My 50th High School reunion is in 2020 and I've pretty much decided that I'll be driving my 57 Plymouth back for it. It's been 11 years since I originally built the old Plaza to drive to Tulsa when they dug up the buried 57 Belvedere.

57 Plymouth by M Patterson, on Flickr

The car runs a 56 354 Hemi with Tri-Power, PAW cam, 56 exhaust manifolds, front disc brakes, iron case overdrive A833 4 speed and a 9 1/4" rear end with 4.10 gears.


57 354 by M Patterson, on Flickr



The paint and interior have both held up well, and it has working AC, cruise control, and a stereo with a reverb (what can I say the 60s were good to me LOL).


57 Int by M Patterson, on Flickr

Right now I’m just doing some general maintenance stuff on it. It needed a set of rear tires and while I had the wheels off I replaced the rear wheel cylinders that has started seeping a little.

The steering gear is has some slop in it so I dug up another one to send out and be rebuilt. I’m not looking forward to that little job. The column and gear have to come out as a unit, which requires taking up the carpet, removing a plate in the floor and bringing out the whole unit thru the interior.

sg by M Patterson, on Flickr
the steering shaft runs all the way from the box to the steering wheel so there is really no way around it. At least it’s not a PS gear which are a good deal larger and heavier.

rs by M Patterson, on Flickr


The clutch in it has always been a bit on the stiff side, so while I have the steering gear out (and out of the way), I’ll probably try to modify the linkage a bit to take care of that issue.


That’s pretty much it for the maintenance, but there are also some changes I’m contemplating.

I’m gathering the pieces I need to build a set of dual quads for it. There’s nothing wrong with the Tri Power, it works great. I’ve just always wondered what kind of performance gain I would see if any with 8 barrels instead of 6.

I’ve also been kicking around changing the 4 speed out to an automatic. I’m getting older and on occasion my left leg gives me a few problems. Of course making some changes to the clutch linkage may buy me a few more years being able to row thru the gears. While I generally really like the OD 4 speed, the gear ratio splits kind of suck for any spirited driving.

My first choice would be to do another 46RH like I have in the 37 Dodge. Now that the Compushift controller is dialed in I really really like that transmission. It also would give me a bit more of an overdrive than the OD A833 does. The two major down sides are cost (by the time I buy the transmission adapter, Compushift controller, shifter, trans cooler and shorten the drive shaft I’d be into it well over $1000, and that does NOT include the cost of the transmission! The other issues are; the size (I’m pretty sure trans tunnel mods are going to be needed) and the trans mount location which would require some major changes to the crossmember.

The second and much easier and cheaper automatic route is to use the small block 727 I have sitting in the back shed. That’s pretty much a bolt in, but would require a rear end gear swap to something more highway friendly than the 4.10s that are currently in it.

The other major change I’m looking at is adding power steering. I purposely built the car with manual steering as I hate the lack of road feel with the stock 57-62. Even if I did decide to go with the factory power steering I’d either have to go with the more restrictive 57-58 392 exhaust manifolds or build a set of custom headers for it. The one option that looks like it might be feasible is to use electric power steering. I’ve been researching the units that go in the column between the steering wheel and steering box and fit under the dash. If I do that route the switch over to an automatic transmission becomes mandatory, as I’ll have to lose the clutch pedal to make room for the unit.

Right now the automatic transmission and PS changes are just in the contemplating stage. I’ll hold up making any final decisions on those until I get the clutch linkage modified and the rebuilt steering gear in it and see how I like it after those changes.

At least I know what my next project is going to be.

Impressive. Most '57 Plymouths had rusted away by the early '60s.

hurry up and retire. the guy that stated :
"when i retired, i can't understand how i even found time to go to work, there are so many projects that need done !"
really knew what he was talking about !
[i speak from experience ]

“……hurry up and retire. the guy that stated :
"when i retired, i can't understand how i even found time to go to work, there are so many projects that need done !"
really knew what he was talking about !
[i speak from experience…..”

I’m having that very same experience.




“……Impressive. Most '57 Plymouths had rusted away by the early '60s……”


Thanks. That’s the nice thing about living in AZ. It wasn’t all that impressive when I drug it home, but it at least it was virtually rust free. Even out here though they didn’t have a good survival rate and I spent 6 years look for a 2 dr sedan to build. As one wrecking yard owner told me when I asked if he had any 57-58 Plymouths…… “Naw, haven’t had any of those in years, they were so damned ugly we crushed every one that came in.”

This poor old thing had somehow not found its way to the crusher. It came complete with the original flat head 6 (with a rod sticking out thru the block) and 2spd Powerflite.

P by M Patterson, on Flickr


At least it was in better shape than the new 57 Plymouth (with 14 miles on it) they buried in Tulsa in 1957 and dug up in 2007. There wasn’t a square inch on that car that wasn’t pin holed with rust.


C2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The Tulsa event was a lot of fun and I’m glad I had mine built in time to go to it. It was likely the biggest gathering of 57-58 Plymouths in 50 years.

This was the row of 57-58 Furys that showed up.

Fury row by M Patterson, on Flickr

This had to be my favorite though. It started out life as a 4 door and in the 60’s the guy who owns it decided that was just too many doors

It run a 392 Hemi and 4 speed and as I recall 3.91 gears.


Short 1 by M Patterson, on Flickr


I’m kind of thinking that could be a handful (but a LOT of fun).

Anyway you can put Rack and Pinion in it>

I looked at that quite a bit when I built the car. It would have to be a rear steer rack, and there just isn't enough room to put one in (oil pan interference) It would make life a lot easier if I could.

Yes: I got two original PS setups going on Sweptline trucks that I owned, I never want to mess with antique PS systems again.

(I know squat about '57's, so keep that in mind)

Based on what you said, it looks like no matter which route you go for PS, you have to modify/change things up.

What kind of oil pan mods are needed for the rack to work?

Beautiful car. I'd love to have something vintage one day.

“…….What kind of oil pan mods are needed for the rack to work?.......”


Not the best picture, but what I had in the computer.

drag link by M Patterson, on Flickr


It also refreshed my memory that it would really take. The pan mods would be the minor part.

In order to keep the stock spindles and suspension I’d need a rear steer rack. It would have to sit just about where the drag link goes. That would require installing a crossmember to mount it to. Even though I could run holes in a new crossmember to run the torsion bars thru, where the ends of the new crossmember would need to go are right where the frame kicks up and there is nothing there to attach the crossmember to. Then there is the issue of connecting the steering column to the rack. Where the pinion shaft would be would require the steering shaft to make an almost 90 degree drop straight down from the firewall.

