 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Jaguar Cars / December 2004Mark 1 Burman Steering Box
Can anyone please tell me the number of turns, lock to lock, of the Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. Thanks, Peter. Peter, According to the manual I have, it says the Mark I manual, non-power assist steering box has 3.5 turns lock to lock. I could go out to the old Jaguar and turn the wheel too, but I suspect that the book is correct. Rick > Can anyone please tell me the number of turns, lock to lock, of the > Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. > Thanks, Peter. Thanks, Rick. I've had a 1968 Daimler for a year and haven't been happy with continually having to correct the steering. My Mark 2 Jag. owning garage man said that apart from the expensive powered rack and pinion conversion the best bet was to find a Mark 1 Burman box - which I have now located, as a Mark 1 is being broken up in January. The reduction to 3.5 from 4.7 should make a 25% reduction and with the lighter V8 engine and crossplies shouldn't make the steering too heavy. Regards, Peter. >Peter, >According to the manual I have, it says the Mark I manual, non-power [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. >> Thanks, Peter. Peter, Perhaps there is something wrong with the set-up on the Daimler 420. Mine on the 420 is better than the rack and pinion on my XJ6. Webserve > Thanks, Rick. I've had a 1968 Daimler for a year and haven't been > happy with continually having to correct the steering. My Mark 2 Jag. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. > >> Thanks, Peter. Webserve, my Daimler is the V8-250, which is the Jaguar Mark 2 bodyshell with Edward Turner's Daimler engine, designed for the SP250 Dart. The SP250 had a steering ratio of 2.5 but the V8-250 has a ration of 4.7, which is really quite excessive. I haven't found a figure for the 420 , but the 420G ratio is given as 3.0 (whatever the 'G' indicated) and the XJ6 is given as 3.3. These are quite a way down from 4.7; hence my interest in trying a 3.5 ratio. The wheel alignment, etc. has been checked and having scuffed out a pair of (not new, but good) tyres in 1,100 miles the camber was found to be over a degree out on the nearside. Peter. >Peter, > Perhaps there is something wrong with the set-up on the Daimler 420. Mine [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. >> >> Thanks, Peter. > Webserve, my Daimler is the V8-250, which is the Jaguar Mark 2 > bodyshell with Edward Turner's Daimler engine, designed for the SP250 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > to be over a degree out on the nearside. > Peter. The 420G was the largest Jag ever built (later called the Mark X) as distinguished from the 420 (a.k.a. the 420 "compact"). Both these would have had power steering surely? I know the S-type front end is often used to replace the Mark 2 front end to upgrade brakes and steering and I would have thought the S-type would have had the same steering set-up as the 420. Putting Mark 1 steering into a 420 would be a backward step, I would have thought. The 4.7 turn, recirculating ball steering on the Mark 2 is a manual system, too. It takes a bit of getting used to but I don't find it a real problem. Gees! I'd hate to have to manoeuvre the beast in a car park with a 3.5 turn system! Graham L Peter, My S-Type has the Burman recirculating Ball Power steering system. The manual does not show the number of turns. The power steering in my 420 is the Marles Varamatic which 2.875 turns lock to lock. This should suffice what you are seeking better than the Burman. Webserve > Webserve, my Daimler is the V8-250, which is the Jaguar Mark 2 > bodyshell with Edward Turner's Daimler engine, designed for the SP250 [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >> >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. > >> >> Thanks, Peter. The kit for the conversion to powered rack and pinion is NZ$3,600 (about ?1,400) + fitting (me or garage) + $800 for an inspection, as it will be a change from a standard fitting; against $150 (about ?55) + easier fitting for the 3.5 Burman box. If it doesn't work out I can return the Burman box against the conversion for no charge. The Burman box should become available at the end of January and as my wife and I will be hooking the camper which I made on the back with a couple of vintage motor cycles and heading off for a M/C rally in mid February the 1,000+ miles should be a good test. Thanks all for your input. Any more thoughts will be very welcome. Regards, Peter. >Peter, > My S-Type has the Burman recirculating Ball Power steering system. The [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >> >> >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. >> >> >> Thanks, Peter. I could very well be mistaken but I don't think that changing the steering box ratio is going to have any effect whatever on "continually having to correct the steering" or on "having scuffed out a pair of tires in 1,100 miles". Nor do I think that a 1 degree camber error is responsible for that much tire wear. You might consider whether there is an undetected problem. If any suspension parts are bent or incorrect it is sometimes possible for geometry to be incorrect even though all measurable alignments are correct. Of course any looseness or binding can cause problems too. That is where a really knowledgeable suspension expert may be required. Hope you get it corrected okay. Best Regards, Don Young > The kit for the conversion to powered rack and pinion is NZ$3,600 > (about ?1,400) + fitting (me or garage) + $800 for an inspection, as [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > >> >> >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. > >> >> >> Thanks, Peter. Thanks, Don. I had the steering mechanism checked by the Jaguar owning garage mechanic prior to having the the alignment done. The left-hand camber was 1.15 degrees positive and the tyre shop owner pointed out to me the rubber which had been scuffed from the inside was built up on the outside and he was able to pick it off with his thumb. My wife and I took it out for a 180 mile run this afternoon; the first decent run since the camber was reset. A definite improvement in handling, which apart from the last 30 miles was accompanied by quite strong winds. With the 4.7 lock-to-lock ratio I found that in order to compensate for the wind between trees, etc. I was moving the quite large diameter steering wheel (17") something like an inch at the rim. So I am still planning on trying the 3.5 steering box when it becomes available. If the steering proves too heavy I will change back again as the car was definitely better under the no-wind conditions. Regards, Peter. >I could very well be mistaken but I don't think that changing the steering >box ratio is going to have any effect whatever on "continually having to [quoted text clipped - 75 lines] >> >> >> >> Burman steering box fitted to the 1955-59 Jaguar Mark 1. >> >> >> >> Thanks, Peter.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.