converting p.s- to non p.s

[NSX-Racer]

He meant with...

Thanks, that makes more sense. BTW: Honda did still make coupes with stick and automatic this year, they are only not imported into Acura-land. And of course the stick version of the cp. with the 3.2 l engine is way better than the auto version with the 3.0 l - had/have both. So you can flame me too :biggrin:

 

[NSX-Racer]

I drove a 93, a 2000, and then settled on a 94. To me, the power-assisted steering in the 2000 felt very different than manual steering models.

You can't compare these models side by side because the steering R&P has changed during the years so a 2000 car would feel different than a '94 even if both would have no power assist. Not to speak of the different front tire sizes which make also a difference. And AFAIK non power assist cars had anyway a different R&P than early cars with power assist.

 

[CiaoBoy]

The 94 has the same tire sizes as the 2000. You may be right about the steering ratio though.

-CiaoBoy

You can't compare these models side by side because the steering R&P has changed during the years so a 2000 car would feel different than a '94 even if both would have no power assist. Not to speak of the different front tire sizes which make also a difference. And AFAIK non power assist cars had anyway a different R&P than early cars with power assist.

 

[NSX-Racer]

The 94 has the same tire sizes as the 2000.

Correct, I was mislead because you wrote of a '93 model that you drove before which had of course 15/16" wheels.

BTW: You can even have a completely different steering feel with the same tire size depending on the kind of tire. Tires with more profile (less rubber on the street) make steering easier. That's at least my experience every fall when I change to snow tires... :wink:

 

[CiaoBoy]

Yup. And the type of tire makes a difference too. I can say from personal experience that parallel parking or doing a hairpin turn in an autocross is absolutely hellatious with Hoosiers!

-CiaoBoy

BTW: You can even have a completely different steering feel with the same tire size depending on the kind of tire. Tires with more profile (less rubber on the street) make steering easier. That's at least my experience every fall when I change to snow tires... :wink:

 

[Jett]

Finally, if power steering is obviously superior and a no-brainer to have on a car, then why did Honda not include it on their supercar? I'm sure that adding power steering wouldn't have been that much more expensive. And why did they take it out for the Zanardi edition? Why does the Lotus Elise have manual steering? Or the first generation Miata?

Honda did include it on their supercar. It was optional on the early cars, it was made standard in the later models. This is what is known in the automobile manufacturing trade an an "improvement". :tongue: :smile:

The Zanardi is a rendition of a track-type car. Taking the power steering didn't make the car "better". It just made it seem more track-like. You get to FEEL those ruts in the pavement.

I don't really know about the Lotus, as that is outside of my experience. Maybe their engineering sucks? Or it is poorly executed, like the original Dodge Viper, which lacked power steering, air conditioning, WINDOWS, and a TOP, if I recall correctly. Ever seen a Viper going down the road with a JC Whitney-looking snap-on MG wannabe canvas top and side curtains on it? I have. And this is supposed to be Dodge's flagship?

Are you are implying that the leaving it off the Miata made the car better? It made it CHEAPER, that's why they did it. Same as on the Fiero, which NEVER had power steering, even though it was a chick car. Go figure. It amazes me that GM has lasted this long. They have been promising "change" and an "end to bureaucracy" since I have been old enough to drive.

I wasn't aware that automatic coupes were manufactured for the non-US market. Hmmm. A 2005 coupe in Grand Prix White with 3.2, black top, black interior, automatic, and power steering...Shweet! Maybe I should shop for one and have it imported!

Thanks guys for all the feedback! I know I have strong opinions, but I am really not criticizing anyone's preferences, I am just skeptical of strained logic. I think all the answer you need for liking something is because that is how YOU like it. If you have convinced yourself, that is more than sufficient.

Drive an NSX - Be happy!

 

[KANE]

I have done the conversion twice. Pm me if you still need help. I may even know of a manual rack and mounts for sale.

 

[DPG]

EPS only works at below 25mph, so why would you want to get rid of it? Mine just crapped out and while it makes no difference in driving, it is a HUGE pain in the butt when parking.

