Opinions on the Borgeson steering box?

greg75vette

The Traffic Baron
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
704
Location
Lindenhurst, LI, NY
Hey guys, I've been kicking around the idea of going with the Borgeson box instead of my currently stock power steering set up. Has anyone done this on this forum? I've done some leg work and it seems like a solid option. I've heard too many 'horror' stories about rack and pinions and the stock power steering is somewhat complicated in components (just more to go wrong) and I would like a quicker ratio.

So here's my questions:
-Are you satisfied with it?
-How is the steering feel?
-Is there a good amount of feedback or is it more muted than stock?
-How's on center? Is there a big dead spot?
-Does it feel over boosted? Better or worse than stock?

Feel is most important to me, but manual really isn't an option. I'd like my girlfriend to drive the beast once in a while.
 
The only thing that I don't like about the Borgenson box is that they have mounted it so that the input shaft and the steering column are in line (so that they could use a rag joint), using the larger and taller Jeep box means that you have to rotate the steering column up to line up with the input on the box.

The downside of that is that the steering wheel will be rotated down about an 1". That driving position does not appeal to me in an already cramped car.

I think their box uses 3/8 bolts. I wouldn't want a modern steering gear with integral servo attached to my frame with 3/8 bolts. There is a reason why the Jeep uses 4 12mm with wider spacing.
 
You are the first one I have ever heard of having to do that. Did you install it? All I've heard of necessary is collapsing the column 1 1/2" to make some room.
 
Hi

That was also my impression. The Borgeson housing is modified in such a way that the column angle stays, just needs to collaps.

If I ever need PS, this is the one I will take.

Rgds. Günther
 
Hi

That was also my impression. The Borgeson housing is modified in such a way that the column angle stays, just needs to collaps.

If I ever need PS, this is the one I will take.

Rgds. Günther

Since the Borgenson conversion uses a rag joint, the steering column MUST be in-line (coaxial) with the input. No angle at all. The housing for the Jeep gear is larger than the Corvette gear and, in the layout below, the corner is resting on the frame rail. This is as far down as you can get it. So what do you do, you rotate the steering column end UP to the input. This rotates the wheel down into your lap. Look at the layout below.

Look for posts by Kid Vette on his Jeep conversion. His is the only design that keeps the steering column in the original position and is in-line with the gear. How did he do it? He notched the frame to remove the interference.

First rule of engineering, two things CANNOT be at the same place at the same time.

Layout.jpg

GearsAligned.jpg

WheelDrop.jpg
 
With a tilt column it might not be such a big problem regarding comfort, with a non tilt... might be problematic.

Also, when changing the steering box axis in respect to the rest of the steering system you should actually also angle the idler arm the same way as the box. If you don't the centerlink will not be horizontal.
 
Whats wrong with the stock system? They can be fit better then new. My 72 & 75 PS systems work great, no leaks, fit and cost 1/2 the price. Yes I did blueprint the boxes,and have good CV and rams.
 
You can build the box as tight as you can, there's always slop in the steering valve because of the way it works. Some people do not like that. The best solution would be a remote servo like on those speedway racks bolted to the input shaft of the box. Sadly none are the right # of splines.
 
Whats wrong with the stock system? They can be fit better then new. My 72 & 75 PS systems work great, no leaks, fit and cost 1/2 the price. Yes I did blueprint the boxes,and have good CV and rams.

And I maybe rong about this, but can the steering ratio be reduced to 12-1 instead the stock 16-1??? I heard NOT....
 
Here's a pic illustrating what the configuration would be if you maintained the input shaft and pitman shaft in the same axis as the stock box.

thum_534a40cd63c2afd.jpg
 
Last edited:
Eh, bolt on a late shark wheel, that cures that school bus wheel the early sharks had.....course at my height, I still needed more room anyway, so I did other mods to get it....

:eek::smash:
 
Wow, Sorry for the delay in getting back to this thread. Starting a power plant never seems to go quite right...

Thank you everyone for replying.

Well I am still interested in a Borgeson box. Seems like the pros outweigh the cons. However, the stock system does work decently well. I'm still not sure if my stock system is currently ok, but it seems to be holding out. I think I'll wait on the Borgeson unit for at least a while. I need to get the bumper covers done first (you should see the chunk that fell off sunday!).

But if anyone else has input , go for it. The more opinions, the better.
 
Well that is still a thought. I haven't completely eliminated the idea of keeping the original system. I like the idea of a simpler system and the quicker ratio, which the Borgeson seems to deliver. However, the stock system does work and I may just switch out my steering wheel for a smaller diameter to make it feel a little tougher to turn and give me a perceived quicker ratio. Now that I think my stock system is somewhat alright, I have some time to think about it.
 
I know this is an older thread, but I have a question about the use of the Jeep box:
to what extend must the pitman shaft be remachined [as Borgeson says that's what they do], or alternatively, could the Jeep pitman arm be used?

Finally, which series of Jeep boxes must be used, since I understand there are differences between series/years?

thanks
Cor
 
Borgeson re-machines the end of the shaft to fit the Corvette arm. I think that is a mistake. The Corvette pitman arm has pretty small splines and normally does not see the same forces as a modern Jeep unit with an integral servo (the servo is on the linkage for the C2/3). The power steering pitman arms from the A-body are beefier, with more spline engagement and are a bolt on.

The Jeep pitman cannot be used because the splines are rotated.

The 1999-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee gear is the one you want.
 
I was thinking the same when I was looking at the Z28 box on my f body, the arm is much beefier than the external servo corvette application.
 
Both the Borgeson box, and my rack are ~12-1 AFAIK the stock setup is stuck at 16-1, if you upgrade the wheels/tires to say 17+ you will be needing the quicker steering....cures that road wander.....the later shark wheel is almost mandatory too.....

:thumbs:
 
Top