Copy and pasted from one of the summit links: These Summit steering couplers are used in applications where a direct steering connection is made without an angle.

I don't think thats true for our applications.

As to the chassis flex - only way this could happen is if the colum/firewall moves forward, or the kframe moves backwards. If either of these happens, even a few thousands, you have other things to worry about then steering colum angle.

All the joints and couplers shown in this thread are for custom or race steering columns. This shaft in these type of columns can move for and aft.

There is a shaft made by Flamming River that will take the place of the OEM coupler. It most often is used when more header clearance is needed or someone just wants something that looks trick. The problem is the OEM shaft cannot move for and aft (except for the collaspable feature). How it allows for chassis flex? I don't know if it does.

I'd rebuild the stock coupler with the new 'guts' available from Mopar. Be sure to check the inside of the housing as it too can wear out. I think the housing is also available new.

_________________
Slant Cecil

Don't think any chassis is 100% rigid. There is flex in all chassis'. Some will take more torque before they do flex, but they all flex.

I know someone that had a '69 383 Dart GTS that he installed a built 440. With street tires, it handled fine. He took it to the track and ran it with 9" wide slicks. As soon as he launched, the car made a right turn into the wall. He checked the front end, found a few worn suspension/steering parts, changed them, tried it on street tires and he thought he fixed the problem as it handled fine. After repairing the body damage, back to the track, launch on slicks, right turn into the same spot on the wall! His problem was the steering column had partially collasped. This pulled the coupler 'guts' back to the edge of the housing. When he launched the Dart with a tire that would hook and create a bit of front end rise, it flexed the chassis enough to disconect steering. As soon as the car settled, the 'guts' went back into the housing and everything looked normal.

Back in the late '60s and early '70s, some Mopar drag cars developed a permanent front end twist due to flex. Most of these cars only had a 3 or 4 point bolt in roll bar. It took frame connectors and roll bar/cages to stiffen the unibody stopped the twist from happening.

It doesn't take a drag slick to create chassis flex, bumps, holes, and curves are enough to flex a stock Mopar unibody.

_________________
Slant Cecil

I looked very closely at mine before I posted. It looks straight to me.

How are those things made inside? The kits look like they have metal inserts. Is there nothing to buffer the metal? Besides the loosness, mine has a pretty loud very irritating rattle/bang noise of metal on metal.

I'm concerned whether putting new metal pieces in it will silence it. Since I don't have a header situation I'd nearly as soon have a rag joint.

They are straight on the outside, the body is solid, but the pivoting happens on the inside. If there was no need for pivoting at this point, then then I'm sure MoPar would have used something simpler and cheaper like a collar with two pins on both ends.

As to the body flex issue - interesting story about the car at the strip, point well taken. The u-joint style couplers are labeled for direct replacement, but that's out of the mouth of the manufacturers. I have the flaming river FR1505M kit ( http://store.summitracing.com/largeimag ... LA-FR1505M ) and haven't seen any obvious problems yet. I think one other on here used the same kit without issue as well, but now your concerns Slant Cecil has me thinking about chucking it for a traditional adapter with the stock coupler.

Hmm, Bill Reilly's page also lists them as a direct replacement to stock couplers. You'd figure between him and the manufacture if they were unsafe it'd be mentioned somewhere.... maybe? hopefully?

Slant Cecil - with a solid coupling the u-joints provide, if any flex happens it would cause the shaft to be pulled out of the colum right? I recall reading someone defeated the collapsable feature of the power column by pounding the shaft into the column to break the plastic pieces in there, and that allowed him to pull the shaft out the ~2" he needed to extend it to meet the shorter manual box. 2" is a big margin I think...

Luthastro if you want to investigate the u-joint possibility you may want to look at https://www.reillymotorsports.com/store ... hp?cat=254 - He mentions the 62-66 coupler is shorter and requres a different solution.

I'm not sure what you mean by inside and outside. I'm looking at a 3/4" steel shaft. What is that square shaft for?

Thanks

Yes, that excludes my '65. Anyway, that's way out of my price range for a transportation vehicle.

Thanks

Kind of like a mini ball-and-trunion without balls