POWER STEERING for 1960-66 Trucks - a DIY for the 230, 250 and 283 engines.

[Lugnutz65]

Ever wanted power steering for your 1960-66 C10 but just weren’t sure what all was involved? Here you go!

I just finished this DIY LINK HERE . I really hope you like it.
I was motivated to document how it can be done with fairly simple tools. It’s a one day job if you have all the parts.
The methods I use have two benefits.
1. I didn’t actually have to remove my steering column. Just had to remove the steering wheel and steering shaft.
2. By “clocking the pitman arm” I was able to retain full turns of the steering wheel in both directions without adjusting the tie rods. That saved me the cost and trouble of an alignment.

Here are a few teaser pics. The DIY has 175 photos. Haha! Can you believe it?

[Lokin4AReason]

looks like a fun project . . .

[Braunschweiger]

An incredibly great job,
your previous documentations have helped me a lot with my restoration,
this one is great.
Thank you for sharing it with us

[Alloyvert]

Awesome write up as this is on my to do list and these instructions (especially the parts list) will be very helpful. Thanks for taking the time to document and post it!!

[Justin71105]

Have followed your website on several how-to's for a few years now, awesome info.

[cgrocen]

Thank you for providing an exceptionally detailed tutorial for this power steering upgrade. I have a 1965 C30 with a 292 that I will be attempting to convert to power steering. I have always wondered how the offset of the new power steering box from the frame would affect the geometry of the steering linkage and the centering of the gears in the steering box. It seems that you recognized this, and addressed the issue by grinding the splines on the output of the steering box to accomodate that. Do you think that a person could have taken a small triangal file and filed 4 splines into the flat areas on the pitman arm? I suppose it is 6 of one and half a dozen of another. Also, because the steering shaft does not line up with the power steering box, you added a u-joint to the input steering shaft. It seems that the rag joint now acts as a second u-joint. I am wondering if a second u-joint could have been added in-line thus taking any flexing out of the rag joint? Any thoughts about my two questions?
Thank you again for an excellent write-up! Chris.

[Lugnutz65]

Originally Posted by cgrocen

I have always wondered how the offset of the new power steering box from the frame would affect the geometry of the steering linkage and the centering of the gears in the steering box.

I added PS to my 1965 several years ago and noticed the loss of steering wheel turns to the right while maneuvering in my back yard. I did some reading and realized that the center link was pulled left by the new steering box. I then read somewhere how to regain the lost turns of the steering. Simply center the steering box and then adjust the tie rods to get the tires pointing straight ahead again. Then off to the alignment shop . . . . and done. So I did that.

I have some old school hot rod mechanic friends who suggested the spline delete. I gotta say it’s better and cheaper than adjusting the tie rods. No alignment needed.

Originally Posted by cgrocen

It seems that you recognized this, and addressed the issue by grinding the splines on the output of the steering box to accomodate that. Do you think that a person could have taken a small triangal file and filed 4 splines into the flat areas on the pitman arm? I suppose it is 6 of one and half a dozen of another.

The flat areas on the gear box output shaft are “low” flat surfaces. The pitman arm has 4 “high” flat surfaces. I would find it technically more difficult to accurately create splines than delete splines. That’s just me.

Originally Posted by cgrocen

Also, because the steering shaft does not line up with the power steering box, you added a u-joint to the input steering shaft. It seems that the rag joint now acts as a second u-joint. I am wondering if a second u-joint could have been added in-line thus taking any flexing out of the rag joint? Any thoughts about my two questions?

This is a great question. Yes, the rag joint acts as a U-joint. It always did act as a U-joint but it now has a bit more angular movement than before. Vendors sell 30 spline U-joints (see pic) that are designed to slip right onto the steering box input stem. You would then buy a 3/4” DD shaft to use between the U-joints. However, that arrangement eliminates the safety feature of the telescoping lower shaft. Having 2 U-joints is definitely safer than factory.

One idea is to remove the rag joint and flanges from the Squarebody telescoping lower shaft. That should leave you with the round section at the bottom half of the telescoping shaft and it should have a 3/4” round ID. Then weld a 3” piece of the discarded 3/4” round factory shaft to a 30 spline U-joint. Insert the other end into the round portion of the telescoping shaft and weld in place. Now you have 2 U-joints and the shaft will still telescope if needed.

[Lugnutz65]

Just finished installing PS in a friend’s 1965 C10. Decided to “clock” the position of the pitman arm by cutting grooves in the pitman arm. The 4 flat areas were cut with hand files. Took about 30 minutes. Worked great and allowed us the position the pitman arm anywhere we wanted.

[cgrocen]

Nice work on the splines!

[Lugnutz65]

Originally Posted by cgrocen

Nice work on the splines!

This past weekend I helped my friend install a power steering box on his 1965 C10 truck. We decided to cut new splines inside the pitman arm by running a V file on the 4 high flat spots. This method allows you to clock the pitman arm to ANY position. Takes a steady hand and precision and about 30 minutes with some good files.