I had briefly considered a front steer rack. The first thing I would need is front spindles that would be compatible with the Chrysler ball joints and control arms. Then front crossmember makes a big forward curve and would end up having to be changed to make it straight to bolt the rack to, which I’m pretty sure would require cutting into the front of the pan which I’m not sure I could do without getting into the oil pump pickup.

At that point doing a front frame clip like 5280Dart is doing to his 57 looks like a much more viable option. He’s doing great work by the way and I’m really looking forward to seeing his car done and his impressions on how it drives and handles.

That being said the clip swap is not for me. It would be easy enough to do especially as he has pretty much blazed the trail. The thing is, I really like the feel of driving my 57 with the old torsion bar suspension. I grew up in the 50s-60s and in 68 started working in a Chrysler Plymouth dealership. It hit me first real test drive I took with the Plymouth that the car had the same “feel” as driving the base (4 speed/manual steering) Road Runners I used to test drive. I know that I could take advantage of the suspension advances of the last 60 years and make a lot better handling and comfortable car out of it. The thing is I think I’d end up losing some of the things I really love about the way the car drives…..and brings back a lot of nice memories for me.

Cavalier center pivot R&P. Fab cross member to bolt it to the original idler arm bracket and steer box mount. Already paper engineered this for install into my Cuda, once I finish getting the shop built.

Thanks for the lengthy reply Mike!

It does look like the T-bars would be the biggest challenge of the R&P mod. I understand the suspensions are completely different, but, this set up for a '57 Chevy was what I was thinking of in terms of mounting. It looks like they handled the kick up by mounting the cross member to the side of the frame rather than the flat.

R&P Linky

And then there's the matter of making sure mounting and angles are right so you don't end up with bump steer.

"The thing is I think I’d end up losing some of the things I really love about the way the car drives…..and brings back a lot of nice memories for me."

I totally get your reasoning not wanting to do a clip swap on your car. I feel the same way about the (original) engine in my wagon (400). Hemi swaps are all the rage but I want to keep the original to show how it used to be done.

I would never pull the T-bars out of a Mopar either. Would that
smaller replacement Borgeson (came in Jeeps maybe) PS box for the "newer" Mopars work?

My son has a 57 Dodge wagon with power steering. Before we installed the 5.9, I spent a lot of time looking for a way to mount up a rack & pinion. I have done several R & P swaps on 30s-50s Mopars. I have an Intrepid rack (a front steer version of a Cavalier rack) sitting here, so I had an actual rack to hang in place. Even without a motor interfering, the rack would not work without major modification to the frame and suspension and completely changing the steering column. The torsion bars get in the way at the rear, and the forward strut bars get in the way in front. To clear either, the rack would need to mount too high to fit in a motor, or too low for ground clearance. Gene

Once the steering box and shaft are out why not cut it and fit a rag joint or trunnion joint in like 60's cars have. sure would make it easier if you ever had to do repairs again.

Good looking Plymouth!!!!

Beautiful car! Only thing I might change is to go with a hydraulic clutch to really cut down on pedal effort.



What's your plan to account for turning radius loss? Are you making longer steering arms?

Thanks for all the replies guys.

"..... Only thing I might change is to go with a hydraulic clutch to really cut down on pedal effort......"

Thanks. I'm going to play a bit with the ratios on the mechanical linkage first and if I leave it a stick the hydraulic clutch is one of the things I'm looking at.



Gene (poorboy) pretty much summed up the rack and pinion situation.



“……Once the steering box and shaft are out why not cut it and fit a rag joint or trunnion joint in like 60's cars have. sure would make it easier if you ever had to do repairs again…….”


About 10 years before I built the Plymouth I built a 57 Dodge Coronet 2dr post car. The 57-58 Dodges have engine compartments, suspensions and steering that are identical to the 57-58 Plymouths.

57 Dodge by M Patterson, on Flickr

I ran a dual quad 440 with a 64 pushbutton torqueflight. Originally it was a manual steering car but with 69 C body HIPO manifolds and I had plenty of room for the larger factory power steering. I originally changed over to a 57 power steering gear before the engine went in. The 57 PS was actually worse than the 58 and later units. I found a later unit in a car in the junk yard and figured as I had the car up in the air on the fork lift I’d just drop it out thru the bottom. I quickly found out that with an engine in the car there was not a hole big enough to drop the gear out without removing the torsion bar…….something you definitely don’t want to do unless you have to on these cars. Coming out thru the interior, the column actually makes a decent handle to hold on to while you thread the unit out thru the hole in the floor.


“……..Would that smaller replacement Borgeson (came in Jeeps maybe) PS box for the "newer" Mopars work?.......”


The biggest problem with most newer boxes is the length of the pitman shaft. The 57-62 (?) used a long pitman shaft to place the pitman arm where it needs to be.


sg by M Patterson, on Flickr


The only readily available stock PS box I’ve come across with a long pitman shaft is on the mid 70s Ford F150s.


F150 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The major show stopper on that box is that it is designed to bolt to the outside of the frame rail…..the second problem is that it’s huge.


The Tri 5 Chevy guys had kind of a similar issue with their steering and many years ago came with this solution. It’s a 605 Saginaw box with a custom longer pitman shaft and an add on casting to support the bottom of the shaft.

57 Chev by M Patterson, on Flickr


If I had more room between the steering box and engine (like with a big or small block instead of the HEMI) I’d probably research this one a bit more. It would likely have to be close to bolt in (length wise) to make sense as having a one-off custom built pitman shaft made would likely be cost prohibitive.

Sheldon your question did get me thinking along an avenue I hadn’t consider before. To use a smaller modern PS box “as is” would require dropping it way down to get the pitman arm in the right location….. but at the same time it would alleviate my steering box to manifold clearance problem.

The issue then becomes the steering column. The column is supported at the top under the dash and at the bottom where it goes thru the firewall. There is only about 6” that comes thru on the engine side of the firewall.

57 Ply by M Patterson, on Flickr



If I cut the column on the firewall side and try to run an intermediate shaft to connect the column to the dropped steering gear on the engine side the angle the joints would have to run would be too steep to work without binding. I might be able to get decent joint angles if I cut the column up in the passenger compartment. That would just leave figuring a way to support the bottom of the shortened steering column. I don’t know what other show stoppers I might run into…..just like every other option I discarded over the years, but I think it’s something I’ll explore some more.

Darn: Yes I've went through this with sweptlines and my friend has a 66 Ford Pickup he is trying to figure something out with as well. It sure is a hassle, that electric unit is starting to sound pretty good.

"........Darn: Yes I've went through this with sweptlines and my friend has a 66 Ford Pickup he is trying to figure something out with as well. It sure is a hassle, that electric unit is starting to sound pretty good......."


Yeah Sheldon that pretty much sums it up.

