Steering

[Jean Mercier]

FYI (For Your Information)
If I remember well this Bosh component is part of the steering system, I am not a car mechanics, you can correct me:

 

[DaveB]

FYI (For Your Information)
If I remember well this Bosh component is part of the steering system, I am not a car mechanics, you can correct me:
View attachment 7805067

That looks like the steering box

 

[trobex]

Looks sturdy!

 

[Trialmaster]

Regarding steering and the way it feels.

Last week we drove a demonstrator for a few miles (our own vehicle should be ready to collect this week) and both my wife and I were a little unhappy with its feel.

Of course, we will revisit this idiosyncrasy when we have our own vehicle, but we have decided that it has to meet our expectations otherwise it will have to join the 21 already on Autotrader.

 

[Disco Dave]

It is recirculating ball steering, you will get used to it. After all you bought a real off-road vehicle, not a wanna be one.

 

[AWo]

It is recirculating ball steering, you will get used to it. After all you bought a real off-road vehicle, not a wanna be one.

Recirculation ball steering is not an exclusive feature of offroad vehicles or a feature of them at all. It was used 50 years ago in cars like in my Land Rover Series 2a from 1971 and in upper class limousins, as it was the better screw spindle steering. It is robust and you need less effort to turn it, that other steerings at that time. However today you only find it in trucks. The recirculation ball steering is less precise, bigger, heavier and needs servicing after a few years.

The most used kind of power steering in 4x4s is the power worm spindle steering. It is lighter, smaller, less parts and needs no maintenance. My steerings of that kind are between 36 and 11 years old, no trouble so far. I once revised my ball circulation steering of my Land Rover Series, no big deal.

AWo

 

[Hannes01]

I was told 1 million km with no problems, indestructible

 

[Disco Dave]

Recirculation ball steering is not an exclusive feature of offroad vehicles or a feature of them at all. It was used 50 years ago in cars like in my Land Rover Series 2a from 1971 and in upper class limousins, as it was the better screw spindle steering. It is robust and you need less effort to turn it, that other steerings at that time. However today you only find it in trucks. The recirculation ball steering is less precise, bigger, heavier and needs servicing after a few years.

The most used kind of power steering in 4x4s is the power worm spindle steering. It is lighter, smaller, less parts and needs no maintenance. My steerings of that kind are between 36 and 11 years old, no trouble so far. I once revised my ball circulation steering of my Land Rover Series, no big deal.

AWo

A “real” 4WD has a solid front axle, because they are more robust and have much greater articulation than an independent axle. The downside is a higher unsprung weight, which is not good for soaking up small bumps, and poorer road handling. Road handling is why most manufacturers have moved to independent axles. Solid axles will also accept a suspension lift far more easily than an independent one.

Rack and pinion steering does not work well with the large movements of a solid axle, which is why recirculating ball steering is used.

I challenge you to find me a production 4WD vehicle with a solid front axle and rack and pinion steering.

 

[AWo]

Did I write rack and pinion? I think no. I wrote worm spindle.

I can find 4x4 without circulating ball steering but power worm spindle steering, the Defender for example.

Cheers
AWo

 

[DaveB]

Did I write rack and pinion? I think no. I wrote worm spindle.

I can find 4x4 without circulating ball steering but power worm spindle steering, the Defender for example.

Cheers
AWo

I think Harry was definitely looking for standard rack & pinion steering that is used on the vast majority of vehicles but not on live axle solid beam suspension.

 

[AWo]

Yes, may be. However, solid axles do not necessarily have more articulation than independent suspension (if sn independant has articulation at all, at least not by definition of articulation). There are any competion vehicles out there with independent suspension. Some have four independent wheels with a huge travel. And I would consider a Hummer as a capable 4x4 and it ha no solid axle at all. There is also a Spanish mod of Wrangler from solid axle to independant suspension for offroad competiotions and kits for other vehicles are available. If you look at competitions like King of Hammer you can see some vehicles with independent suspension even winning the game. As it is very often the case, it all depends.....My supsension guy (with 40+ of experience in suspension building and building rallye cars) even do not care about unsprung mass, as he says it is just a matter of calculation and then you can handle any unsprung mass. Yes, I know, that doesn't apply to the majority of users and so there is a big portion of truth in that statement that you should prevent too much unsprung mass...but it can be handled if necessary.

