Chad91GTZ wrote:I found it strange , that someone with your knowledge would advocate a 'repair' like this. Because it is indeed dangerous. If you were in an accident, and it was found that you had done this to your vehicle, your insurance would not pay out. In inspection states, you may be found CRIMINALLY at fault lol. The rack gear itself does not need lubrication from the fluid, but the pistons that drive it do. And frankly, it doesn't matter the length of time those items sit without lubrcation. Sometimes one minute is enough to cause those issues.
It has nothing at all to do with you talking out of your ass, and everything to do with you just being wrong.
Front wheel drive, front engine car. You need power steering. There is a reason why the car was never offered with that option.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
Chad91GTZ wrote:3X00-Modified wrote:Chad91GTZ wrote:There is a reason why the car was never offered with that option.
on the beretta no but there was a cavi rack that is manual.
I found it under 88 2.8L
A-1 CARDONE Part # 231609 {#26000532, 7847698, 7849351, 7849353} Reman. Rack and Pinion Complete Unit (Manual)
Supplied without Inner Tie Rods
Yes, which I stated earlier in the thread. But it was only offered one or two years, probably because it was a horrible idea. - Also note, as i stated earlier, they are not even close to the same design with less parts. They just dont function in the same way.
Bottom line, the rotary valve that makes the whole damn thing work can gall, lock, seize whatever you wanna call it. "hoping" that enough fluid remains to 'keep everything lubricated' is laughable.
If you look how more modern power steering systems work, if you didn't have fluid many of them would just CEASE to function immediatly.
Its a horrible idea. Replace the line, junk the car or get her towed!
You just don't make sense,
Chad. You complain that this is an issue particularly because of the time of year (winter/spring) which implies a difficulty controlling the car on bad roads. Then someone else mentions that it is a lubrication issue, and you are all over that. Then you say that front-wheel drive cars need power assist right after you bring up a Cavalier non-power rack that was used, and when another member calls you on it, you claim that GM just made a mistake. There are many non-power-assisted FWD cars that have been made over the years (I have one of those too, it is a Nissan), so that argument is dead. Want to start pointing out that none of those cars are likely to have the same steering geometry as the Berettas, so that we can mention the non-power Cavvy again?
I can't take anything you say here seriously until you start being consistent with your arguments.
I do have a lot of knowledge about these cars, and a lot of experience too. It doesn't mean that I have seen all possible issues that can arise with them, and you are 100% right that just because I haven't had a failure with any given part doesn't mean that it cannot happen, but I have multiple vehicles that have had the P/S system disabled with zero problems from it, for literally YEARS of operation... While that evidence is strictly anecdotal, it is more than the unsubstantiated opinion you have offered thusfar.
Power steering racks do NOT 'fail immediately' due to lack of fluid -it just doesn't happen, and I say show some actual evidence, or back up. The parts of a power rack that sustain high loads are not lubricated by the P/S fluid (again, IIRC), and those parts ARE the same design as those used in manual racks.
If you decide to drive your car into oncoming traffic, while drunk, blindfolded, and stoned, guess what? Your insurance company STILL PAYS when you hit someone. Disconnecting a component of your car, no matter how critical, does not release them from liability to cover YOUR mistakes, under the contract of the policy. Do you work for an insurance company? I don't think so. Want to qualify your statement to say that you meant a full-coverage policy? On a 20-something year old Beretta?
So far as being found criminally at fault, well who can say, the courts have been FUBAR'ed since the beginning, why do you think the lady with the scales is blindfolded?
If you caused the accident, no matter what state you are in, you would be found at fault anyway, and you would typically get a citation (meaning 'criminally at fault'). In safety-inspection states, if your car is found to be unsafe, it fails the inspection and you get sent home without the ability to renew your plates until you fix it, they do not charge you with criminal negligence.
They don't cut your hands off at the wrist either, just to clarify.
And, as Jon is always saying, READ MY POSTS before criticizing! I am not so much advocating this 'repair' as I am suggesting a way to do it without destroying his power-steering pump, which could cause it to fail, which could easily cause a safety issue if it seizes and either stalls his engine or throws the belt, causing him to also lose the alternator and water-pump. I AGREED WITH YOU that the repair SHOULD BE DONE IMMEDIATELY, but no, I don't believe it is a serious safety issue, especially if used for a short time. If lack of lubrication causes accelerated wear, there would be indications of an impending failure before anything catastrophic happened.
I get that you don't like the idea of someone driving their car without power steering fluid when it was designed to use it, I think anyone reading this thread can tell that. But, really, you are being an alarmist. I would have more of a problem with it if someone wanted to bypass their power brake booster, but I wouldn't be telling them that they need to scrap their car. Drive carefully, drive slowly, give extra stopping distance, and realize that stock Beretta brakes suck even when everything is working right.
Get it fixed as soon as you can...