• Welcome to For E Bodies Only !

    We are a community of Plymouth Cuda and Dodge Challenger owners. Join now! Its Free!

Durango rack and pinion fit a 71 Challenger without a ton of mods?

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
New to the site guy here.... Already on the 'A' site.... Hopefully I can find the massive amounts of help the A side has provided to me and warm welcome here as well! Good group there and they speak well of this group too.

Wish to convert a 71 Challenger over to rack and pinion. A certain ---- shop advertises them but are out of stock and have been out of stock for a while. (Have a pending email with Unisteer on the 8010660-01 Small Block unit and the 8010670-02 Big block unit). Read someplace (I think) that someone used a Dodge Durango steering unit on a early Challenger???? Hopefully someone out there in Dodge land can point me in the general direction of the chances of success in my quest. Hopefull, has already accomplished this!!! Have the tubular K replacement already, so freed up some room under the motor.
Many thanks and hoping for some good suggestions from the group.
TEQ'
 

70chall440

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
975
Location
Western Washington
First, welcome aboard.

I have never heard of anyone using a Durango unit but that of course doesn't mean someone has. Putting a RP system into a vintage Mopar is problematic due to the design of the K member and front suspension/steering. Typically the K frame has to be highly modified and even then the angles are less than ideal. The Unisteer system from what I have seen and read is sub-standard on its best day and personally I would never use one on anything I intended to actually drive. That said, I do not have any personal experience with them so this may just be my perception but looking at how it installs it looks bad to me.

Why do you want a RP system?
 

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
First, welcome aboard.

I have never heard of anyone using a Durango unit but that of course doesn't mean someone has. Putting a RP system into a vintage Mopar is problematic due to the design of the K member and front suspension/steering. Typically the K frame has to be highly modified and even then the angles are less than ideal. The Unisteer system from what I have seen and read is sub-standard on its best day and personally I would never use one on anything I intended to actually drive. That said, I do not have any personal experience with them so this may just be my perception but looking at how it installs it looks bad to me.

Why do you want a RP system?
Thanks for your input. RP? Weight reduction and tighter steering. Have read a little about the Magnum Force product (pricey, but looks fantastic, to me) and one writer was impressed with the handling changes. I am not a drag racer any more. Cruising and shows and just driving, enjoyably down the highway, is my goal. Already added the frame rails and torque boxes. And I was thinking if and when I decide to sell the vehicle, this might increase the value and make it better monetary return and easier sale. Also, as I have the Tubular 'K' member already, was hoping someone else might have converted over already and worked out the kinks as well.
This vehicle was pieced together so the vintage angle does not apply. Nothing matches on the vehicle. Hence and older 440 in what was a 340 car.
 

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
I have upgraded conventional parts in my cuda, with a Borgeson box. The car feels like a R&P.
Thanks for your input! I have read about the Borgeson products and nearly all reviews are very favorable. If I am unsuccessful in my Rack & Pinion effort, I will probably go with their product line.
 

70chall440

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
975
Location
Western Washington
Thanks for your input. RP? Weight reduction and tighter steering. Have read a little about the Magnum Force product (pricey, but looks fantastic, to me) and one writer was impressed with the handling changes. I am not a drag racer any more. Cruising and shows and just driving, enjoyably down the highway, is my goal. Already added the frame rails and torque boxes. And I was thinking if and when I decide to sell the vehicle, this might increase the value and make it better monetary return and easier sale. Also, as I have the Tubular 'K' member already, was hoping someone else might have converted over already and worked out the kinks as well.
This vehicle was pieced together so the vintage angle does not apply. Nothing matches on the vehicle. Hence and older 440 in what was a 340 car.
Sounds like a plan, I will say however that I do have experience with the Magnum Force stuff and what I would tell you is RUN, do not walk away from that as it is junk. It is poorly designed and their product service is horrible.

Since you have a tubular K frame I would say you have a lot more options. Have you tried contacting RMS, Morrison or any of the other companies that specialize in this area? Morrison is local to me and they have always been great to work with but i have heard really great things about RMS. Reach out to Denny have HDK, he is a die hard Mopar guy that specializes in coil over front suspensions but I bet he has some insight to RP (Rack and Pinion) systems.
 

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
Again, appreciate your input. Have not had anyone shed light on Magnum Force before. Very helpful. Will heed the warning!!!

RMS? I am not not familiar with that name.

I will research turning radius's and wheel base lengths, etc. I have seen plenty of Benz's with truly strange turning angles and apparatus while working in Germany while making turns. Turn left or right and the tire looks to be actually canted off center, aka, not plumb??? But only during extreme turns. So am hoping that a US version will work, since we drivers are only in a turning situation for a few moments. Drag racers, none at all unless you do a Brittany Force special!!! Lots of work ahead of me to be sure. Actually looking forward to the drill. Good brain exercises!!!! Thanks again....
 

moparleo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
6,926
Reaction score
1,709
Location
So. Cal. Riverside area Moreno Valley
The R & P has nothing to do with the camber/caster angles. It just replaces the tie rods, idler arm, center link, pitman arm.
Just the linkages controlling moving the tire to the left or right.
 

