TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
#2342507
07/24/17 04:21 PM
07/24/17 04:21 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,442 NW Chicago suburban area
Mopar Mitch
OP
pro stock
|
OP
pro stock
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,442
NW Chicago suburban area
|
Does anyone know the weight difference between, say, Firm Feel's solid steel sleeves vs, say, PST's solid aluminum sleeves? I've already purchased the FF 11/16" c-body setup (solid steel sleeves, along with the 11/16" larger tie-rod ends). But, I should've looked into this question earlier... re-assembly still lurking ahead for me... a few months away.. The "light-weight" aluminum (solid?) sleeves, say, from companies such as PST, maybe others, might be in my better interest. I'm always looking for weight reductions.
T/Anks ahead!
Mopar Mitch
"Road racers and autocrossers go in deeper and come out harder!"... and rain never stops us from having fun with our cars... in fact, it makes us better drivers!
Check out MOPAR ACTION MAGAZINE, August 2006 issue for feature article and specs on my autocross T/A!
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2342584
07/24/17 06:11 PM
07/24/17 06:11 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
IMO, weigh reduction via aluminum adjusting sleeves is not where I'd go. http://www.aluminiumdesign.net/design-su...m-and-fastenersDoesn't take much for the aluminum sleeves and the iron ends to start corroding. If you are worried about weight step down to the A body tie rod assemblies.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2342661
07/24/17 08:29 PM
07/24/17 08:29 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
My first of alum TR sleeves was 20? years ago, they stripped out before getting them on the car, that's likely a fluke, as I have not heard that complaint since or elsewhere, but it made a big impression on me. I still have them if anybody needs a pic.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2344709
07/28/17 08:47 AM
07/28/17 08:47 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 234 Brisvegas, Australia
Alchemi
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 234
Brisvegas, Australia
|
Unless the tierods are made from 7075 ally, steel is way stronger by weight - the a-body ones would be worth weighing vs the ally This is definitely a weight vs strength question - its a regular thing to do the c-body upgrade, but is it actually necessary? yes the thicker tierods would deflect less, but has anyone measured the difference? I would like to think that if a tierod was going to deflect more than 1/2 an inch it would just fail After googling bent and failed tierods, pretty much everything that comes up is newer solid bar stuff or on a 4x4 Has anyone who has done -only- a tierod upgrade noticed much of a difference? please chime in!
Last edited by Alchemi; 07/28/17 08:52 AM.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Alchemi]
#2344790
07/28/17 12:35 PM
07/28/17 12:35 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
I have brought up this exact issue many times for over a decade, you get two responses, "it can't hurt" or crickets.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: jcc]
#2344896
07/28/17 04:06 PM
07/28/17 04:06 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
I have brought up this exact issue many times for over a decade, you get two responses, "it can't hurt" or crickets. Now you can add three, don't.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Supercuda]
#2344975
07/28/17 07:44 PM
07/28/17 07:44 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
"I have brought up this exact issue many times for over a decade, you get three responses, "it can't hurt", "don't" or crickets.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Supercuda]
#2345020
07/28/17 09:19 PM
07/28/17 09:19 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,395 The Pale Blue Dot
Skeptic
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,395
The Pale Blue Dot
|
Rick E and the Green Brick are where the 11/16" tie rods started, AFAIK. The mod was cheap and stronger than the 9/16" A body parts. That was long before you could buy solid aluminum or steel sleeves. The bigger tie rods should wear longer under the higher g-loads, so that could be a plus for the street car that gets occasional track/ Auto X. The smaller solid 9/16"sleeve (or welded OE) is probably as strong as the split larger part, I haven't seen any tests . I'm not sure if the weight difference is really all that noticeable in the street/weekend warrior. If someone has done a comparison I'd like to see it. Just to be clear, I opted for the solid 9/16" sleeves on my car, but it now has the Hotchkis kit on it and at this point I'm not going to get it going, then tear it down get it aligned, and switch it all back to do an A-B-A test.