What's the rationale behind loosing the P/S?

t

Save weight :biggrin:

 

[Jett]

Kane, you seem to be a knowledgable source of information, having done two conversions. Setting aside for a moment whether the power steering is more or less desirable, what will be the headaches associated with the swap. Please provide a cost estimate for acquiring parts and a labor estimate in hours. And is it a bolt-in swap, or are there other issues to deal with? Is it reliable when it is done, or is the car just not quite right ever again? (An example might be that the supercharger is great, but the car hasn't idled right since. You have to shift into neutral and rev the throttle to keep the car from stalling at traffic lights, or whatever. Of course the guy who has the supercharger crows about the horsepower, but he keeps the negatives to himself.) People just aren't completely forthright about these things. People rarely post in a forum that the 3.0 to 3.2 swap they did turned into a fit and electrical nightmare. Plus now the car stalls whenever it is raining because that wiring harness was never quite right after the swap. Or whatever. It is an embarassment they keep to themselves. They accentuate the positive and downplay the negative. It seems to me that most substantial "mods" seem to come with a trunkful of difficulties, both short term and long term. Also, in my limited experience wrenching on my NSX, it seems to me that there are larger tolerance variations between cars, probably as a result of them being handbuilt. So when changing parts things don't seem to always line up as reliably as on an assembly-line built car, where fit tolerances have to be kept very tight so everything bolts together quickly. I am just curious what an experienced installer has to say.

Thanks!

 

[NsXMas]

I think both sides of the Power Steering / non-power steering are correct.

I have pretty strong forearms and I can drive the NSX pretty easily without fatigue. However, I can easily see how someone who is not as strong could easily get tired and wish for power steering.

It comes down to personal preference, and you can not fault personal preference.

I prefer non-power steering because I feel it is more challenging and makes me feel like I have more distinct control over the steering, whether that is actually true or not when compared to power steering.

 

[old_S13]

Kane, you seem to be a knowledgable source of information, having done two conversions. Setting aside for a moment whether the power steering is more or less desirable, what will be the headaches associated with the swap. Please provide a cost estimate for acquiring parts and a labor estimate in hours. And is it a bolt-in swap, or are there other issues to deal with? Is it reliable when it is done, or is the car just not quite right ever again? (An example might be that the supercharger is great, but the car hasn't idled right since. You have to shift into neutral and rev the throttle to keep the car from stalling at traffic lights, or whatever. Of course the guy who has the supercharger crows about the horsepower, but he keeps the negatives to himself.) People just aren't completely forthright about these things. People rarely post in a forum that the 3.0 to 3.2 swap they did turned into a fit and electrical nightmare. Plus now the car stalls whenever it is raining because that wiring harness was never quite right after the swap. Or whatever. It is an embarassment they keep to themselves. They accentuate the positive and downplay the negative. It seems to me that most substantial "mods" seem to come with a trunkful of difficulties, both short term and long term. Also, in my limited experience wrenching on my NSX, it seems to me that there are larger tolerance variations between cars, probably as a result of them being handbuilt. So when changing parts things don't seem to always line up as reliably as on an assembly-line built car, where fit tolerances have to be kept very tight so everything bolts together quickly. I am just curious what an experienced installer has to say.

Thanks!

It sounds like you are biased not because if truth, just because of bad experience. If your transmission swap never "swapped" over properly, that isnt a mechanical flaw -- that is a flaw on the installer. The same applies to poor forced induction upgrades that arent configured properly, and any other mechanical conversion or upgrade.

I swapped my NISSAN S13 from auto to manual, the conversion worked perfectly and I easily dumped some serious weight. I then dumped the factory motor for the Japanese 2.0L turbo motor, and that swap also went smoothly and reliably. And to chime in on the power steering / manual steering discussion, I also dumped my power steering components and really do enjoy the characteristics of driving a car with manual steering.

Cars with manual steering dont necessarily jump around and dart all over the place, it just requires a slight increased effort in holding the wheel. If you have issues with bump steer, then maybe that is due to tire pressure, alignment, or excessive lowering. There are many characteristics that you have to look at when making statements like you did about the pros and cons.

I will say, that I very much do like the fact that the steering feedback is far superior than that of power. If I run over a patch of water and lose traction, I immediately feel it in the steering wheel. With power, you dont feel it until you get feedback from the rear tires. You also feel when the car understeers, its all in the steering wheel.

Either way, people do their own research and make their own decisions -- its the ONLY way to say what is indeed better or worse, FOR THEM.

 

[nicholas421]

Lighter cars go faster. But you're not changing the hp.

Not entirely true. Reducing unsprung weight will increase HP. :wink:

 

[Hugh]

Not entirely true. Reducing unsprung weight will increase HP. :wink:

So if I take a big dump before I drive my car, the engine will produce more HP?

I think you meant to say that the HP to weight ratio will improve. :biggrin:

 

[nicholas421]

So if I take a big dump before I drive my car, the engine will produce more HP?