340challconvert

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
5,177
Reaction score
2,707
Location
Parsippany, NJ
kc4
:welcome: to FEBO from New Jersey
Sounds like a challenging and interesting project you are taking on.
Glad you joined up; good people here with a lot of different experiences with our e bodies!
 

mmissile

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
353
Location
Macomb County Michigan
My QA1 stuff, has no steering stops, and the car will rub the tires on the framerails. That's a tight enuff steering-radius setup for me. Two people I know, that have ridden in the car... think it rides and handles like a big,German touring-sedan. It has no body roll, turns very quick and tight, and stops better than any vehicle I've ever owned.
 
Last edited:

Chryco Psycho

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
4,402
Reaction score
2,042
Location
Panama
One of the biggest issues rarely address correctly when modifying steering is Akerman angle so if you draw a line through the center of the tie rod end & ball joint it should line up at the center of the rear diff otherwise the tires will not steer correctly . Often people try to move the rack in front of the ball joints , doing this you cannot use the Mopar lower ball joint so now you have to create a lower ball joint that works which has never been done or change the whole system . If you keep the rack in the rear of the ball joints you can use the Mopar ball joint but now you have to lower the rack to clear the oil pan & you may create horrible bump steer if the inner tie rod length is different than the lower control arm length .
I agree that a Borgeson type upgrade using the existing steering linkage is the best & most simple way to upgrade .
 

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
One of the biggest issues rarely address correctly when modifying steering is Akerman angle so if you draw a line through the center of the tie rod end & ball joint it should line up at the center of the rear diff otherwise the tires will not steer correctly . Often people try to move the rack in front of the ball joints , doing this you cannot use the Mopar lower ball joint so now you have to create a lower ball joint that works which has never been done or change the whole system . If you keep the rack in the rear of the ball joints you can use the Mopar ball joint but now you have to lower the rack to clear the oil pan & you may create horrible bump steer if the inner tie rod length is different than the lower control arm length .
I agree that a Borgeson type upgrade using the existing steering linkage is the best & most simple way to upgrade .
Thanks for your input and the name of that angle! I was about to Google and try and figure out what the name of it was. Saved me some search time.
And my whole effort is geared to reduce weight. Reading about hot rod guys and bending this, kinkin that to get that angle as close as they can as well as the Formula 1 guys. So, If it can't be done correctly with the RP setup, then I go with the Borgeson. Not done yet tho. Thanks again....
 

mmissile

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
353
Location
Macomb County Michigan
The Borgeson box is power and lighter/smaller than any factory box. The biggest weight savings I can think of in the front end....is brakes and a lighter engine. My cuda outhandles and brakes any of the cars we've had in the last 15 years. If you're hell-bent on converting....I'd go HDK.
 

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
Thanks for your reply. Really grateful to all of you for the inputs, both pros and cons. NEED to hear it all. Again many thanks to the group!

And the engine is the problem, if you think having a 440 in a Challenger is a problem!!!. :)

Went from 340 to 440. That, according to what I can find on line, (and correct me if this is off) adds about 175 pounds of additional (cast iron weight). Have Aluminum water pump housing, water pump and pulleys. timing cover, intake heads, with MOPAR Aluminum rockers, went from steel hood to fiberglass TA style. Tubular 'K' replaced the original. Aluminum radiator, with 2 - 10 inch electric fans. Fiberglass front Valance. Doing the upper and lowers with tubullar. Struts are hollow adjustable too. At this point, I think I am 15 pounds under the 175 added on from the 440 before ridding the Ilder, Pittman and Center drop link and that was just a logical (to me) route to investigate, NOTE: not chiseled in stone....
Have the correct torsion bars. Can't get away from that weight.

Did put on some weight with frame rails and torques boxes, but that weight should be distributed (I think) over all 4 wheels and not just in the nose.

And from the Gentlemen's comments on the Ackermann Angle, I can research some (hopefully) informative data on line from the different camps, problems and fixes for the change over to R&P. If it will be too much, I will covert over to Borgeson hardware.
 

70chall440

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
975
Location
Western Washington
If I may ask, what is your drive on this weight issue? I believe you said this car was to be a driver but it sounds like you are trying to build a road racer/track car. Going to the 440 was a step in the wrong direction of "light and nimble" was your goal but I get that intentions and desires change over time, so here you are.

I think it would help to understand what is driving your desire for the R&P/weight reduction. I mean, if you are trying to increase handling and performance (weight to power) I get that and if that is the issue then in my mind you have to issues to focus on that are related but are not necessarily symbiotic, that being handling v performance.

If you were to use a better than stock steering box, fast ratio idler and pitman arm, good UCA's, reinforced LCAs, stiff T bars, good bushings, adj struts, and really good shocks (and good tires of course) you car will handle exceptionally well.