My big plan was to ship out the spare steering box to a rebuilder in Phoenix yesterday. I was actually in the process of packing it up when I realized IF I can make a later box work by mounting it lower and using an intermediate shaft I'd end up with a box I spent over $350 on sitting in the pats shed. So late yesterday afternoon I put the Plymouth back up in the air where I can get better look at everything.

After 20 years of off and on thinking about how to get PS into these cars deep down I suspect that after doing some looking and measuring this will likely also end up pile of discarded ideas, but you never know.

Sheldon I don't know if this box would have worked for you or your friend. I came across it while I was looking for something else. It's a Ford box and would mount on the inside of the frame (instead of the outside like the other box I posted). It wouldn't help me with the HEMI, but might work with other engines.


f Bronco by M Patterson, on Flickr


https://www.wildhorses4x4.com/product/Po...AyABEgKZcvD_BwE



On my 57 I went thru my pile of steering gears to get some measurements and drug a couple into the shop so I could get some measurements and make some comparisons. At this point it looks like I might be able to fit a Saginaw 800 box in there. The measurements I could take look good, but I really won't know till I get the original steering gear out. If it physically fits issues like shortening and modifying the original column and coming up with an intermediate shaft and joints should be fairly straight forward.

Once I determined the gear might physically fit I figured the next show stopper would be whether it would be mechanically compatible with the stock steering linkage. I was really surprised on how close it meets the requirements. The stock Plymouth pitman arm will fit the steering box and indexes where it needs to be on the master splines (but may need to be tweaked a bit). The pitman arm rotates in the correct direction....a big plus . The steering box I have is 3 1/2 turns stop to stop (the manual gear in the Plymouth is 4 1/2 turns stop to stop) which is right where I'd like it to be. Finally both boxes have the same 7" of pitman arm rotation stop to stop. Basically I don't think I could have speced out a box any closer to what I need.

Figuring the cost of using a rebuilt Saginaw 800 box and the bits and pieces I'll need to modify the steering column, add an intermediate shaft, and custom made PS pressure hoses (I already have a new PS pump on the shelf), I will still be under what it would cost to have the Manual steering gear rebuilt. Provided I can get the Saginaw mounted. I've got a couple other things I need the bay for before I'm ready rip the steering out of the 57, so it will be a bit before I get back to the steering.

As far as some of the other things I want to do to the car;

I should hopefully finish of the modifications to the clutch linkage today or tomorrow.

Yesterday I picked up the dual quad intake for the HEMI (it's an original 57 Chrysler intake). At this moment I'm not sure what carbs I'll be using, other than they will AFBs. I've got a pair that are pretty well matched that would work in a pinch but I'm still looking at options. On the bright side the dual quad intake is so much lower than the Tri-Power that I'll be able to run 1" Phenolic spacers under the carbs and still have plenty of hood clearance.

Even with the spacers I could actually go back to a stock flat hood. I actually wouldn't mind doing that but with an 11 year old paint job I know I'd never be able to match the paint where I'd be happy with it.

I’ve got the clutch straightened out. Turns out that all that was required was adding a bolt on extension to the clutch fork. It was pretty simple to built but took just a bit of time working on a creeper to figure out what I needed to make.


57 ext by M Patterson, on Flickr



Changing to an automatic is not completely off the table depending on what I end up doing for power steering , but I figure I've probably bought my leg a few more years with the 4 speed. if I decide to keep it.


I mentioned in the original post that I put the 57 together so I could drive it to Tulsa when the unearthed the 57 Belvedere in 2007.


Now that I’m working on the 57 again I’ve gone back and revisited some web sites I was on when I built the car. I came across some information on the Belvederes’ current status.

https://www.hemmings.com/blog/2017/06/28...eum/?refer=news

The car looks a lot better than it did when it came out of the hole, but like the article indicates all the metal is thin and pin holed (“It’s basically like papier mâché,”).

The museum where it’s to be located is only a couple of hour drive from where my High School reunion will be so if it’s still there I’ll probably take a drive and go see it.

Once I got the 57 drivable back in 06 the drivers’ side rear spring started to sag a bit. I took the easy/quick way out at the time and threw a set of air shocks on the back. I finally got tired of adding air to them every 3 days so figured I go ahead and fix it right.

My experience with re-ached springs is that they tend to be over arched and when they are first put on the car sits like a stink bug and it take up to a couple years for the rear to settle to the final ride height. The only new off the shelf springs that will bolt on to the 57 are Mopar Performance C body super stock springs and those are a bit on the stiff side for my taste (I used them on the 57 Dodge I built several years ago).

That pretty much left adding some leafs to the spring packs. I had a spring pack out in the shed that has the right width leafs so I ended up adding 2 to the drivers’ side and one to the passengers’ side. That and a new pair of shocks and one more thing is checked off the list.

57 brakes by M Patterson, on Flickr


I also started collecting the bits and pieces for the dual quads. I picked up an original 57 dual quad manifold form a friend of mine who has decided to go with an aluminum intake for his Hemi. I set a pair of parts carbs on to check the height of the spacers I want to run under them (these carbs have too many internal issues to make them viable as builders). I’ll be running spacers for 2 reasons; insulating the carbs from the intake to help prevent heat soak on hot days , getting the air cleaner up into the scoop area……even with 1 ½” of spacers the air cleaner is still sits lower than the tri-power.

354 DQ by M Patterson, on Flickr

I like the big oval air cleaner on this car, but when I built it the only thing I could find were the chrome steel ones. To me the chrome steel never looked quite right with the aluminum valve covers. I picked up an aluminum air cleaner assembly which was black powder coated. I got the powder coating stripped (acetone and steel wool). Right now I’m debating whether to polish the lid out or send it and the valve covers out to be powder coated. I’m kind of leaning towards the powder coating. The “near chrome” powder coating does not look anything like chrome but does look like polished aluminum and it doesn’t oxidize like polished aluminum does. It’s also a lot easier than polishing the lid and those big valve covers …..but like I said, I’m still deciding.

Longer? No that would worsen the issue.

Shorter, yes.

Depending on the applications you can sometimes find a different model arm that will bolt on and work.

I took a look at the Cavalier center pivot R&P. At a glance for this car it’s probably more unfeasible than trying to rig a convention rack under the car. Besides the rack hanging down way to low, the added room required for rack movement and the angle the tie rods would end up requiring a complete redesign of the front crossmember and oil pan. By the time that’s finished you’re almost looking at a front frame clip again.

I found a build thread on another Hemi Plaza last week (neat project). He started with a 6 Cyl car like mine and changed out the 6 Cyl Frame mounts to original V8 Frame mounts like I did. He ended up with room for a factory PS unit……..on closer inspection of his pictures, it turns out he had shifted his engine over a couple of inches. That boats already sailed on mine ( and I won’t put factory PS on mine anyway).

