I posted this in the general section and nobody was able to offer an answer for me. So I'm putting it here hoping somebody more familiar can help me.

Something I've never noticed before was that there are 2 different steering ratios available for our cars stock(at least the sunfire i know does)

15.7:1 for the GTs and 1SC PEG package(03+)
14.7:1 for the SE/sedans and 1SA/1SV & 1SB PEG(03+)

Resulting in an end to end steering of 2.83 turns for the 15.7:1 and and 2.66 turns for the 14.7:1

What does this actually mean?
Is the steering tigher on the 14.7:1 since you only need 2.66 turns to go lock to lock(less)? Or does it just have less of a turning radius because of different parts(rack?) that lowers the turns needed based on not being able to turn as far? I'm not processing this because if the steering is tighter on the 14.7:1 why would they not give it to the GT and 1SC packages?

What is the actual difference in terms of which one will turn your tire the most, with the least rotations of the steering wheel?
Is it the rack that makes the difference?

If its even possible, what would happen if you put a 14.7:1(whatever parts necessary) on a GT with the 205 width tires, rather than the 195 tires(I only ask because stock they would've never been mated together)? Does the tires or tire width even matter?

Ive never really messed with steering components other than direct in and out parts that are exact stock replacements.

Upon further research The cavaliers are the same. Z24 got the 15.7:1 (at least in 2002)

I looked online and found same results, that doesnt make sense though, why would the Z24/GT have that ratio? The turning radius are the same with both, just the 14.7 rack would turn "quicker" It would make more sense having that on the Z24/GT models. Im not sure if there is a mistake with the info GM reported to online car review sites or what? Can someone comfirm that this is true??
Also, tires size should not matter....


2000 Cavalier Z24 5spd - Intake, Dynomax muffler, Hawk Pads, Powerslot rotors, Sportlines/Koni reds, Neon Coil, MSD 8.5 Wires
2005 Mazda 3 GS Auto- Wifes car
2006 Cobalt SS/SC - Intake, 2.5" Exhaust, GMPP Brakes, Solid Mounts, Ported S/C - Sold
1991 GMC Sierra - Lifted on 38.5" Swampers, Too much to list off. For Sale

The 14.7 would turn quicker, but 15.7 would turn with less effort, and could deliver more control if set up properly. Faster steering isn't always better, as it can exaggerate torque steer.

I was just curious and was looking around at other cars today and it seems that most cars higher trim levels have a higher number so this probably isn't a mistake.

The only reason I brought up the tires were because theres more surface area touching the road. Since the 16s are wider, wouldn't they need to travel less distance(side to side) to turn? Maybe the did that to balance it to keep the turning radius the same? I can't find any other difference(other than the rack and any parts needed to be changed for one or the other to function)
I mean the track is the same on both cars(width wheel to wheel) What reason would they have to change it?
I'm just trying to logically think this through, so please don't think im retarded lol. I just don't understand this.

The question still stands though, what would happen with a 14.7:1 in the GT with the 16" wheels? Tighter steering? Any adverse effects you can think of?

It won't effect turning radius, the amount that the wheels turn is the same. It effects steering response. Smaller movements in the steering wheel have greater effects on the road wheels with lower ratio steering. It gives you a less sloppy, more agile steering.

So you are saying that tires with a 205 width and tires with a 195 width using the same rack with turn the same distance with 1/4 of a steering wheel turn?

For some reason that doesn't make sense to me :/ a wider tire should cover more area faster moving side to side if all other components are identical shouldn't they?.
Im thinking this way because if you put a larger or smaller diameter tire on your car without moving down in sidewall size it covers more or less distance going forward and backward, so shouldn't a wider tire do the same thing side to side(turning)?
Could somebody explain to me why this is wrong? (i'm not trying to prove i'm right because idk, I want to have the correct information, and the facts that support it.)

They will all move the same. The pivot points are on the top n bottom of the spindle. Doesn't matter what you bolt on its going to turn the same amount.

The mechanical movement is the same but the ground covered during the turn would not be.

