4bt, 80% daily driver, 10% tow rig FFPW???

[BigSmoke]

[QUOTE=gixxer;87098] Is there enough room to mount a steering box to the inside of the frame rail if one were running a 4bta or a V8? I ask because I noticed if it were mounted on the outside / top of frame rail it would mandate modification of the inner fender.
QUOTE]

I've got the same question.

[maineSS]

Here's a link to a crossover steering setup using a 86-up Land Cruiser box in a Dodge Carryall fitted with a Mopar 360 V8- http://www.customclassictrucks.com/h...ade/index.html (you may have to Google this link).

Unfortunately, it's hard to see from the pics exactly how far forward the box is located. but it does appear to be located outside the frame.

[MoparNorm]

I've seen that tried before on a few Dodges, just beware that the Toy Box is awful light duty for a Dodge truck.

[BigSmoke]

I've seen that tried before on a few Dodges, just beware that the Toy Box is awful light duty for a Dodge truck.

I think the Toy IFS steer boxes are pretty tough. On the Rubicon' Moab etc, you'll see lots of straight axle Toyota's turning 40" and larger tires with full lockers in the pumpkins.

[MoparNorm]

I think the Toy IFS steer boxes are pretty tough. On the Rubicon' Moab etc, you'll see lots of straight axle Toyota's turning 40" and larger tires with full lockers in the pumpkins.

The problem is with the shaft length of the Toy box, vs. design of the Dodge box. The Toy box places extreme shear force upon the Dodge frame rail. The Dodge frame rail is not engineered to flex in that direction.

Messing with steering without understanding the forces at work, is dangerous. Just saying beware.

[BigSmoke]

The problem is with the shaft length of the Toy box, vs. design of the Dodge box. The Toy box places extreme shear force upon the Dodge frame rail. The Dodge frame rail is not engineered to flex in that direction.

Messing with steering without understanding the forces at work, is dangerous. Just saying beware.

I know what you're saying but anything possible. I'm all for keeping our PW's as original as possible but I also understand the desire to make these trucks into a daily driver. Maybe the best approach is to attach the body to a modern chassis.

I don't have any problem with someone that want's to experiment with new technology on an old vehicle.The NOS parts aren't always going to be available and it's only a matter of time before we have to resort for ways to adapt our trucks to exist in today's world without compromising it's integrity.

[MoparNorm]

Having worked on and off for about 10 years, trying to build a power steering kit for these trucks, I can say I've seen a lot of scary stuff out there.

In today's litigious society, I'd hate for someone to get hurt or sued over a backyard fix and more so I'd hate to be coming the other way on a blind curve when Rube Goldberg has his steering arm snap off... = )

I saw it on the internet doesn't seem to be the perfect defense.
I've seen the Toy set-up and it's fine for off pavement and lighter rigs.

[maineSS]

I've used the frameside style Toy box for several years with zero strength problems. The Pitman arm shaft is the same dia on the Toy box as the Saginaw, and the fact that I didn't have to cut the upper frame web to fit the box was a BIG plus from a strength standpoint. The Toy box appears to have a smaller dia piston than the Saginaw, which likely means less assist is available.

The Toyota minitruck frame that the IFS unit comes from isn't as large in cross section as the PW, so it would have less resistance to the torsional force imposed by steering loads. If I recall correctly (it's been awhile), that area is boxed on the minitruck. You will want to look at 4x4's of similar weight to the PW that use a crossover steering box to see how the OEM's engineer it- they tend to be conservative about this, and so should you. You definitely want to allow enough room so there's no possibility of the front leaf spring hitting the drag link going over bumps. Also, the Land Cruiser box is supposedly different than the standard IFS box- haven't seen them both together, so I can't say exactly how.

[gixxer]

I've been researching all week while on vacation (raining out) and I don't think I am any closer to finding the perfect setup then I was. I am exhausted!! LOL. Never new NP / NV and ZF made transmissions and t-cases (np / nv) for all three auto makers. Between the different models, years, and variants a guy starts pulling his hair out trying to figure out how many spines will fit from this trans. to that t-case and from what years. I could use some insight, anybody know if all this will work together; 4bta to Chevy ZF s6-660 married to a Chevy (passenger side drop) NP 241 turning a early Dana 60 or 70 (passenger side diff). ??