Here is a video where both types are compared. For my usage of a 4x4, travelling and offroading, no or rarely competition (and then just for fun), myself always prefers solid axles.

View: https://youtu.be/kOE1EkB6rgM

 

[Spjnr]

Honestly don't have a clue what people's issue with the steering is? After having done 300 miles, both me and the Mrs (who drives a 2 seater sports car) found the steering to be pleasant and predictable. I was very impressed with how good it was compared to my old jeep, especially on motorways.

 

[Cheshire cat]

Honestly don't have a clue what people's issue with the steering is? After having done 300 miles, both me and the Mrs (who drives a 2 seater sports car) found the steering to be pleasant and predictable. I was very impressed with how good it was compared to my old jeep, especially on motorways.

Likewise. A 90 degree left turn this morning was one full turn of the wheel and a light ‘flick’ of the wheel to re-centre. I really don’t get it.

 

[DenisM]

Likewise. A 90 degree left turn this morning was one full turn of the wheel and a light ‘flick’ of the wheel to re-centre. I really don’t get it.

Paddy Hopkirk was a master at the "handbrake flick" turn ...(guess I'm showing my age"!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ah8L9we2kM

 

[Wilaspira]

Honestly don't have a clue what people's issue with the steering is? After having done 300 miles, both me and the Mrs (who drives a 2 seater sports car) found the steering to be pleasant and predictable. I was very impressed with how good it was compared to my old jeep, especially on motorways.

I absolutely agree (after c900 miles). The steering is totally fine and can compare favourably with the “modern” cars I have. For any avoidance of doubt it feels far more precise than my 300 tdi defender and nothing like the steering in a series 1 ie the IG does respond to steering inputs (contrary to Harry M’s comments/inference)!

I‘m quite happy if the “internet experts” pan the car in UK as long as the overseas markets thrive and Ineos Automotive is sufficiently successful to keep going since I would prefer to be in a “rarer” vehicle

 

[Flewks]

Honestly don't have a clue what people's issue with the steering is? After having done 300 miles, both me and the Mrs (who drives a 2 seater sports car) found the steering to be pleasant and predictable. I was very impressed with how good it was compared to my old jeep, especially on motorways.

Totally agree - 500 miles in and I’m quite enjoying the steering. You quickly get used to it. You need to be a little more aggressive on the turn-in, but it is predictable with little body roll. Exiting a corner you don’t rely on self-centering and adapt. It’s second nature to me now.

 

[stickshifter]

Yes, may be. However, solid axles do not necessarily have more articulation than independent suspension (if sn independant has articulation at all, at least not by definition of articulation). There are any competion vehicles out there with independent suspension. Some have four independent wheels with a huge travel. And I would consider a Hummer as a capable 4x4 and it ha no solid axle at all. There is also a Spanish mod of Wrangler from solid axle to independant suspension for offroad competiotions and kits for other vehicles are available. If you look at competitions like King of Hammer you can see some vehicles with independent suspension even winning the game. As it is very often the case, it all depends.....My supsension guy (with 40+ of experience in suspension building and building rallye cars) even do not care about unsprung mass, as he says it is just a matter of calculation and then you can handle any unsprung mass. Yes, I know, that doesn't apply to the majority of users and so there is a big portion of truth in that statement that you should prevent too much unsprung mass...but it can be handled if necessary.

Here is a video where both types are compared. For my usage of a 4x4, travelling and offroading, no or rarely competition (and then just for fun), myself always prefers solid axles.