Like I said I think I can fit a 800 series Saginaw box in but I’m continuing to look at options. I talked to a friend of mine yesterday and he has a core 605 Saginaw box I can borrow for a while. It’s a bit smaller and may be easier to mount than the 800s and universal Pitman arms are available for them so I’m going take a closer look at that.

This week is going to be pretty much eaten up with getting a load of stuff ready to take up to a swap meet in Tucson so it will probably be a bit before I get back on the steering.

You're making good progress.

I started looking for AFBs to use for the dual quads a couple of weeks ago. Personally I usually like to find a pair of used carbs that are matched and build them myself. I usually have at least some AFBs sitting on the shelf but over the last few years a lot have been used or sold so I didn’t have anything suitable on hand. The local wrecking yards were picked over years ago so I went on E Bay and Craigs List to see what was out there. It’s been a few years since I've bought any and boy did I get a bit of sticker shock.

There was a swap meet in Tucson last Saturday that I was going to anyway so I figured I'd see if I could find anything up there. There were several used AFBs around but most sellers were asking E Bay prices. I did find one Carter 9635S that the guy was asking $60 on (about twice what I’d normally pay for a builder) but I bit the bullet and bought it anyway……..if I didn’t find a mate for it I figured I could built it and either keep it on hand or sell it. I found the “bargain of the day” a little later when a guy set up across the road from me (selling mostly flea market stuff) and set out a pretty grungy looking 9625S for $5.


sm2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


There are a couple of minor external differences between the 9635 and 9625 but they are both 625 CFM and internally identical.

They both cleaned up well and I had enough parts on hand to build one so I only had to buy one kit. I verified they were both jetted the same and have the same step rods and springs so that will be my starting point.

I built the carb I’m going to be using as the primary carb back to the way it originally was and removed the choke from the carb that will be used as the secondary carb. It happens the carb spacing on the factory manifold is just right to use an aftermarket fuel line for a Holley dual feed double pumper, which takes care of having to build fuel lines. The carb spacing is the same on both the First Gen Chrysler Hemi and the factory B and RB cast iron in line dual quad manifolds the fuel line will work for either

DQ by M Patterson, on Flickr

So with the cost of the carbs and 1 kit, I’m into the carbs for about $100……sometimes life isn’t not too bad.

those carbs look good. what did you use to clean them with ?

When I decided to put the dual quads on the 57 and started looking around for AFBs I became concerned that I would have a problem finding affordable builders. I did luck out and found the 625 CFM AFBs though and got them rebuilt and ready to use. They weren’t my first choice but I’m pretty sure they will work out fine.

My first choice was a pair of early 60s Cadillac AFBs. I’d used a pair of these on my 65 Chevy (350 4 speed) years ago and really liked the way they ran. I had one sitting on the shelf and had keep my eyes open for a mate for it for years but never was lucky enough to find one.

It never fails, a couple of days after I got 625s rebuilt I found out a friend of mine had the Cadillac carb I wanted sitting on his shelf gathering dust. We ended up doing a bit of trading and it ended up in my shop.


Cad AF by M Patterson, on Flickr


I picked up a couple of kits and got them both taken apart and cleaned up. You could tell it had been a long time since anybody had been into to them (I think they had both had kits at least once sometime in the past). When was the last time you took a carburetor apart and it had steel needles (no “rubber” tips) in it?

SN by M Patterson, on Flickr



So now I have 2 pairs of carbs to try out on the 57.


Cad AFB 2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


These AFBs are a little unusual compared to most of the ones produced. They are 575 CFM and don’t have an idle speed adjustment screw. The throttle plates are closed at idle and the speed is adjusted with the brass air bleed screw located between the fuel mixture screws. As they are the early AFBs they have the also have the smaller 4 7/32” air cleaner base instead of the 5 1/8” used on the later AFBs. I found an outfit that sells aluminum adapter rings for the air cleaners so that I have a pair of those coming too.

I’m going to set both pairs of carbs up for synchronized and progressive linkage while the intake is still on the bench. So now I’m down to building 4 sets of carb linkage. Whatever set carbs I don’t end up using on the 57 will probably eventually find a home on something else around here.

As far as cleaning them it depends on how bad they are. I always soak them in a 5 gallon can of carburetor I have here (I'm not sure who made it, the can is 7 or 8 years old and I've had to replace the original can it was in....it might have been hydro-seal). Then it's spray can carb cleaner and compressed air especially thru the internal passages. A little steel wool and elbow grease usually works if there is stubborn gunk. Although I really hate doing it if they are internally salvageable but bad on the outside I have been known to seal everything up and bead blast the outside to clean them up. It takes a long time and a lot of carb cleaner to clean them afterward though. I've never had a problem with a carb I've done this to, but that is usually a last resort.

I spent the last few days sorting out the linkage for both pairs of AFBs. Building linkage on the bench is a lot easier than doing it stretched over a fender. The Carter 625s were already on the intake so I started with those. I set both pairs of carbs up for synchronized and progressive linkage so I can easily change over and find out what the engine likes best.

The synchronized linkage was a snap and took just a couple of minutes to set up.


DQS by M Patterson, on Flickr


The progressive linkage is just slightly more complicated but still pretty simple. It's so simple I just couldn't bring myself to spend $35 for a pre-made set so I spent about an hour building my own. I basically just copied the style used on the Chevys Dual Quad 409 cars.


DQ P by M Patterson, on Flickr


There is just enough difference between the throttle arms on the 625 CFM Carters and the Caddy AFBs that the linkage wouldn't directly interchange so I just built a second set for the Caddy carbs.


Cad afb s by M Patterson, on Flickr


Cad AFB P by M Patterson, on Flickr


Here's a shot of the other side with the fuel line.

DQFL by M Patterson, on Flickr

I've gone about as far as I can on the dual quads until it's time to install them. For now I'll throw a towel over them until I get some more Plymouth time.



.

Nice job on that intake set-up

I've had several early Chrysler Fire Power Hemi (331 and several 300 C and D 392 motors) with the factory cast iron single plain dual 4 barrel intakes with stock progressive throttle linkage that I ended up converting to 1 to 1, which in my experience was much better driving in both the big old 300 cars with the push button cast iron torqueflytes and my 1933 Ford pick up street rod back with the early Ford stock three speed with the weak enclosed driveline and rear end in the mid 1960s
I use to look for a aluminum dual plane dual 4 barrel intake for them but never saw one anywhere in SO CA after looking for 30+ yrs at the swap meets and races, how about you?
Your Plymouth looks good
What part of AZ do you live in now?

I live a bit south of Tucson....down in the land of no smog testing.

Years ago I did a bit of normal maintenance work on a customers 55 300 but never had a chance to do any "playing" with the carbs or intake.