Last edited by Skeptic; 07/28/17 09:23 PM.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2345054
07/28/17 10:56 PM
07/28/17 10:56 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
http://www.speedwaymotors.com/QA1-52325-Heavy-Duty-Tie-Rod-Sleeve-Mopar-A-B-E-Body,258463.html
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Skeptic]
#2345057
07/28/17 11:10 PM
07/28/17 11:10 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
"The bigger tie rods should wear longer under the higher g-loads" That right there I think sums up the herd instinct on this topic. First I suspect the robustness between the two choices, shooting from the hip, I bet approaches 40%. But I think it it is a pretty big misconception TR's take any significant cornering loads (g-loads) in the first place. And oem size TR's last for quite a few miles on the street, pot holes, curbs, slow speed parking ( highest loads on TR's likely, without a, IMO, a high wear concern, so extending it, if we use the 40% factor, and not sure if that would be linear, we really don't have any need to for longer wear cycles. I could go on. I'll add lastly, because invariably someone will, "it doesn't hurt"
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: GoodysGotaCuda]
#2345209
07/29/17 12:44 PM
07/29/17 12:44 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
Irrelevant to the alum vs steel argument, but you can't really do that with tie rod ends. That's not entirely true, it is just more difficult than using shims to correct. The MP chassis book details it.
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Skeptic]
#2345284
07/29/17 02:32 PM
07/29/17 02:32 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
Good troll JCC but you aren't "shooting from the hip" you are blowing smoke out your backside. Nice attempt at taking the high road. After over a decade on this topic on Moparts, they usually take this course, unilaterally. I can go back locate/link them if needed The smaller part will wear out faster than an = larger part given the same load. Other then stating the obvious , what is your point? It's up to the individual to decide what is acceptable, Other then stating the obvious, what is your point? save a few pound VS shorter service life. And who here has worn out a TR in under say 50K? on one of our maintained not abused cars? My car is far from a daily driver, so I'll save a few pounds. I doubt It Really, what does it hurt if someone puts bigger tie rod ends on their car- seriously. I clearly addressed that, "what can it hurt?" Most people don't need the power their engines are capable of, nor the ginormous brakes that are so popular. Yes, a prime example of the Herd Don't get your panties in such a bunch about it. That would be counterproductive for "blowing smoke" Nobody is going to force you to put big tie rods on your car. that's great, and likely means nobody can make a solid case for doing so. Regarding hollow drilling, I assume most of loading on a TR in the shank is direct compression or tension loads, little bending, the math on CSA which is directly proportional to the items strength in this application, between a 11/16" and a 9/16", not using root thread diameter, is an approx 52% difference. Using the thread root diameters that will lower slightly, but i don't have that data at my fingertips, and am satisfied with my shooting from the hip 40% guess. Attached is a typical Mustang TR with adjustable bump steer adjustability. Guess they have not heard about all the Mopar defection issues with the 9/16" TR.
Last edited by jcc; 07/29/17 02:42 PM.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2348894
08/05/17 12:15 PM
08/05/17 12:15 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491 Lethbridge, AB, Canada
dangina
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491
Lethbridge, AB, Canada
|
I apologize I don't have better pics for you mitch. I'm running longer aluminum tie rod sleeves (from brads70) for 11/16" extended tierods (now discontinued by howes) welded on a spacer to the balljoint to combat bumpsteer. Running boregson box, fast ratio arms, with drop spindles. Been running this the last 2 years, autox a few times, no issues so far, no erratic steering either... this photo show the arms with the old sleeves which I had to abandon as they were too short: The best pic I can find right now on the car, you can see how much lower they sit than stock
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2348921
08/05/17 12:52 PM
08/05/17 12:52 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889 up yours
Supercuda
About to go away
|
About to go away
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 14,889
up yours
|
can't see the pics, photobucket wants you to pay up
They say there are no such thing as a stupid question. They say there is always the exception that proves the rule. Don't be the exception.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mopar Mitch]
#2349155
08/05/17 09:17 PM
08/05/17 09:17 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,386 Pikes Peak Country
TC@HP2
master
|
master
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,386
Pikes Peak Country
|
Found my old list of shipping info from my retail days. 11/16 steel tie rod sleeve shipping weight was 4#. 11/16 aluminum tie rod sleeves were 2#. This was the whole shipping package, box, packing, tape, parts. Actual weight may be less.