View: https://youtu.be/kOE1EkB6rgM

In debates between independent front suspension (IFS) and solid front axles (SFA), someone always brings up King of the Hammers - and that it is always won by vehicles with IFS Not trying to be snarky - it just seems to be a common argument for IFS, but it is one that - to me - isn't all that relevant, as the kind of rigs that win King of the Hammers are not for sale at your local car dealer.

Yes - IFS can be amazing off-road. But the rigs that win King of the Hammers are competition rigs - they are highly specialized, and they are really expensive. I don't think one can compare them to a production vehicle available to the general public.

If we look at production vehicles, SFA rigs provide better articulation, measured using objective techniques (like the Ramp Travel Index - RTI). This allows you to keep tires on the ground when an IFS rig will lift a tire.

Land Rover has developed excellent traction control to counter the poor articulation in their IFS vehicles, and Land Rovers can often keep moving forward when they lift tires. This traction control is enough for easy to moderate trails. But that doesn't change the fact that you are safer, and will get further if all your tires are on the ground. For harder, technical driving in a factory-built rig, SFA will perform better. Go to 20:56 in the following video, and watch the Ford Bronco (IFS) lift tires and get super-tippy. In another video, you can watch the two Wranglers roll through that section with relative ease.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_otepVIGSg

There are other advantages to SFA, like ease of service, ease of modification, and lower cost of modification (I am talking about mods like bigger tires and different gears).

The obvious disadvantage of SFA comes on-road, with - as you mention - high unsprung mass, and less precise steering.

Both IFS and SFA need to be properly maintained to function at peak levels.

 

[globalgregors]

In debates between independent front suspension (IFS) and solid front axles (SFA), someone always brings up King of the Hammers - and that it is always won by vehicles with IFS Not trying to be snarky - it just seems to be a common argument for IFS, but it is one that - to me - isn't all that relevant, as the kind of rigs that win King of the Hammers are not for sale at your local car dealer.

Yes - IFS can be amazing off-road. But the rigs that win King of the Hammers are competition rigs - they are highly specialized, and they are really expensive. I don't think one can compare them to a production vehicle available to the general public.

If we look at production vehicles, SFA rigs provide better articulation, measured using objective techniques (like the Ramp Travel Index - RTI). This allows you to keep tires on the ground when an IFS rig will lift a tire.

Land Rover has developed excellent traction control to counter the poor articulation in their IFS vehicles, and Land Rovers can often keep moving forward when they lift tires. This traction control is enough for easy to moderate trails. But that doesn't change the fact that you are safer, and will get further if all your tires are on the ground. For harder, technical driving in a factory-built rig, SFA will perform better. Go to 20:56 in the following video, and watch the Ford Bronco (IFS) lift tires and get super-tippy. In another video, you can watch the two Wranglers roll through that section with relative ease.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_otepVIGSg

There are other advantages to SFA, like ease of service, ease of modification, and lower cost of modification (I am talking about mods like bigger tires and different gears).

The obvious disadvantage of SFA comes on-road, with - as you mention - high unsprung mass, and less precise steering.

Both IFS and SFA need to be properly maintained to function at peak levels.

There is something to be said also about the driving experience of each.

I’ve not driven one of the competition IFS vehicles mentioned, just my modest LR DS. As much as I like the vehicle, it has somewhat of an ironing board/see-saw rigidity to it when compared to our previous Jeep Wrangler, which exascerbates the reduced visibility from the drivers seat and feels less controlled over uneven ground.

 

[Tanters]

I just had a thought….. …….. it’s gonna be hard to drive this car and eat an ice cream cone at the same time omg!!

 

[Shaky]

I just had a thought….. …….. it’s gonna be hard to drive this car and eat an ice cream cone at the same time omg!!

Not if you fit a ball to the steering wheel, like the lorry drivers have.

You will just look demented, feverishly swinging on it trying to go round a tight corner in town.