Me again,

So I guess I am putting this out there because the few threads that exist on this topic either die out or nothing comes from it. So here are some questions:

1). The 140 steering box by nature seems loose, replacements are hard to find and from what I have heard rebuilding them does nothing so what exists out there that would work in place of a 140 box? A box that would provide for a better steering ratio, tighter steering and better availability? I have heard that the 2002tii has a similar box but looks as though it's just rumor.

2). The EZ steering option for those that have money to spend on such a thing. I have heard great things from owners that installed one and especially from those that have wider tires. Supposedly it assist with slower steering issues but allows for the natural steering feel of the 140 at speed. One of the "questions" regarding using this unit was whether that would cause the steering box to wear faster. That goes back to question 1....

3). Apart from going with a custom front end what are those of you that have a 140 doing apart from throwing used boxes on these units? Or are we to the point where we just accept the steering for what it is?

I guess I'd just like to see a discussion regarding this that doesn't end in someone sending another person a lesser word out and used 140 box in an attempt to help tighten their steering and/or improve handling.

Last thought.. Other particular groups have exhaustive literature on tire/wheel sizes, backspacing options, handling improvements, comparable parts, etc.. and while I see things that might pertain to 200 series but much less on the 140 series..

Anyways, just thinking out loud I guess. I'm willing to tackle this myself if I have to.. :)

Cheers, Brandon

The stock boxes slack is easy and cheap to fix.

If you can, fitting the PS from a 144 74 that has it would be best.

Fitting the steering and idler arms from a 164 PS box speeds it up, but makes the steering heavier. A race only mod.

For cheap thrills, extending the steering arms, shortening the drag and swaping their position makes for cheap thrills, very heavy.

Fitting 164 PS is a painfull process because the steering is at different angle to the 144 which means you have to make a heavy plate steel adaptor to go between the box and chassis rail. Lengthing the steering arm on that side would help. A big plus with power steering is you can crank in a heap of positive caster.

Manual boxes found in 164S cars are slower than 144 because the extra weight on the front tyres makes it essential. Made of iron too, very heavy and something for the scrap bin.
--
Three 164's, Two 144's, One 142 & a partridge in a pear tree.

If the steering is loose, then something is wrong & it just needs fixing.

1.Are you sure all the tierod end are in tip top shape?
2.Are you sure the idler bush is good?
3.Strip, clean & reassemble the box with new generic seals. I typically leave a shim or too out of the input bearings until it takes minor effort to turn. DO NOT touch the sector adjustment until last & fitted back on the car, because it it a good start for adjustment.
4.Do not use diff oil with sulphur. Use gearbox or engine oil instead.

NOTE: The worm & roller steering box design is only slack free in the straight ahead position. As you turn the steering wheel from straight ahead, more slack comes in, but that's only noticable with the wheels jacked up.

The strut frontend with rack found in the 240 isn't better, it's only cheaper.

--
Three 164's, Two 144's, One 142 & a partridge in a pear tree.

Forgot to mention the pitman arm must be centred when the high spot is found . This will negate small amount of wear in worm. Over 40 years some people would have installed pitman arms wrongly on lots of cars, that can account for blaming the box.

As with any steering box the high part of the worm must be centred in the straight ahead position by adjusting tie rods either side to attain straight ahead with the correct amount of toe. The 140 box can be adjusted this way without any play, as with any steering all pins bushes tiered ends ball joints must be sound. To my mind the steering in the 140 is excellent,and could not be improved by swapping with another make. To convert to rack and pinion would open a can of worms like bump steer etc. Volvo got it right.

Ok so I spoke to the previous owner today and I'm guess he had been instructed incorrectly for adjusting the tension on the box. He has been adjusting the tension with the wheels 1/2 to 1 full turn to the right. Would this account for additional wear?

I'm going to drop this low mileage box in when I get it.

As mentioned by a previous poster--the nature of the box automatically creates "slack" as the wheel moves from center position. The PO adjusted the box WAY too tight. -- Dave

Adjusted like that you'd find it just about locks up as you turn it back across the centre position. Get it up in the air with jack stands under the A arms and see how it feels. Having the wheels free to turn makes it much easier to judge the adjustment screw setting. The minimum free play at the wheel should be at the centre position but you shouldn't feel any obvious stiffness as you move back and forth across the centre position.

Is there a rebuild kit for a box that is leaking? Can anything in the steering box be renewed (with exception of the worm gear) when you get into the box to change seals, etc?

