Lousy turning radius.

[03safari]

New guy here with a question about the turning radius on my 2 wheel drive, 2003 Safari.

Basically, it's terrible when compared to the 97 Astro van I used to own before my wife totalled it. Heck, even my 79 full size Club Wagon had a tighter turning radius.

So, the question is, can the stops on the steering box be adjusted to tighten up the radius, or is there any other adjustments that can be done?

BTW - I already removed the steering stops on the lower A arms and it didn't change a thing.

Thanks in advance.


Alex

[LaGrasta]

Interesting topic. I have a '98 and have always hated the turning radius compared to most other cars I drive. I can't imagine yours could be any worse. As far as I know, there is no adjustment or way to cheat it.

[ihatemybike]

I've always felt that the turning radius on these vans was pretty good, maybe it's cause I grew up driving huge Ford LTDs, Lincoln Town Cars, pick-ups, and grains trucks.

[03safari]

Not sure what to say that... I've had a number of full size vans (Ford & Dodge) over the years that were much better and like I said, my 97 Astro's turning radius was better than my 03's as well. It boggles my mind on how the two vehicles are so different even though their basically the same model.

It's really irritating when I have to make two point turns to park my Safari at a mall about 90% of the time and 0% in a full size Ford.

[ihatemybike]

I wonder if the hardware switch they made when they went to the 6 lug wheels has anything to do with it. Haven't driven an Astro newer than 2000 yet.

[03safari]

I was wondering about that as well. My 97 was five lug, my 03 is 6 lug.

[Astrophysics]

Yes, I have a 2003 Astro AWD and yes the turning circle is 44 ft or so but remember that even though the Astro has a relatively short 111 inch wheel base, it does have a fairly wide track. The wide track gives it good stablilty and lots of room inside. Just look at an old S10 Blazer and see a narrow vehicle. oh well, 3 point turns on the way to go on winter roads anyway, less likely to get stuck on the shoulder.

the 16 inch 6 lug wheels and maybe the slightly wider rim and tire also make the track wider and the turning cirle worse but even the new 4 door Jeep Wrangler has 41 ft turn circle.

It would be nice to make it tighter but not worth the cost I suppose.
VAns should be driven slowly so just take it easy.

Astrophysics.

[ihatemybike]

VAns should be driven slowly so just take it easy.

Crap just when I'm aspiring to do this.

[Astrophysics]

I suppose one could put a narrow tire and a rim with offset to narrow the track. That could maybe give a bit tighter turn radius but the handling and stability could suffer.

Maybe one could find the parts for the rear steer (quadra steer that was offered on GM full size long wheelbase trucks from about 2001 to 2004 or so.... but that would cost a bundle.


The old trick would also to narrow the track of the rear wheels with special offset rims and more narrow tires. Old full size G20 Chevy van has about 1/2 inch narrower track in the rear than the front.

one of the best old cars as far as turning cirle was the Volvo 240 at about 33 ft with a 104 inch Wheelbase and a very narrow track especially narrow in rear.

in England and Germany narrow cars were necessary to manuever the narrow streets of the old towns.

[03safari]

Astrophysics - I'm not sure if you saw this.

like I said, my 97 Astro's turning radius was better than my 03's as well. It boggles my mind on how the two vehicles are so different even though their basically the same model.

The wheelbase and track are pretty much the same yet there is a big difference between the two vehicles.

Anyways, it appears I'm stuck and can't make adjustments. Bummer.

[Astrophysics]

It would be an interesting Automotive Engineering study to create an Excel spreadsheet to do the math and calculate the physic of the turning circle. One would think there could be some improvement made to the 2 WD vans. Perhaps the rack and pinon steering unit etc.would allow more travel.
but it would take a lot of work since there is no not much extra room in the fender and wheel well area on the van. One reach a point where the wheel travel is limited by the interference with the fender and inner panels etc. more clearance could be obtained by offset wheels BUT
offset wheels increases the track. The only simple solution seems to be skinny narrow tires like the trucks of the 70 and 80's . I mean real skinny tires like 195/75 -15's etc but then the load capacity of the tire could be insuffficnet for the GVW of the Astro.

The AWD has the added issue of the drive axles and constant velocity joints etc.

It would be interesting to do a "what if " analysis to determine how much extra wheel offset versus the improvement in the maximum angle of steering control before hitting the sheet metal. but the added offset also increases the front track of the vehicle so it could cancel out the improvemnt. Since a higher percentage of vehicle stability is defined by a wider front track, it may be a better solution to decrease the rear track. but that has issues also.

We need some mechanical or automotive engineering students to model this for us.


Astrophysics.

[dean89]

The spindles are very different on the two vans, the six lug vans use a bearing like an awd drive van that bolts to the spindle unlike the older vans that use the conventional repackable bearings. I think that these changes as well as more convervative steering lock placement (the old vans will let the tires rub the swaybar before the steering stop is hit) is probably where most of the difference is.

[GEJ]

Two things I can add to this is my Ole Yellar 1985 Astro feels like it turns tighter than my 1994 ext Lt.Not sure why that is because as far as I know both have the same wheel base.The other thing is for sure the track on the front of these Astro's are very wide because without using donut spairs they don't fit on U-haul dollies at all.Oh yeah,lastly not sure if the rack conversion is a effect on how tight the Astro's turn.I think the main reason for rack conversions is more the answer to idler arm design problems and how quick the steering ratio is lock to lock.

[mdmead]

It would be nice to see someone with access to 5 lug and 6 lug vans to actually do a measurement of the turning circles. I don't doubt there is a difference, but I'd like some hard numbers. (What one person thinks is a large turning radius may not be to someone else.)

(I've always been real impressed with the tight radius my 96 AWD offers.)

[potskie]

(I've always been real impressed with the tight radius my 96 AWD offers.)

Same with all my vans. all my RWDs have turned tighter than any AWDs I've driven and I've never had a problem swinging into tight spots. My vans have tighter turning circles than alot of small cars I've driven. My moms Optra being one that had a horrible turning circle. My old suburban had some pretty crappy turning radius as well. Had to 4 point turn that monster lol.

I'm in agreement on the adjusted stops being the case as well. My vans (pre 00) all will turn till they rub then go a little more .