I did have a factory 1958 BB Dual Quad intake on a 69 440 I stuffed in a 57 Dodge Coronet many years ago. The design of the manifolds is pretty much identical........ BIG open plenum with a couple of 4 BBLs bolted to it and a large heat chamber cast into the bottom. My experience with that intake was that performance was noticeably better with a 1:1 ratio but mileage suffered by a couple miles to the gallon. I suspect my experience will be pretty much the same with this. I also recall that with that intake the engine was pretty cold blooded too, hopefully the MSD I'm running on the 57 will make a difference with that.

I used to do the swap meets a lot in the pre-internet days and it was very seldom that you saw ANY early Hemi parts. I only do about 1 meet a year now but it's still pretty much the same. I did score the Weiand Drag Star 6X2 intake that's on the 331 in my 37 Dodge at the Prescott Swap meet 25 years ago though. Seems most of the HEMI stuff usually gets shuffled around by word of mouth.

I figured I'd update where I'm at with the power steering swap. I really don't plan on tearing the 57 apart for the dual quads and PS till sometime this spring and have been mostly collecting parts. With the dual quads ready to go on I've been concentrating on figuring out the PS swap and gathering the pieces I figure I'll need.

Just a brief recap. This is the original manual steering gear I want to replace.

sg by M Patterson, on Flickr


The original style PS gear is a lot bulkier and has virtually no road feel. Even if I could fit one in the car with the HEMI it would be my last choice.


PS G by M Patterson, on Flickr


The 354 Hemi with the 56 Manifolds just barely fits around the steering gear. The top of the steering box almost touches the bottom of the exhaust manifold.

SB by M Patterson, on Flickr


I had originally looked at using a Saginaw 700 style steering box, the most common one that was used on most GM cars and light Trucks from the 60s-80s and Mopars in the 70s. I'm pretty sure there's room for the 700, but eventually decided to try the smaller and lighter Saginaw 605 Box. The 605 is an almost direct replacement for the 700. The mounting holes are the same as is the 3/4" 30 spline input shaft. When bolted up the pitman shaft is located in the same place.




S5 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The only thing that really keep the 605 from being a direct replacement is diameter that the pitman shaft which is smaller on the 605 than it is on the 700s. The 605 pitman arm is the same diameter and splines as the Saginaw manual steering boxes which means that any manual steering pitman arms from least 1958 through the 1980 GM cars will fit the box, giving me a lot of choices to pick from. Additionally Borgeson makes a few "universal" pitman arms for the 605 Box.


I went ahead and picked up a rebuilt 605 steering gear and I have a junk one to use in mockup. The rebuilt box has the same amount of rotation stop to stop and the original 57 and is 3 1/2 turns as opposed the the 57s 4 1/2 turns stop to stop.

Mounted on the frame rail the 605 will sit considerable lower than the original gear, placing it where it will be well below the exhaust manifold and into an area where there appears to be plenty of room for it.

S1 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The one thing I hadn't considered when I started looking at the Saginaw boxes was that it would move the pitman shaft inboard about 2" from where it is with the stock box.


S3 by M Patterson, on Flickr


I'm not sure exactly how I'll end up compensating for the 2 inches, but I think I have a couple options. One is a pitman arm that is bent where it properly locates the outer end for the pitman arm to connect to the drag link.


I currently have a couple of stock Chevrolet manual steering pitman arms (58 and 65 Chevy) and I sprung for a Borgeson universal pitman arm ( one of the bendable steel ones).

Neither of the stock arm locate the pitman arm where it needs to be but as I mentioned there are a lot of other stock arms out there that may.


S4 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The Borgeson universal pitman arm is not cut with the master splines that the stock arms have. It might be as simple as just locating the arm on the shaft in the position that located the pitman arm outer end in the same location as the stock box and pitman arm.


S6 by M Patterson, on Flickr



Another option might be to adjust the tie rods by shortening the ones passengers side and lengthening the drivers side, moving the while drag ling over. The potential issue I may run into with either solution or combination of the 2 is I'm not sure how it will affect the geometry of the draglink and tie rods as the as they move thru their travel. Another solution I've been kicking around is seeing if I can find a drag link off something else that would fit and move the joint at the pitman arm inboard.......or even as a final option have a custom drag ling built.


Once I get the steering box/draglink/tie rods sorted out, I'll still need to shorten the steering column and add an intermediate shaft. Shortening the column won't be a big deal. Rather than buy a couple steering universal joints and piece of bar stock to make a custom shaft I think I can use a trick/upgrade I learned about when I was building my G body El Caminos. It happens an 88-96 Jeep Cherokee is a direct bolt in for the 78-87 GM G body vehicles. Here is a comparison picture of the stock G Body shaft and Jeep shaft.


84 94 s shaft by M Patterson, on Flickr



The Jeep shafts eliminate the trunion joint at the top and rag joint at the bottom with U Joints (the correct splines at the bottom joint for the Saginaw steering boxes and a double D end at the top). The U joints can run at a bit steeper angle than the aftermarket steering U joints and the shaft will collapse and telescope depending on the length needed.

So far the biggest expenditures have been the rebuilt steering box and jeep steering shaft. If this doesn't work out the money won't go to waste, the parts will either sit on the shelf as spares for my 83 El Camino or the wifes 84 El Camino will get a steering upgrade.


So that's where I am right now.

From my past experience with modifying steering components, I suggest you bend the pitman arm (or find one that works) so it will keep the box centered and will meet where the drag link needs to be for it to be centered. Attempting to adjust the tie rod ends to accomplish the task creates more issues then it solves.

When do you think you will be moving forward with this swap? My son has a 57 Dodge with the original power steering, unfortunately, last summer the car went under water and we have concerns about the condition of the power steering unit. His car has a 5.7 Hemi, we had a pump modified to run the original power steering, and we will replace the pump, but it would be nice to upgrade the original power steering unit as well. Gene

".....From my past experience with modifying steering components, I suggest you bend the pitman arm (or find one that works) so it will keep the box centered and will meet where the drag link needs to be for it to be centered. Attempting to adjust the tie rod ends to accomplish the task creates more issues then it solves......"


That's been kind of my thought too Gene.


I'm thinking on getting started on the conversion around Mar/Apr.....when I do I'll post my progress on this thread.

If you do end up having the original gear redone, I'd recommend "Benchworks" in Phoenix. I had a couple of the original gears done by them some years ago and they seem to know what they are doing.....they're a bit pricey, but you don't want to have to pull that steering box more than once.

http://benchworksteering.com/

This is great info. Thanks for the update!

I decided to go ahead and get the intake swap done before I start on the power steering. It hit me when I got the intake on the bench that this is the first time on over 30 years that I haven't had at least one Tri Power car to drive.