IMO, any flex that occurs in tie rod sleeves is due to the OEM split end design, which means its pretty marginal to begin with. Also, looking at pure lateral loading on the threaded portion of the tie rod stud, which is the same size regardless of the threaded shank size, its something like 5G's worth, which is far and away more load than any of our old heaps can corner at.
Now, if you race oval track where you are constantly being leaned on or bouncing off other objects, then yea, bigger sleeves might make sense.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Supercuda]
#2349291
08/06/17 02:00 AM
08/06/17 02:00 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491 Lethbridge, AB, Canada
dangina
pro stock
|
pro stock
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,491
Lethbridge, AB, Canada
|
can't see the pics, photobucket wants you to pay up
ah damnit I forgot they did this BS, If I have to upgrade my entire photo library, I'll do it on another website SOB's! anyone recommend a good one?(sorry for the thread jack)
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: TC@HP2]
#2349346
08/06/17 10:32 AM
08/06/17 10:32 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
Reg sleeve flex, I calculated a number years back for a thread on this same topic, and it was something like the sleeve would have to bow a 1/4" (???) to get a change in toe of .030". I don't see how this "phantom" flex on OUR cars is an issue worth much discussion.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: jcc]
#2349707
08/06/17 09:00 PM
08/06/17 09:00 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,645 Phila. Pa.
Mattax
top fuel
|
top fuel
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,645
Phila. Pa.
|
Reg sleeve flex, I calculated a number years back for a thread on this same topic, and it was something like the sleeve would have to bow a 1/4" (???) to get a change in toe of .030". I don't see how this "phantom" flex on OUR cars is an issue worth much discussion. Check that calc. I may have it somewhere myself. Maybe later I'll remember where.. The reason I suggest double checking is that one quarter, and certainly one half turn on the tie rod sleeve makes a measurable change of the toe. And a 1/2 turn shouldn't be 1/4". If my calcs are correct 18 TPI would result in .11" change in steering linkage for every full rotation of either sleeve. The resulting toe change will be some ratio larger than that. All that aside, IMO the main reason for larger sleeves and tie rods were (a) endurance especially for high shock load on the ball joints (b) maintain a stock appearance. Plenty of classes where the rules didn't or don't allow welding of suspension and steering components. There was a time when even sub-frame connectors were not allowed to be welded in SCCA Street Prepared. My recollection is that welding the sleeves may have been a no-no as well. I was already out of catagory due to the frame connectors, so welding the sleeves was an easy decision. The only caveat to welding the sleeves is keeping splatter off the threads - especially the lefties. Not a job for any old hack welder.
|
|
|
Re: TIE-ROD SLEEVES -- STEEL VS ALUMINUM
[Re: Mattax]
#2349788
08/06/17 11:21 PM
08/06/17 11:21 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695 Bitopia
jcc
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
|
If you can't dazzle em with diamonds..
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 22,695
Bitopia
|
I need to be clearer, if for example, the TR assembly was say 12" long, and a compression force was applied axially with enough force to cause the center of the 12" span to bow outwards, off axis a 1/4", the member would also shorten approx .030" (???), and toe would change .030". I have not checked these actual numbers yet, just a rough guess from what I calculated in a past thread. But the point is still valid, our sleeves are not bowing a 1/4", and if they were, they would soon fatigue and fail, and they aren't and .030" ain't that much anyway.
Reality check, that half the population is smarter then 50% of the people and it's a constantly contested fact.
|
|
|
|
|