In regards to the tire, I don't think 205 width tires compared to 195 width tires will travel through the turn at the same rate. If all of the mechanical(and pivot) parts were the same, the wider tire has more surface area touching the ground, thus making the car turn sooner, with the same amount of steering wheel turns(say 1/2 a turn. The 205s would turn just a little more than the 195) or 'carry you through' the turn a little sooner. Right? or wrong?
Because I was thinking about this, because the same sort thing happens when you change the wheel diameter. The GTs have one inch bigger rims(duh lol), but there was one inch subracted from the sidewall of the tire, so there is no actual overall size difference(barring tread depth) between the 205-55-16 vs 195-65-15. If they didn't do this then the cars would travel distances at different rates, and wheel sizes would not be interchangeable without recalibration of some kind. You have to account for the inch added/taken.

Example: If a car came stock with 195/65/15 tires, and you put 205/65/16(without the 1 inch subtracted, or recalibration) You're logging less mileage on the odometer than you are actually traveling. Because there would be less revolutions of the wheel per mile because you actually WOULD be running a larger overall tire(and rim)

So in the same regards as the tread height, i'd assume the extra width of the tread would need to be accounted for somehow, to get the same turning radius between the base and GT+z24 models. Otherwise one would turn more than the other(without the steering ratio difference). Right?(im asking...)
Could that be the reason for the worse ratio being in the better cars?

But thats steering away from the topic(pun intended). Why is the tighter steering in base models, and not the GT/Z24 trims? lol

I think you are way over thinking things. yes with a wider/narrower or shorter/taller tire the tires relationship to the road will be different affecting turn radius to a point. Also a taller tire will turn differently than a shorter one but not as drastically as you think, unless your comparing pizza cutters to superswampers. As far as the turning of the tire in relation to the turning of the steering wheel nothing will change, it is physically exactly the same no matter what size tire or wheel.

They did not only put the better ratios on just the GT/Z24. My convertible has the better ratio and it is not a Z24. It came with the 14 or 15" wheels so that is contrary to your wheel size idea. It does however have the 2.4 engine. My thoughts are sporty engine means sporty steering package.

I want to get away from the tire argument because I already know what size tires i'm going to use. I want somebody to explain to me why the 15.7:1 is better because I'm thinking under the impression that the 14.7:1 is the more responsive unit and based on rick and colts comments im not the only one.(we could be wrong though, id just like to know why if we are.)

Zs Z wrote:
They did not only put the better ratios on just the GT/Z24. My convertible has the better ratio and it is not a Z24. It came with the 14 or 15" wheels so that is contrary to your wheel size idea. It does however have the 2.4 engine. My thoughts are sporty engine means sporty steering package.

Iike I said, im under the impression that the 'better' ratio is 14.7:1 which you probably do have. But you also have 15" wheels so that actually would support the wheel idea size. And to my knowledge, no convertibles got a z24 badge until 1998. If you have a 96 with a 2.4, it was an engine option because otherwise the convertibles were an LS trim. This is where I got the cavalier trim information http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1995-to-2005-chevrolet-cavalier-7.htm
But then again, idk very much if anything about the convertible trim differences because its not warm enough for them 8-9 months out of the year here so drop top market for any car is pretty much pointless and reserved for the yuppies.

However... I am curious to know how you found out which rack you have, because there is no way to tell what rack you actually have without removal. They are both identical from the outside, and both take the same tie rods and high pressure line, and you can't see its part number sticker(if its even still there) without taking it out. Unless you replaced it and have the part # you put in, but at that point its driver selection. They are directly interchangeable, and the only difference is the 15.7:1 weighs a little over a lb more(cite:duralast replacement).

Duralast lists the 14.7:1 as a smooth ride suspension, and the 15.7:1 as a ride and handling upgrade suspension. FE1 and FE2 options.

****The question stands, if 14.7:1 turns tighter then why is it on the base trims, and not the 'performance' trim?****

[watch after all this, somebody with intelligence is going to stop by, and tell us we are dumb, and give a logical explanation why the 15.7 steers better. Then all this discussion will have been for nothing lol] As I said before, other companies do the same thing (larger number on higher end trims)

I wish I knew more about steering components so I didn't sound dumb having to try and think through it :/

It doesn't really turn tighter, it turns quicker. It takes less steering input to turn with a lower ratio, but requires more effort and is more sensitive to torque steer and the environment. I guess the easiest way to explain it would be go talk to someone who drag raced in the 60s and 70s. With higher power applications, a lower ratio is not always the best option, as it can make the steering twitchy at speed, or under launch conditions.I'm assuming the same basis would apply here, or at least in the eyes of GM it did.