TPDQ by M Patterson, on Flickr


The swap was pretty straight forward a bunch of little changes needed to be made that took up some time but all in all nothing really unexpected.

20180331_165142 by M Patterson, on Flickr

FL by M Patterson, on Flickr


I started out using the 575 CFM Cadillac carbs They worked well with synchronized linkage, but I was a little disappointed with them running progressive linkage. I could have played with them and gotten it better but figured what the heck the 625 CFM carbs were ready to go too so I went ahead and threw them on.......the Plymouth liked them a whole lot better with either the synchronized or progressive linkage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brTqZTMSoz4


Still have to fine tune the jetting and set the choke but overall I pretty happy with the change.

I got the carbs pretty much dialed in so I figure sometime next week I’ll get started on the steering.

I decided that when I do the power steering conversion I’d go ahead and change over to one of the smaller Chrysler high torque starters that they started using them in the late 80s-early 90s. I have one on the Hemi in the 37 Dodge and am pretty impressed with it.

Anyway I ordered one and when it came in I thought it looked smaller than the one on the 37, so I checked. Sure enough the snout was the same configuration but the starter was quite a bit smaller.

MS1 by M Patterson, on Flickr


MS2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The parts book show both interchange with each other. I’m going to go with the bigger one (it’s the same as the one on the 37). I was just wondering if anybody has used the smaller style or knows performance wise how it compares with the larger one.

Ha, ha: You made me realize I haven't had a carbed vehicle for over a year now after 45 years of having at least one.

I have recently discovered that a 1957 plymouth uses the same springs as early B bodies and all the A bodies.

Front segment = 20"
Rear segment = 35"
Total length = 55"
I ended up ordering a pair of Caltrac monoleaf springs for my '57. I told them I wanted a pair for a 1962 dodge with a one inch drop.
The car sits exactly where it did with the pair of springs I ordered from espo springs, which I also requested with a 1" drop.
http://www.springsnthings.com/

Thanks for the info and link on the springs 528Dart. I happy with the springs now that I've added the leaves but if I end up doing something different down the road that sure opens up some options.


I've been working on getting the power steering pump mounted over the last couple of days. The only readily available PS pump bracket for the early hemi out there seems to be the Hot Hemi Heads one, but that is for the newer (small) GM pump with a remote reservoir. PAW used to sell a bracket for the older Saginaw pump that would have been exactly what I needed, but they have been out of business for years now. At least I've still got a copy of their old catalog with pictures so I had a starting point.

I had originally planned of just building the brackets on the car. I really didn't relish the thought of bending over the fender and radiator and getting everything aligned, drilled, and welded. My friend of mine came to my rescue however, he was kind enough to loan me an old 331 block, cart to set it on, timing cover and water pump adapters. Between that and the odds and ends I have around here I was able to mock up the short block to use to build the brackets. Sitting on a stool figuring everything out sure beats doing it on car.

MUPS by M Patterson, on Flickr



I started out with an old pump I had laying and a pretty common old SBC PS bracket.


HP1 by M Patterson, on Flickr



The modifications to the bracket and a couple of smaller support brackets weren't hard to do or complicated, but getting everything aligned took a fair amount of time and tweaking.




HP3 by M Patterson, on Flickr


Having the mockup block was a real blessing and definitely worth the time and effort to set up.



HP2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


I picked up a rebuilt pump and belt. and ended up using a different pulley than the one I started with but I finally got everything sorted out.

Bolting it all to the engine was straight forward and I'm happy with the result.......but boy I still wish I had bought one of the PAW brackets years ago when I built the engine. :LOL:


HP4 by M Patterson, on Flickr


I've run out of easy stuff so I guess next is getting the old steering gear out and fitting the 605 box.

nice job on the bracket ! but you by now have noticed just how much time gets gobbled up keeping things "simple".

Thanks.

“……but you by now have noticed just how much time gets gobbled up keeping things "simple"……”

Yeah, if I was still running the shop and this was a customers’ car after I explained what it would cost to build the bracket vice buying the Hot heads one and using a remote reservoir chances are it would have gotten the HH bracket.

The 57 has always been intended to be a keeper (at least keeping it longer than many of the other cars I’ve built). As it’s my own car I can justify spending a lot of time doing a lot of the little stuff I want(ed) to do on it.

I'm going to get the alignment checked on the 57 before I start on the steering box change. The shop I use can't get me in till Wednesday so with luck I'll be able to get a start on that next week.

With the car in the shop where it's handy to work on I've been taking care of some of the little issues that have turned up in the 12 years since I built the car. I figured I throw a couple of them on here in case they might help some of the other 57-8 Mopar guys.

The dash mounted rear view mirror has always been kind of useless as it was too low to see over the top of the back seat. I finally got around to building a 1" extension for that. I went rooting thru my odds and ends drawer to see what would work for the extension. I had a couple of old SBC T handle valve cover bolts sitting around that happened to be 1/4-20 which is the same thread used to screw the mirror head to the stem.

ME1 by M Patterson, on Flickr


It was pretty simple to cut the extension out of that, then drill and tread the end to make the extension.


ME2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


ME3 by M Patterson, on Flickr

After getting the mirror back in the car and actually having it useful was one of those “I should have done this years ago things” LOL

When I drive back to Illinois I do a lot of the driving at night. I’d already made the cross country trip in the 57 once with no issues, and about 5 years ago took it back to the Midwest to visit family again. It’s definitely a WHOO S#** moment when the headlights go out at 80 MPH on a dark interstate at 3AM. About 5 minutes later the headlights came back on then went out again about 20 minutes later and came back on in about another 5 minutes. I finally narrowed the problem down to the circuit breaker in the headlight switch cycling on and off.

The 57-58 Mopar guys are probably already aware Chrysler didn’t use a fuse box/fuses when they built the cars! Power for the accessories and lights go thru 2 internal circuit breakers inside the headlight switch. Which is why there are all the terminals on the back of the headlight switch. When I built the 57 Plymouth I did a custom wiring harness and added a fuse box (including a circuit breaker for the lights)but retained the original switch.


LS1 by M Patterson, on Flickr

I was carrying a spare switch with me and installed that to get me thru the rest of my trip, but after the experience with the original switch I had a feeling it might be a time bomb too. I had no idea why the circuit breaker was cycling; whether it was bad contacts in the switch creating resistance or the breaker just getting weak. So yesterday I decided to pull the switch and see if there was some way to bypass the circuit breakers.


I had to un-crimp the housing to get that off.


LS2 by M Patterson, on Flickr


Then split the switch to get to the contacts and circuit breakers.


LS3 by M Patterson, on Flickr


All the contacts were dirty and I did find where there had been a bit of arcing on the headlight contacts. The way the switch is built makes it pretty difficult to get to the circuit breakers which sit down in a well in the housing. There are actually 2 circuit breakers one dedicated to the headlights and the other for the rest of the lights and accessories.