I think you meant to say that the HP to weight ratio will improve. :biggrin:

Don't lighter wheels increase WHP?

 

[Hugh]

They don't actually increase the RWHP however lighter wheels require less force to rotate therefore increasing the efficiency allowing more power to make it to the ground.

 

[heySkippy]

Lighter cars go faster.

I'm not sure that's true. Lighter cars go quicker. I don't think weight has that much to do with what your top speed is, just how long it takes you to get there.

So, for drag racers losing 100 pounds might be the functional equivalent of gaining 10 hp.

 

[jdc1687]

...
The Zanardi is a rendition of a track-type car. Taking the power steering didn't make the car "better". It just made it seem more track-like. You get to FEEL those ruts in the pavement.

Jett,

That is exactly the point, you can feel the road. Case closed as far as I'm concerned.

-Jeremy

 

[jdc1687]

I'm not sure that's true. Lighter cars go quicker. I don't think weight has that much to do with what your top speed is, just how long it takes you to get there.

So, for drag racers losing 100 pounds might be the functional equivalent of gaining 10 hp.

Actually.. I'll show you a physics proof to show that a car limited by drag will go faster if it is lightened.

Assumptions:

• Car X and Car Z both have the same drag coefficient.
• "Xm" and "Zm" represent the mass of the respective car, and "Zm < Zx"
• The force represented by engine power is "f", and "Xf" and "Zf" respectively. Since they use the same motor "Xf = Zf"
• The acceleration represented by aerodynamic drag is "a", and "Xa" and "Za" respectively.
• Assume Force = Mass * acceleration (F=MA), Newton's second law

Theory:
Za must be greater than Xa

Proof:
Xf = Xm * Xa

so:

Xf / Xa = Xm


it follows that:

Zf / Za = Zm


Since Zm is less than Xm we know that:

Xf / Xa = Xm > Zm = Zf / Za


so:

Xf / Xa > Zf / Za


some algebra and:

Xf / Zf > Xa / Za


but since we assume Xf = Zf


1 > Xa / Za

and viola!

Za > Xa

 

[neuralpathways]

Actually.. I'll show you a physics proof to show that a car limited by drag will go faster if it is lightened.

Assumptions:

• Car X and Car Z both have the same drag coefficient.
• "Xm" and "Zm" represent the mass of the respective car, and "Zm < Zx"
• The force represented by engine power is "f", and "Xf" and "Zf" respectively. Since they use the same motor "Xf = Zf"
• The acceleration represented by aerodynamic drag is "a", and "Xa" and "Za" respectively.
• Assume Force = Mass * acceleration (F=MA), Newton's second law

Theory:
Za must be greater than Xa

Proof:
Xf = Xm * Xa

so:

Xf / Xa = Xm


it follows that:

Zf / Za = Zm


Since Zm is less than Xm we know that:

Xf / Xa = Xm > Zm = Zf / Za


so:

Xf / Xa > Zf / Za


some algebra and:

Xf / Zf > Xa / Za


but since we assume Xf = Zf


1 > Xa / Za

and viola!

Za > Xa

Well that settles it. :biggrin:

 

[nicholas421]

Lighter cars go quicker. I don't think weight has that much to do with what your top speed is, just how long it takes you to get there.

Za > Xa

looks to me you two are saying the same thing.

 

[jdc1687]

looks to me you two are saying the same thing.

Nicholas,

Yes and no.. I believe bodypainter was saying that the car would accelerate faster, but would have the same top speed. What I tried to show is that when you are at max speed, the acceleration would *still* be larger than the heavier car.

After thinking about this some more my proof has a few problems, but it is funamentally correct. For one, it assumes that the torque in the gear is constant at all RPMs, and really this should be a function based on engine torque.

Also, I should have shown that the drag force was equivalent to the motor force when at max speed.. I just jumped over that part..

In any event..

-Jeremy

 

[nicholas421]

when you are at max speed, the acceleration would *still* be larger than the heavier car.

When you are at max speed, acceleration = 0.

 

[nicholas421]

lud, can you split this thread starting from #37?

 

[jdc1687]

I don't think I follow. When you are at max speed, acceleration = 0.

Well, no..

Even if the car is not accelerating the acceleration is still a value.. Just as an object pulled toward earth always has 9.8 m/s^2 of accelration..

-Jer

 

[nicholas421]

I'm not really sure what you are trying to show with your calculations. Showing Za > Xa doesn't really mean much. For one thing, none of your calculations are a function of time. When Z is at max speed, Za = 0 and Xa > 0 because X has not reached top speed yet.