Cadillacin wrote:
However... I am curious to know how you found out which rack you have, because there is no way to tell what rack you actually have without removal. They are both identical from the outside, and both take the same tie rods and high pressure line, and you can't see its part number sticker(if its even still there) without taking it out. Unless you replaced it and have the part # you put in, but at that point its driver selection. They are directly interchangeable, and the only difference is the 15.7:1 weighs a little over a lb more(cite:duralast replacement).

I know this because both the Convertible and my Z have 2.5 turns lock to lock. Tighter steering for a sportier feel.

If thats true, and you have a 2.5 lock to lock you should have a 14.7:1 ratio rack in both cars because stock ratio for the 14.7:1 is 2.66 turns and 2.6 for replacement parts. Which is the base model rack. BUT on paper it looks like the better one in regards to tire turning response through the steering wheel.(turns sooner)

---That was the whole premise of this question. Why is the better rack in the cheaper cars?---

BUT the z24, and GTs are listed stock, and replacement parts range from 2.75-2.83 lock to lock. (15.7:1 rack)
So if yours is exactly the same in both cars, then you have the 15.7:1 which is NOT the better rack for steering response. If you were only looking at them in regards to trim levels then you could say its a better rack because the better cars got them.(you need to turn the steering wheel more to get the wheels to turn compared to the 14.7:1).

The reason I say this is because the Z24s and GTs are built with 15.7:1 racks. All of them. No exceptions.

So if your z24 is the same as your 96 convertible, and you've never changed either rack, I can almost gaurentee you have a 15.7:1 and aren't counting the steering wheel turns correctly(which isn't a hard mistake to make since its only 1/4 of a turn off)

However this WOULD support your theory(and debunk mine) that the wheels make the difference.
Even though I still think wider wheels make a slight difference in the rate of turning, I don't think this is the reason they used 2 different racks, since as you said, your convertible had the 14-15" wheels. So that means the larger rack has been mated with the smaller wheels before. So its more likely you were right that the 15.7:1 was used with the 2.4 option rather than only on the GT/z24 options.
At the same time, this also means that the smaller rack was NEVER mated with the 16" wheels and probably never with the 2.4 engine. This is leading me to believe(im theorizing on this bit) that maybe the 15.7:1 is heavier duty? It does weight almost 2lbs more, and for a part whose only difference is the internal gear, I can't see it gaining 2lbs there just changing the teeth on the gear, unless its made of a heavier metal.

I can see what I'm going to have to do lol, I'm going to have to get a 14.7:1, and put it in one of my cars and drive them one after another. They're both the same year GT and have the same tires.(with the 2.4 and GT badge, im going to assume they're both 15.7:1)
This will tell me which is tighter(more responsive), and I can also lock the wheels all the way to one side on both cars and measure how far out the tire turns from the wheel well. (it should be different since the lock to lock is different.) So I can see which one can actually generate more turn(just out of curiosity). lol realistically unless your making a uturn or parking, its doubtable youd ever get to the 'end' or lock on the wheel with either rack when driving on the road.

I'm not going to post anything else here because I'm looking for facts, not a fight lol.
My next post on this will be the results of the side by side test/review of the 2 different racks and then we can put this matter to rest. I called a yard earlier and they have a rack from a base model 2200 cavalier(to ensure I get the 14.7) for 45$ so that'll be my project for tomorrow or thursday since I don't work anymore lol.

Why two of the same thread?



>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:Why two of the same thread?

I originally had the 1st in the general section and started this one when i wasn't getting any answers thinking it would appeal to different kinds of drivers. Then it must've gotten moved to suspension. I'm glad you said something because I wasn't really checking that one anymore.
HERE: http://www.j-body.org/forums/read.php?f=3&i=159995&t=159960#159995
Mr.Goodwrench-GT explains this steering issue very well on the other thread using fact based information thats easy to follow. So anyone who is interested in an actual answer should go to the other thread...

Sorry for starting 2 guys I haven't been overly active on here until recently so im still feeling out where i should put things to get the right people reading.