LS4 by M Patterson, on Flickr



The brass contact the switch slides over is isolated from the power side with a piece of Bakelite so the power has to go thru the contact set at the bottom of the switch.


LS5 by M Patterson, on Flickr



I finally decided the best way to bypass the circuit breaker was to just fill the gap between the contact and power side of the switch with solder.



LS6 by M Patterson, on Flickr



Anyway the switch is reassembled and back in the car and I’m a lot more comfortable about driving it at night.



LS7 by M Patterson, on Flickr

Things kind of went to crap for a while since my last post on the 57. I got the front end aligned but hadn't gotten too far figuring out the PS conversion.

A while back I came across a guy who is starting to put together PS conversion kits for 57-58 Dodges and Plymouths. He's apparently using a Ford truck PS gear that mounts on the inside of the frame. He did the prototype on his personal 57 Savoy and was able to send me pictures of the setup. It moves the steering box rearward from where the manual box sits and looks like it will clear everything. The steering shaft and column needs to be shortened and a support bracket added to the lower end of the column but that's all stuff I would have needed to do anyway.

I went ahead and ordered his first kit and it should be here next week. It will be 2 or 3 months at the earliest before I can start installing it however as I'm healing up from wrist surgery but I'll post some pictures of the kit when it gets here.

UPS came by today and dropped off my PS conversion. About all I was able to do was unpack and inventory it.

PS Conversion by M Patterson, on Flickr

I'm still waiting on a PS pitman arm that's coming from a friend out in California. I glanced over the instructions and they seem pretty comprehensive.

We'll see how it goes after I'm able to get the car apart and get it installed.

This will be interesting.

Yup!!! I'm more than interested too!!!

Do you know what PS pump this kit will need to use? And how about a ball park price tag for the "kit"?

Really looking forward to your experience with this. Gene

Gene I like your sons' wagon!!

The kit will come with a Saginaw PS pump. I deleted that and the pump bracket as I already have that built and on the HEMI. He will be including hoses for the pump and gear but they are designed for a stock engine. I don't know what the routing will have to be on my combination so I elected to have him just send the fitting and I'll get the hoses fabricated locally.

The kit also requires a PS pitman arm which is longer than the manual steering arm. Looking at his pictures and the instructions I do see a tweak or 2 I may want to do but I won't know until I can actually get started on the conversion......and the Dr says that is probably a couple months down the road.

He's getting ready to start selling the kits on E bay probably later this month. I'm guessing the complete kit will go for a bit north of $1,000.....just how far north I don't know.

When I get the kit installed I'll start a separate thread on what it takes to get it in and my impression on how well it works.

I am interested in learning more about this kit. Do you have a link you can share or anything?

I keep waiting on him to list the kit on Ebay which should give some more information....he says sometime this month.

The only other thing I have is a picture of the complete kit he will be selling which includes the parts I had deleted from my kit.


PS kit by M Patterson, on Flickr

My wrist took a little longer to heal than I planned and naturally other things came up so it took till now to get back to the PS.

Getting the original gear and column out was pretty straight forward.......PIA but straight forward. Because of the design of the torsion bar suspension and size of the steering gear it's pretty much impossible to get the gear out thru the bottom of the car so the 57-61(?) Mopars have an access panel under the peddles that allows the removal of the column and gear to be removed as a unit thru the passenger compartment.

I've changed out a few of these before so there were no real surprises. I did have to remove the clutch linkage and cross shaft but I kind of expected that.

The conversion was designed for stock motor 57/58 Dodge and Plymouths and the test mule for the original kit was a Poly powered 57 Savoy with automatic. As my car is HEMI powered with a 4 speed there was some question if the kit would actually fit so I went straight to bolting the adapter plate to the steering gear and test fitting the unit using the 2 existing bolt holes......bypassing the first step in the instructions which call for drilling a 3rd in the frame for the adapter plate.

The gear HAS to go thru the access panel in the floor, then mounted from under the car.

The new steering gear cleared the exhaust manifold with a lot more clearance than the original manual steering gear. It was close to the bottom edge of the valve cover but did clear.

Because the steering conversion is really designed for cars with an automatic transmission were I running an automatic (or a hydraulic throw-out bearing) at this point I could have simply finished the installation. As I'm using original 1957 clutch linkage there were some changes I needed to make to the adapter plate, cross-shaft frame bracket and cross-shaft.

I pulled the steering gear back out and unbolted it from the adapter plate. Then I bolted just the plate back to the frame drilled the 3rd hole required to finish the adapter installation.

Then came the modifications I needed to make for the clutch linkage. The major issue with the adapter plate was it would not allow the cross shaft to fit. While the plate was bolted on I marked were I needed to make my notch for the cross-shaft.

The second item was the frame cross-shaft bracket attachment. The bracket is attached by 3 bolts....two that screw into captive nuts in frame and the third one was one of the original steering gear bolts. That original steering gear bolt is the one original mounting points the new steering conversion the kit doesn't use due to steering gear interference. The design of the bracket makes that bolt kind of critical to prevent the bracket from bending/breaking. Due to the location of the steering gear on the adapter plate I couldn't simply drill thru the adapter and use a long bolt (that would have been way to simple). I ended up marking where I needed to make the hole so when the plate was removed I could finish drilling and tapping the hole for a piece of all thread when I did the final installation.

Of course the cross-shaft bracket also interfered with the new 3rd bolt and washer used for adapter bracket which required grinding a clearance notch in it.

And then finally when doing the last test fit of the plate after making the modification I found out the cross-shaft grease zerk interfered with the adapter plate requiring it to be relocated about 1-1/2" closer to the engine.

In order to have access to the frame an make it easier to get to the cross-shaft bracket bolts I ended up trimming part of the inner fender out of the way.

So with the modifications made to the adapter it was time actually install the steering gear. It should be smooth sailing. Yup that's when everything turned into a low grade of crap.

Once the new steering gear and adapter were actually installed what little clearance I had between the gear and valve cover had disappeared....... probably due to the test fitting being done using only 2 of the 4 bolts that mount the adapter plate. Anyway the gear was now rubbing against the lower edge of the valve cover (which protrudes at least a 1/4 " beyond the head) and also the valve cover bolt boss. After studying the clearance issue for a bit I pulled the aluminum valve cover off and set a stock valve cover on. It has all kinds of clearance so I had a decision to make......change over to stock covers (I have a pair of chrome reproduction covers I had set aside for the Poly/Hemi build I'm slowly working on) or try to grind some clearance into the aluminum covers.


