box with the same amount of output shaft travel as my original box had.

I second everything the last post has in it. I went with the 98 Jeep Cherokee one and am amazed at the fit. It is an absolute bolt in. My steering went from 5+ turns lock to lock to 2 1/2 turns - with the limiting factor still the same built in frame stops from the factory in 65. The Cherokee is easier to find than practically any other choice - most are from roll overs, low mileage and are not hurt. Lots of them in the boneyards. The Cherokee uses the 3/4" splined input shaft for the rag joint connection. Call Lee Mfg. for the hose end adaptors at less than $9.00 plus UPS. Good people. These allow the use of your old hoses with the new box. Easy assembly.

Bryan and OLDED,
I like the idea a firmer steering feel. Thanks for the info; that does clarify things a bit. Here's the link for that article in Chevy HiPerformance:
http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/49838/index.html

I'll let you know what I end up with.
Patrick

The reduction by 15% may be correct, especially when you think that we are only dealing with approx. 43° and comparing this to a reduction to a 39° turning radius. 15% reduction from 43°, if my math is anywhere near correct would be around 4° or so.


Thanks for the link to the article!