What’s my problem??? I reassembled my ’73 Challenger (which included removing the torsion bars) front end suspension and notice that the driver’s side tie rod end link that connects to center link, contacts the torsion bar when I turn the steering wheel.

As you can see from the picture, the top of the end link and the pitman arms are in line with the lower portion of the driver’s side torsion bar. Consequently when the steering wheel is turned to the right they contact one another. I have not placed the wheels on the car and dropped it on the ground however, I don’t recall experiencing this interference problem when I have previously performed K-member removal and front end reassemblies. I did place a jack underneath the lower control arm and loaded the front driver side which did not appear to alleviate this interference. The car is not aligned or ride height set. The passenger side does not have any interference with the torsion bar when rotating the steering wheel.

Initially I thought the pitman arm was incorrect which may have placed the centerlink in an incorrect position. However, I eliminated that the pitman arm is incorrect. I double checked and the torsion bar are correct for each side; driver’s side (left), passenger side (right). The centerlink is not backwards or flipped over either. Everything was bolted up and initially I did not notice the interference since I had everything pointed straight. I did replace the steering box with a Firm Feel however, they assured me that it’s not the issue and comparing it to another ’73 Challenger, the pitman arm’s drop appears to be in the correct position. I double checked the outside tie rods and they are correctly orientated on the lower ball joint. At this point, I’m lost what else it can be. The only other thing I’m thinking is could I have clocked the torsion bar into the lower control arm at an incorrect position when reassembled them and would that have any affect?

Any ideas???

Does the tie rod end go in from the bottom side? I'm not familiar with the E-bodies, but looking at the picture it would sure give a lot more clearance.

Edit: C-bodies have the shank of the tierod parallel to teh ground, so the rod end mounts to the back side of the centerlink, and that's what I'm familiar with. I just saw a pic of a B-body and it's rod ends come from the top like is shown in your picture. I dunno.

That height is set by the pitman arm I don't think setting the wheels on the ground and loading the suspension is going to change where the pitman arm is sitting , if it does you have bigger problems.

Do you have the steering box centered ?

I believe so. As I recall the steering box mounting holes are fixed and do not provide for movement/adjustment. I think there are three stout bolts which affix the steering box to the K-member.

The shank of the gear box, where the pitman arm attaches appears to be in the proper location when I compared this to another '73 Challenger.

I gotcha.... According to the company, they ship them centered. Prior to mounting, I indexed/marked the shaft with the case in case it got out of alignment during installation or when assemblying the pitman arm, center link etc.

It seems to be centered having turned the wheel as much as possible from side to side and judging how the steering wheel aligns.

I am having the same problem with mine after a front end rebuild but mine is a B body . tried every thing for weeks now still no luck . every one says the pitman arm is too short , but it is no different than the old one .although if it were longer it would solve the problem or putting the tie rod in from the bottom. If anyone has an answer let us know. thanks

I thought it may be the pitman arm too. I purchased another one to make sure I didn't have a "manual" steering pitman arm instead of a "power steering" pitman arm.

Is your issue with the driver side too?

is that the original kframe?

I think you have the tie rod end in backwards. The inner and outer tie rod ends are different. The stud length is longer on the outer end if memory serves. I just did this on my '71 Challenger and put them in backwards myself. Pull the rod end-sleeve assy out and swap end for end.

I suspect if you look closely, the present inner tie rod end castelated nut is way down on the stud and the cotter key is not closely engaged either.

Astrobuf

yes it is the driver side also , and original K frame , just all new front end kit from moog . will check the tie rod ends to see if they are backwards, never thought of that being different .

dont the tie rod go in from under the bar?

the old one was on top on my 66, is there any reason why it can't go on the bottom ?

never mind, i think it goes in only one way

What's going on with the idler side of things?...

If the idler is low for whatever reason, the centerlink will pivot at the pitman joint. And then the driver side tie rod will move up toward the T-bar. Looks a little turned up, but could be the power of suggestion.

Do you have your old idler? How does the geometry of it look compared to the new one?

