Has anyone used the Edelmann 2133 Power Steering Rack

[Ol'earl]

It is suggested that the newer 99-04 (SN95) steering racks are generally superior to the older racks. I was looking at the Edelmann rack and it seem to be of good quality. Any advice.
Thanks Earl

[edwardb]

It is suggested that the newer 99-04 (SN95) steering racks are generally superior to the older racks. I was looking at the Edelmann rack and it seem to be of good quality. Any advice.
Thanks Earl

Not an expert, but 99% sure an SN95 rack doesn't work in these cars. You need a Fox Body version. Remans available at your local parts store. For my past couple builds, wanted something a little better so used Unisteer (MAVAL Industries) racks from Breeze. That's what my current Gen 3 coupe has and I'm happy with it. But they're no longer available from Breeze. FWIW Mark at Breeze recommends, but does not sell, BBB INDUSTRIES N1010106. New (vs. reman), good quality. $237 at Rock Auto. But does need extensions added. My buddy installed one in his Challenge Roadster. Good looking part at he's happy with it.

[i.e.427]

Not an expert, but 99% sure an SN95 rack doesn't work in these cars. You need a Fox Body version.

SN95 ones will work (and actually SN95 is 94-04). We've used a number of them in the past. Not my favorite since they use that odd shaped rack adapter. I prefer the Fox style.

I'm just curious where the O.P. is getting his info on the SN95 being superior?

Frank

[edwardb]

SN95 ones will work (and actually SN95 is 94-04). We've used a number of them in the past. Not my favorite since they use that odd shaped rack adapter. I prefer the Fox style.

I'm just curious where the O.P. is getting his info on the SN95 being superior?

Frank

Thanks Frank. I will reduce my guess of 99% sure to a lower percentage. But I knew there was something about the SN95 rack that wasn't easily compatible.

[Jeff Kleiner]

Also, if using an SN95 rack (which will work) be aware that in addition to the different “pyramid” style shaft coupler the tie rods are metric and won’t be compatible with Fox era tie rod ends.

Jeff

[PG_Cobra]

SN95 have a dual rate spool valve and a stiffer pinion torsion spring than the Fox rack. Change the tie rods from SN95 to Fox. The tri-lobe pinion fitting needs a matching joint. My preference in fittings is the Unisteer pinch bolt type.

The 99-04 racks got a stiffer torsion spring from the early SN95. The stiffer torsion springs reduces the lane wander from wider wheels.

I have a 99-04 Mustang GT rack with Fox tie rods in my Mk1. No lane wandering.

[Ol'earl]

SN95 ones will work (and actually SN95 is 94-04). We've used a number of them in the past. Not my favorite since they use that odd shaped rack adapter. I prefer the Fox style.

I'm just curious where the O.P. is getting his info on the SN95 being superior?

Frank

Forums on foxbody mustangs show some switching to the SN95 racks particularly the later model years and report better control similar to the mustang cobra racks. Just looking to plan for the best configuration.
Earl

[Ol'earl]

Thanks P G Cobra, did you use the ffr extension pieces on the rack along with the fox inner tie rods?

[Ol'earl]

Thank Jeff, those are 2 of the drawbacks which add to the cost. Would need additional parts so not sure if it is worth it.
Earl

[PG_Cobra]

Thanks P G Cobra, did you use the ffr extension pieces on the rack along with the fox inner tie rods?

My MK1 is using Fox spindles so no need for the extension pieces.

[Jeff Kleiner]

My MK1 is using Fox spindles so no need for the extension pieces.

Actually the extenders are beneficial to bump steer geometry with any spindles. With the Mk1 & 2 the rack location is the biggest contributor to bump steer is the less than ideal rack location which was changed and improved beginning with the Mk3.

Jeff

[PG_Cobra]

Jeff, thanks for the input. I moved my rack to locate on the X frame to correct the Ackerman angles some years ago. I have no evidence of bump steer.

[Mike.Bray]

If you draw a line from the upper A-arm pivot and the lower A-arm pivot the rack pivot has to fall within this line so that everything works together. If it doesn't, as the A-arms move up and down it will cause the rack arm to move out of sync and causing bump steer. Hope this makes sense.

[Ol'earl]

If you draw a line from the upper A-arm pivot and the lower A-arm pivot the rack pivot has to fall within this line so that everything works together. If it doesn't, as the A-arms move up and down it will cause the rack arm to move out of sync and causing bump steer. Hope this makes sense.

Mike I see what you are saying, and if these were all equal length parallel links that would be perfect.The fact that they are not, complicates it but your point makes sense and that is the best to aim for with the suspension under load. The extensions probably get the rack closer to this condition, but I will only know that when I get the parts assembled.
Earl

[Jeff Kleiner]

If you draw a line from the upper A-arm pivot and the lower A-arm pivot the rack pivot has to fall within this line so that everything works together. If it doesn't, as the A-arms move up and down it will cause the rack arm to move out of sync and causing bump steer. Hope this makes sense.

Exactly Mike! Here's a photo that I took and marked up about a dozen years ago to illustrate.





Jeff

[Mike.Bray]

Exactly Mike! Here's a photo that I took and marked up about a dozen years ago to illustrate.





Jeff

That's it! You can kind of see it in this picture since the dust boot isn't installed on the rack. When those three pivots are inline there's zero bump steer.

[i.e.427]

Forums on foxbody mustangs show some switching to the SN95 racks particularly the later model years and report better control similar to the mustang cobra racks. Just looking to plan for the best configuration.
Earl

I'm guessing you are looking for a rack to fit into a Mk4 Roadster...................... that's not a Mustang that uses struts. Jeff already brought up bump steer so I'm going to leave that there. However, concerns about lane wandering ("tram-lining" as it's called) was brought up. And those issues are easily solved with proper front end alignment.


Frank

[CraigS]

SN95 have a dual rate spool valve and a stiffer pinion torsion spring than the Fox rack. Change the tie rods from SN95 to Fox. The tri-lobe pinion fitting needs a matching joint. My preference in fittings is the Unisteer pinch bolt type....

I can also imagine that overall build quality is improved. Better materials for parts like the bushings that the rack rides in, coupled w/ closer tolerance machining available from better machines, would all offer an improvement in feel and precision.

[Ol'earl]

To close off the question of an Edelmann power rack, although I think this is a good quality rack but it can't be used as they do not have compatible fittings of inner tie rod to rack so cannot install the rack extensions. Lares also makes new power racks but they couldn't answer the question about the inner tie rod attachment, not good for a manufacturer. I did not want to buy a rebuilt rack and on speaking to FFR they state that their rack is a new design superior to the foxbody rack so in the final analysis I decided to order one and now have it installed. It is a 15:1 ratio 2.5 turns end to end.
Earl

[Benchwarmer]

So, what is the preferred rack for someone trying to add power steering to a MK3?

[JCB52]

So, what is the preferred rack for someone trying to add power steering to a MK3?

I have the same question for my MK4…

[Cutter 54]

I have the same question for my MK4…

Late to the discussion, but did either of you two (Benchwarmer, JCB52) get an answer to your question about preferred power rack and pinion for the MK3 or Mk4? I am obsessing also over the issue of installing an SN95 power rack.