Basic cure for leakage is to replace the lower seal. If there's not too much wear in the lower bush that should keep the oil in for a good bunch of miles. Pitman arm has to come off and a suitable thin but tough, jawed puller, is a bit hard to find. The arm and bottom of the shaft are marked for correct straight ahead replacement. This has to be correct so you know that the box is exactly in its central position when adjusting the top screw. All of the workshop manuals go into this with great detail but assume you are adjusting the box off the car. You're not likely to adjust it with a spring tension gauge but these details allow you to understand why and how to make the adjustments on the car. If the adjustment ends up a fraction loose, no worries, but a fraction tight will wear some more off the worm until it is slack. If tight you'll also get wander when driving in a straight line as the box tries to get off the high spot.

Huh. I've always thought the manual steering in a early 140 is the best of the old Volvos, save perhaps, a 544.

The addition of power steering, not so much.

A BMW 2002Tii? And you say a 140 box is rare?

And, tighter suspension works wonders with steering feel, which, based on replies about the 142 you are considering, you'd end up with a well set up car in that regard.

Seriously, I think you'll be happy with it as is, should you get it. A '71 142e really is a wonderful thing.


--
-Matt I ♥ my ♂

having owned both 2002 tii & 72 145 wagon, I can say the tii has better steering, that's not to say I would ever consider swapping out the 145 steering

Thanks Matt.. I guess I'm just going off of all the reading I have done. I should probably wait. I know my p220 is hit and miss sometimes on how I feel about the steering on it.

Yes, A BMW 2002tii. Once again though I only read that, no proof actually.

Older BMWs including the 2002 do use the same type steering box, also Alfa Romeos of the period. They don't interchange, though -- the column is unique to each marque.

The box and layout of the steering is the same on the 220 and the 142. How much difference is there between your cars? Wide wheels and big tyres add little to the driving experience IMO and putting a set on a car with less that 100% condition suspension and steering can make things pretty unpleasant on a bumpy road trip.
If there is a thread or two on the adjusting screw after the locknut is done up your box should function almost as good as new. Yes there might be a bit of galling on the worm, not good and the bearings might have started to break up due to it running without oil. Bushes wear and the bottom seal goes. Seals bushings and balls can all be replaced but the worm cannot. If in reasonable condition and properly adjusted it should steer pretty light once you're on the move. A new box had about 1" play either side of centre and you might have up to double this but that doesn't seem to matter when your driving. All of the suspension joints need to be good and the idler shouldn't have any play. With just a fraction of toe in it should run down a flat road hands off and steer itself so to speak. It will never have the instant and direct response of rack and pinion but the feel is friendly enough.
Ez-Power will lighten things up and allow a smaller steering wheel, it's also adjustable for weight, but it will still be using ye olde steering box.
You say you've been doing some reading so there's probably not much there in the way of new news so maybe refurb what you have even if it means finding a better box. The stockpile is getting smaller, especially for Amazons but you'll find a 140 one without too much of a problem. Good Luck.

Awesome Derek! Thanks for that.

The previous owner is telling me that the box in the car now is pretty loose but he is sending a newer box with 40k on it (hadn't had the chance to install himself). It can get hilly and curvy here so I just want to make sure I am not white knuckled when cruising in the car or worse, aggressively driving.

Interesting that you brought up the 2002... I've always considered the '71 142e to be Volvo's answer to the 2002.

Having had both, I must admit, I liked driving the 2002 more. And it was not a Tii

I did not like fixing the BMW more though.


--
-Matt I ♥ my ♂

So let me ask this Matt. As far as you are concerned there is nothing to be gained from having a tighter steering box on a 142? Let's just say you were able to get your hands on a never used 142 box, how would that affect your view of the steering? What improvement would you notice from how it stands today?

I would love a 2002... Then again, I also want a Saab Sonnet III.

If the existing box is worn, by all means.. put the new one in. And check all tie rods, links, idler, ball joints, bushings.

If everything is in good nick, You should be happy. And unlike 122 (mentioned earlier), in my experience, 140s are much more forgiving to wider tires and such... from a driveability standpoint.

Saab Sonnett? that's just crazy talk you're doing now :)

--
-Matt I ♥ my ♂

If you only knew! :) I know this is a Volvo harem but I do love Saabs as well. The Sonnet especially! Then again, I have an International Scout in my garage and if you want white knuckle steering just come over and drive that!

I'm still trying to decide if I want to keep the 700 steelies or go straight to panasports.

I'm voting panasports. :)

Are the steel guys original to the car? (seller sounds knowledgeabe.. he should know) If they are, they should be 5.5" wide which fit beautifully inside 195/65-15 which is a great size for the car.

If you want to go custom, keep the steelies in storage. The 5.5 guys are not easy to find.