I totally agree with you guys on the steering, that's why was a bit hesitant. If you look at the link to the "dumpster" build that MaineSS posted you can get a good idea of a safe way to pull it off. Seems pretty well thought out. Cross over steering with panhard bar and box in the frame behind box. Think that's the way I am heading.

[Bruce in BC]

I used a saginaw box but it was not easy .

http://www.powerwagonadvertiser.com/...t=5521&page=18
If you follow along you can see how i finally got the whole thing to work . If I was doing my build again I would go 4bt - zf6spd from behind a gasser and then use a np205 . Axle would be a ford hp dana 60 and run 4.88 gears on 39 to 40 inch tires . i would place a reciever hitch in the front and back and have a winch placed on the side of the truck behind the drivers door . This winch would be portable . For a steering box I would try and place it between the frame rails in front of the rad - very similar to how a jeep is set up . Hydraulic assist would take the stress off the frame . Going with the ford front axle leaves lots of room for the exhaust .

Bruce

[maineSS]

It would be neat to develop a parts list for a modern drivetrain, suspension, and steering using widely available assemblies. The links I found represent a few different ways of doing it, and some have more road time than others. Maybe Gixxer can draw up the definitive build for a special issue of PWA?

[Gordon Maney]

It would be neat to develop a parts list for a modern drivetrain, suspension, and steering using widely available assemblies. The links I found represent a few different ways of doing it, and some have more road time than others. Maybe Gixxer can draw up the definitive build for a special issue of PWA?

A great idea.

[scrapdaddy]

This is a great thread going on. Even though I only have a M37, I'm learning alot.2 thoughts on this, have any of you concidered the Spicer 3053. I'm going with it behind a 4bt, thoughts? and a question for the O.P. have you ever driven a power wagon or sat in one. The reason I say this, I wanted a power wagon first then drove one. It was like my old landcruiser, had to cock my leg up in the air to work gas pedal. Bad for the long haul. I found out the M37 fit my body just right. Not a problem for some, but if you're going to use it alot, check it out before all your planning. I'm looking forward to the build.

Ron

[Gordon Maney]

Legroom has always been an issue for me. I have thought it would be good to lengthen an M37 just behind the door, as it would be the simplest location. You could lengthen it enough to get sufficient legroom.

[Charles Talbert]

This is a great thread going on. Even though I only have a M37, I'm learning alot.2 thoughts on this, have any of you concidered the Spicer 3053. I'm going with it behind a 4bt, thoughts? and a question for the O.P. have you ever driven a power wagon or sat in one. The reason I say this, I wanted a power wagon first then drove one. It was like my old landcruiser, had to cock my leg up in the air to work gas pedal. Bad for the long haul. I found out the M37 fit my body just right. Not a problem for some, but if you're going to use it alot, check it out before all your planning. I'm looking forward to the build.

Ron

I've had a number of clients tell me the reason they chose an M37 over a Power Wagon as the core base for a build was the fuel pedal location not being a driver friendly issue. The "BUDD" M37B1 build was one of those.

We use upgraded Spicer 3053 transmissions in various configurations that we build in house frequently; I love them for many reasons. I would not use just a take-out unit without upgrades however. You will have issues with that behind the Cummins.

We are in process with a power wagon build at this time, and will soon be to the point of addressing in cab features. It is getting an electronic Cummins which makes dealing with fuel pedal location much easier since there is no mechanical linkage required; thus mounting the pedal assembly anywhere you desire becomes in most cases a simple matter. I'm going to look seriously at locating it down low off the trans tunnel. I'll try to remember to post an update of how that comes together. We can certainly do it using the older mechanical Cummins also, but as you might imagine, it would be a much more complicated issue because of having to fabricate mechanical linkages. I can understand how the purist builder would not want to change this, as it is a definite trade mark of a Power Wagon. Nothing at all wrong with that, however one of our trademarks at M Series is being able to build a truck that is very user friendly with regards to vehicle driver comfort, safety, capability, and longivity. Above all we put lots of effort into building exactly what a client wants. I love purist builds as much as the deep rooted diehard; but to remain in successful business, we must be willing to build what a client wants. I love seeing smiles on faces because we can turn out exactly what a client wishes their truck to be at the end of a build; that is the biggest reward and it brings return business.