I don't know anything about the engine/driveline but there are a lot of performance options as I am sure you know with aluminum heads being near the top as it supports your weight reduction efforts and will increase performance
 

mmissile

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
353
Location
Macomb County Michigan
If I may ask, what is your drive on this weight issue? I believe you said this car was to be a driver but it sounds like you are trying to build a road racer/track car. Going to the 440 was a step in the wrong direction of "light and nimble" was your goal but I get that intentions and desires change over time, so here you are.

I think it would help to understand what is driving your desire for the R&P/weight reduction. I mean, if you are trying to increase handling and performance (weight to power) I get that and if that is the issue then in my mind you have to issues to focus on that are related but are not necessarily symbiotic, that being handling v performance.

If you were to use a better than stock steering box, fast ratio idler and pitman arm, good UCA's, reinforced LCAs, stiff T bars, good bushings, adj struts, and really good shocks (and good tires of course) you car will handle exceptionally well.

I don't know anything about the engine/driveline but there are a lot of performance options as I am sure you know with aluminum heads being near the top as it supports your weight reduction efforts and will increase performance
Big sway-bar is a good move. My torsion-bars are too big for my gen III hemi, and I'll have to install a smaller diameter set, to get more ride quality/ride-height adjustability. That seems to be the only miscalculation I made in the front-end.
 

70chall440

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
1,260
Reaction score
975
Location
Western Washington
Big sway-bar is a good move. My torsion-bars are too big for my gen III hemi, and I'll have to install a smaller diameter set, to get more ride quality/ride-height adjustability. That seems to be the only miscalculation I made in the front-end.
What size T bars are you using?
 

mmissile

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
353
Location
Macomb County Michigan
BIG Hotchkiss bars. I think they are over a inch....
It's been a long time since I ordered them. I'm guessing a set of small-block bars would work with this engine.
 

Rons340

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2021
Messages
110
Reaction score
60
Location
Tennessee
I’m using the Borgeson unit and love it! It’s a direct replacement for the factory unit and uses the original pitman arm. Very little modification needed to the steering shaft and it’s smaller and lighter than the original meaning more header room, if you are using headers. Very close ratio plus a 3 year warranty!
 

kc4teq

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
11
Reaction score
5
Location
Huntsville, Alabama
If I may ask, what is your drive on this weight issue? I believe you said this car was to be a driver but it sounds like you are trying to build a road racer/track car. Going to the 440 was a step in the wrong direction of "light and nimble" was your goal but I get that intentions and desires change over time, so here you are.

I think it would help to understand what is driving your desire for the R&P/weight reduction. I mean, if you are trying to increase handling and performance (weight to power) I get that and if that is the issue then in my mind you have to issues to focus on that are related but are not necessarily symbiotic, that being handling v performance.

If you were to use a better than stock steering box, fast ratio idler and pitman arm, good UCA's, reinforced LCAs, stiff T bars, good bushings, adj struts, and really good shocks (and good tires of course) you car will handle exceptionally well.

I don't know anything about the engine/driveline but there are a lot of performance options as I am sure you know with aluminum heads being near the top as it supports your weight reduction efforts and will increase performance
Thanks for your input.... All here on the site have chimmed in with many, many points to this possible conversion, both goods and bads of why it is an ill advised effort or why it is neet, and I weigh each one carefully. Pushing 80 myself (and I still learn from you as a group each day and this is a challenge. Great schtufff!!!!

So to your inquiry, Yep, a conundrum. Not racing and yet weight reduction???? WTH??? Being in Alabama, heat is an issue. Less weight that BB has to move is better in my head for one.

Two, and I probably should have emphasized this in my early post, Da Bling Factor. All of us here know the guy that has a Elephant gun on the wall that he has never shot. Stands there in his Den with his $250.00 glass of Scotch, Marsh Wheeling cigar in his hand, smoking jacket, admiring that rifle on the wall. Never shot it. Never will!!! And Bling factor will sell an over priced ride in many instances (not that I would over price my ride....). In my head, today, all too many individuls out there buying older muscle cars will overlook the details and only see all that jewelry under the hood, suspension improvements and will justify the price someone is selling the vehicle for. So, if I need to sell my ride, I can ask a good price because its functional and pretty.

Next, it hasn't been done yet as far as I can tell, using Modern Dodge hardware on 60/70 vehicles. I like a challenge (er??:cool:). Can weld. Have leaded, Paint, Computers, Woodworking, HO trains, etc.... I have hobbies and love kludging (safely and hopefully, smartly) something together. R&P came up from a friend that drives a 2017 Challenger... I accepted his gauntlet throw down ( or I am trying too.....)

Sorry for the lengthy response, but I hope I have answered your questions. And please, keep them questions/advice/lesson learned coming. Opening my eyes wider every day with this project!

Oh, the kc4teq login is my Amateur Radio Callsign! Anuuder hobby.....
 
Back
Top