And, you want to talk sloppy steering? I'll see your Scout and raise you a 1953 flat fender Dodge Powerwagon

--
-Matt I ♥ my ♂

The steel wheels you see on the car now are from a 740. I'm attaching a pic of the originals that come with the car.



As John mentioned earlier it also has VPD progressive springs.. Not entirely sure I like the lowered look.. We'll see.

Yeah, that Powerwagon must be tight around the turns. Brushing against guard rails much? :)

The interchange is to very early 164's w/o power steering, to the majority of 164's which do have power steering, and to late 140 automatics, many or most of which had power steering for 1974 only.
The ratio is faster in the power boxes and they can be run manual style (but they are huge).
The ratio is variable (faster out near the locks, & yes, this can easily be engineered in) on the rare early 164 manual boxes.

Topi/TRS used to offer a faster ratio 140 steering box. I have no idea what that was. Gears from something else (122, 2002?) in a 140 box, I am told. He called out 3.5 turns with full use of the existing lock. Stock was 4.0. We could ask him if Dave Barton didn't drive him out of business. On the Swedish boards, I have not seen a conversion method used, but I've typically stayed in the engine forums.

One thing to understand in the bigger context of car enthusiast driving, is that the ratios of cars have decreased by about forty percent, since the 140 was engineered- from the 140 being on the quicker end of 17.5-24:1, to modern cars that are 11.5-14.
To some that makes it seem vague and slack.
At the time, there was more driving at low speed and on gravel, and in Volvo's case certainly testing in snowy driving conditions. The slow ratio makes it much easier- more precise, in fact- to make small corrections when at the edge of traction at low speed.
I'm familiar with the Hyundai Elantra Touring which has 12.2:1 steering, IIRC. Whatever it has is much faster than a 140. It also has electric boosted power steering which has inherent major "inertia feel". Comparing driving them in snow and ice, you loose traction with the Hyundai, and you are going for a ride.
Put it another way, in the Volvo I can feel and correct several times, no exaggeration, before the first correction input of the Elantra replies back to me via "seat of the pants". Also, and inch and half motion of the Elantra steering wheel rim is enough degrees at the tire to break traction. Very easy to over correct and your hand motions have to be miniscule and sensitive. All while the steering fights you with the effect of having a 40 lb flywheel in the column somewhere (and worse, one that comes and goes!!).

To me the Volvo has *vastly* better steering. The 544 is notably faster and lighter than the 142, however. The 142 is only 350lbs heavier, (2280 to 2630) but feels it. I find myself needing to crank in more lock midway into the corner if I've been driving the 544 and switch to the 142. So, not only is it heavier, but it's slower as well. The 140's have several more degrees of lock angle, and only a half turn more rated lock to lock of the wheel, so on paper...? I'm surprised, but it's unmistakable, and the wheel base is the same

But, anyway, if you are used to the Hyundai, and driving on dry pavement with grippy tires, you might say you liked how little steering wheel motion was required to zip it around 90* turns. You might even like how it feels magnetically dampened when holding a straight line, and lightens way up when you begin to "use" it. I don't personally, but the car magazines all did, or claimed they did. It also has a combination of trail and caster which make it seem like a guttered bowling ball- requiring work to get it to climb out of its straight ahead groove, and all too willing to "fall back into" said groove.


If I were to get organized and tool up to make new fabricated front spindles- this is not unheard of- I would
A) raise the hub centre for about 1.75 lowering with full stock suspension travel
B) raise the upper ball joint height substantially for a camber curve which goes fairly sharply negative (at least compared to OE) on the outside wheel in cornering/roll.
Lastly (and on topic here):
C) bring in the steering arm tie rod attachment closer to the SAI pivot axis, for slightly quicker steering. I'd need to study it a bit, re: bumpsteer, but a little toe out during roll would be just fine- more ackerman. ;)

Potential fabrication of 140 spindles has been simplified by Ford using 5 on 108mm bolt on bearing units on just about everything passenger car that they build.
So the spindle can be a much simpler build because you are not building the bearing unit in- merely allowing a flat place for it to bolt onto.




Ps. You did say exhaustive... lol. Merely fulfilling your request.

That is quite exhaustive.. I have quite a bit to work out on the vehicle. For one the steering box that is in it right now has one thread remaining and it's quite sloppy..however I do not really know how sloppy is considered normal and what is considered inappropriate. The threads on my other steering box are showing 3/4 threads.

I also need to work out the suspension. It's a mismatch of IPD fronts and VPD rears, the left wheels scrubs on the fender at weird approach angles or under load. Not sure which shocks are on it. It does ride fairly decent for it's age. Poly bushings have been installed.

She's got 205/60R15's so quite difficult to move about until you get rolling. She tracks ok also.