Do you have another centerlink to compare against? Careful they look bent when they are perfectly fine if you stare at them enough. Need a good one next to it.

The tie rod ends are different. The difference is right hand and left hand threads used to adjust tie rod. The the size of the tie rod end links do not appear any different in size.

I've considered the idler arm and thought about how that may alter the pitman arm's geomerty if it is the wrong one. Will have to investigate further. I was able to compare the centerlink and initially thought it may have been reversed however, that wasn't the case.

sorry for high jacking again but like I said I have the very same problem with my B body same side every new part is identical to the old part and I highly doubt we both have bent center links .

Maybe try installing your old idler then pitman and see if things change.

It has been noted recently in header fitment situations that not all brand idlers put the geometry in the same place. Someone changed brands of idler and headers didn't hit.

Wish I had kept it. Unfortunately I got rid of old one when I broke everything down. At the time, it did not occur that I should save in the event that there is a slight difference between the parts. Perhaps it could be the wrong part. I'll have to pick one up tomorrow and go from there.

I had to shim the steering box to get everything where it belonged. The MP Chassis manual explains how and why. My driver side inner tierod end was hitting the torsion bar and the centerlink was rubbing the oilpan. Bumpsteer was real bad. Everything is fine now.

GomangoCuda,

I hadn't consider this!!! I'm trying to think if the original box was shimmed when I removed it. If so, would it have been shimmed with those square-ish looking horse-shoe shaped shims? I sort of recall seeing these now that I'm thinking about this.

I found the first pitman arm I bought, for my 72' b-body, to be slightly loose on the cross-shaft splines after the nut was tightened. The nut and lock washer had bottomed out against the shoulder, the tapered splined hole in the arm was a tad too big. I don't recall the steering linkage was contacting the torsion bar but clearly the pitman arm was too far up the cross-shaft. Sourced another arm from a different vender to solve the problem. I have never found shims installed under the steering gear originally, don't believe that to be the solution.

Wouldn't a shim move the box up? Making the problem worse?

Check out the suspension pic in this link. Make sure you have the center link installed correctly. It would be easy to get it switched end for end.

https://board.moparts.org/ubbthreads/show...art=19&vc=1

Is the center link horizontal?
If not, either the pitman arm or idler arm are incorrect. They should be at the same distance off the ground. That means they should be the same height from the frame rails too.

JohnRR referred to this but in an odd manner. The idler arm and pitman arm do not set ride height. However, they are the points that are supposed to be measured to set the ride height.

My money is on the center link being installed backwards or upside down.

shouldn't the hole the tierod end go into be chamfer??

I'm running a 69 B-body k frame in the hot rod. My pitman arm is about an inch below the torsion bar. The tie rod actually sits below the T-bar with the wheels centered.

That's pretty far off from where you're at.

Cruzin,



From your photo it appears you have the wrong end of the centerlink assembled, it appears that you have the idler arm end assembled to the pitman arm end,....the pitman arm end should be angled rearward, and have a slight forward pitch looking from the rear,...the idler arm end is somewhat straight,....as I'm sure your aware there is no way to install the centerlink upside down, because of the joints taper,....but it's easy to swap the wrong end,...a photo taken looking straight up at the centerlink would confirm,.....


Mike

** Update ** Over the weekend it appears that I got this problem squared away. I wish the problem was as simple as having the center link reversed or flipped or a bent part, as some had suggested. However, that was not the case.

What I did was obtain another new pitman arm (third one) and replaced it. Also, I shimmed the top bolt on the new steering box. Not sure if the shim was necessary however, it appeared to add a slight amount of clearance and it doesn't seem to affect anything so I left it in when I re-torque the steering box. The new pitman arm was Moog same as the prior two, new ones. Comparing them side by side, and taking some measurements with a caliper, I could not find any significant difference. Apparently, Moog sources these parts from other vendors since none of them had an actual Moog part # as far as I could tell. All I can say is upon reassembling and torquing everything back up, wall'la no more interference!

Anyway, thank s for everyone's help and suggestions.