Now I really really like the way the aluminum valve covers look on the 57 Plymouth. The down side to them is they can be a pain to keep clean and they are a huge PIA to take off (which I've had to do twice over the years). To get the aluminum covers off requires draining the coolant, pulling the master cylinder, pulling the heater blower and removing the heater box. On the stock style covers it's remove the 6 nuts and pull the covers (after removing the spark plugs and tubes).

Believe it or not I really had to think about what I wanted to do. In the end going to the stock covers on the 57 won out. So I will be playing swap the valve covers. The new chrome ones went on the 57, the aluminum ones will end up on the 37 Dodge truck and the chrome ones from the 37 will be set aside for the Poly/Hemi engine build I'm working on. At least I have all the stuff on hand to do it so I don't have to wait on parts.

Gotta love those wet valve cover bolts on the Chrysler, At least there is a wide variety of stock covers, That area you are working in -steering box,T-bar,starter,ex man, on a 57-58 Ply with a Hemi is one of the worst. Always seemed there was an inordinate amount of maint. issues/grief in that cubic foot, 4 bolt manifolds exacerbated it.

which hold down bolt[s] is/are wet ? this is something i didn't know of.
please explain. TIA.

Could you have shimmed the motor mounts up a little?

Kevin

"....which hold down bolt[s] is/are wet ? this is something i didn't know of........"

On the first gen HEMIs the upper (intake side) of the valve covers screw into the water jacket. Chrysler used studs for the valve covers so this wasn't a problem. I used bolts on mine because the studs would have had to be about 2" long because of the bosses in the aluminum valve covers..........meaning an extra 2" I'd have to raise the covers to get them off. The exhaust manifolds and interesting too. The lower bolts also go into the water jacket and as I recall the upper exhaust studs go into the head (where oil sits).


"........Could you have shimmed the motor mounts up a little? ......?

Not really enough room to raise the front of the engine. I did try shimming under the trans mount, but ran trans tunnel interference.


.

With the gear installed next came the steering column modifications and test fit. When you order the kit you will be asked you are using a column from a power steering or manual steering car. If you are using a PS column you will not require any modifications to the mast but will need to extend the steering shaft with an extension which will be included in the kit.

If you are using a manual steering column (like me) you will cut the steering shaft off the manual steering gear which is more than long enough without a shaft extension. You will have to cut the end from the column mast and replace it with the extension provided (you will not need the column extension if you have a PS column) . With the tube extension properly measured and mounted it is almost identical to a power steering column.

The instructions and illustrations provided with the kit for measuring and cutting the column and shaft are pretty comprehensive and doing the modifications was pretty simple.

This shows the piece I had to cut off the manual steering column and the column with the extension installed. Also pictured is the shaft I cut off the manual steering gear with the U Joint provided with the kit temporarily installed. For reference the bottom shaft is from a Power Steering column.

With the column ready to test fit the next step is to reinstall the floor plate back in the car. The smaller square plate will also be installed with the new seals provided in the kit.

Instead of using the top 2 sheet metal screws those holes will be drilled out for 2 bolts used to attach the angle iron bracket that will hold the clamp used secure the bottom of the column. The illustrations provided show the clamp used in 2 different positions.....for my car using it as shown in the second picture was what worked the best.

Next the steering shaft with the provided U Joint temporarily installed is connected to the steering gear and the column mast is slipped over it and secured with the new column clamp. After taking a few more measurements the shaft can be cut to final length and U Joint pinned and tack welded to the shaft.

With all the work you are doing there, I'd want to make the shaft collapsible too. Wouldn't be very much more bother.

Before I did the final installation of the column and shaft I wanted to address the horn. On the manual steering cars Chrysler ran the horn wire from the horn button thru the steering shaft all the way out the end of the steering gear to the horn relay. The length of wire was long enough that as it twisted when the steering wheel was turned it did not create any issues. The power steering cars used a different horn setup but of course I don't have one of those.

Among the odds and ends I collected over the years was this collar with the copper ring. As I recall it was part of the turn signal cancelling mechanism used on 60-62 Chryslers with the Astro-Dome dash and dash mounted turn signals.

When I had the column installed to measure the steering shaft I marked a spot on the column housing there I could cut a hole that would be accessible but not noticeable when everything was installed.

When I had the column out so I could cut the steering shaft I also cut the hole in the column I would need.

When I did the last test fit after cutting the shaft and pinning the U Joint to it (but before tack welding) I marked the shaft thru the access hole I had cut so I could properly place the collar on the shaft.

The collar is designed to allow a wire to be run up thru the steering shaft.

I drilled a hole in the column for a bolt and using insulating washers (from an alternator actually) attached the bolt to the column.

I made a wipe arm from a strip of springy copper which is then attached to the stud and then a terminal to attach the original horn relay wire to (which had been relocated to inside the passenger compartment).

The wipe arm and terminal where then removed to prevent damage to the wipe arm when the column was slid over the steering shaft. They would have to be reinstalled after the column was in place for the last time.

Finally I also added a ground wire to the column to insure a good path to ground for the horn button.

With the steering installed the last thing to do was cover the hole I'd cut in the inner fender. I had access to a donor inner fender from a 57 Dodge and I figured I'd cut an oversize piece of it to make a removable access panel to cover that area. I had originally thought the inner fenders would have been identical but of course they are just slightly different. I'm not sure if the difference was because one was Dodge and the other Plymouth or if they used different inner fenders between PS and Manual steering cars. Anyway I welded the piece I cut out of the Plymouth inner fender to the piece from the Dodge sprayed on some undercoating and bolted it together. It actually looks pretty decent (meaning unnoticeable....... especially with the tire back on LOL).


I've had a chance to put a few miles on my 57 since I complete the installation. In my opinion it was well worth the cost and work to installing it. I've driven several Forward Look cars with factory power steering over the years the road feel of the new steering gear is far nicer than the original PS. Don't get me wrong it does not make the car feel like a sports car.......but it now has the feel of the later 60s era power steering cars.

good write up mike !

My 50th High School reunion was cancelled/postponed last year. It was held last week and I did drive the 57 Plymouth back to Illinois. All together the car racked up 4000+ miles there and back. The car did great.

The route I drove took 29 hours each way and on the way back I drove straight thru. I missed the 20 MPG I got with the Tri-Power but fun with the Dual Quads was worth it.

I even fit in a trip up to the Museum that the 57 Plymouth that was buried in Tulsa now calls home. Kind of fitting considering I originally built my 57 to Drive to Tulsa to see the car exhumed in 2007.

RT1 by M Patterson, on Flickr


The Tulsa Plymouth looks better than it did when I last saw it, but that’s not really saying too much!




RT3 by M Patterson, on Flickr



RT4 by M Patterson, on Flickr


Anyway it was a great trip and I’m glad I made it.


.

congratulations !
your car looks good, and it has proven to be a safe and reliable ride.
you done good !