Steering Tie Rod Fracture

[PeterCrespin]

There are different steering arms on S2 cars so maybe S2 uprights on an S1 car or vice versa might cause binding?
Pete

Series 1 and 2 steering arms are not interchangeable the mounting hole centres are different.

Indeedely doodely - that's why I said uprights :-)

People sometimes swap XJ and E-type series around to get better brakes or stiffer stub axles etc. I doubt that's the issue here mind you but you never know. I've only ever used Jaguar racks so maybe the aftermarket inner ball joint nuts are an issue if binding occurs with standard length dampers. I assume this problem has never occurred on an unrestored car using the parts it left Browns Lane with (even if clapped out) and only shows up on rebuilt ones?

Pete

[johnney]

If the nut is a problem and you have access to a lathe then increasing the hole size slightly would be an easy solution.

[christopher storey]

Not a good idea at all I'm afraid. Those nuts carry the whole outward force exerted by the tie rod when the car is cornering and to reduce the cross sectional area ( and indeed the thickness of the metal at the lip ) carrying the force would be a very chancy business .

[johnney]

Chris I should clarify "if the nut is the problem" then the hole is not the same size as on an original steering rack, so the rack or at least that part of it is an incorrectly sized repro. The edge of the hole is relatively thin due to the outside tapered edge (Countersunk) and the inner (concave) shape of the nut. The load bearing capacity of the nut tapers off toward the edge of the hole. So enlarging the hole would only be to make it the same size as an original part. You can machine any part of the nut you like to achieve that.

[christopher storey]

I see the point. I have not in fact seen repro nuts for the rack ends but I suppose they may be available and could cause the problem you envisage ( as indeed could a failure to tighten the original equipment nuts sufficiently as this would restrict the tie rod angle of movement )

[PeterCrespin]

...could cause the problem you envisage ( as indeed could a failure to tighten the original equipment nuts sufficiently as this would restrict the tie rod angle of movement )

I know what you mean, but in practice this can't happen.

The nuts are the most 'outboard' part around the tie rod, which sits in a spring-loaded seat on the inner side and so is pressed into the nut recess at whatever position inboard or outboard on the rack it is held by the thin locknut to give the right pre-load against the spring.

So a nut's position cannot affect the maximum angle of the rod unless it is so grossly loose and hanging on by a few threads that there is no longer any contact between the tie rod and its seat and it flops inwards to contact the seat. This isn't really feasible, as even a totally knackered rack is not THAT loose.

It sounds feasible that repro racks might use marginal nuts and because of the geometry I could see that even a millimetre undersize could result in a significant restricted distance at the track rod end.