steering coupler length

[Burdar]

Jim Fillmore from Detroit Muscle Technologies is researching steering coupler lengths.  He would like a measurement from a 73 and a 74.  My 73 isn't here at the moment for me to measure.  I told him I'd ask on here for the info.  I guess there are two different lengths.(3" and 3.5") Jim thinks the 3" was used up through 73 and in 74 they changed to the 3.5" style.  Can a couple people with a 73 and 74 measure their coupler length?  Thanks

[Cuda Cody]

I looked through my stash and I don't have any 3.5".  All of mine are 3".  If anyone has a 3.5" coupler it would be cool to see where the .5" comes from.  My guess is they just added more length to the top so it holds more grease and left the bottom the same (making them work on the existing steering column shafts)?      If they changed the way / length at the bottom then they would have had to change the steering column shaft length and the parts book would call it out.  I don't have a 74 parts book, but looked at the 1973 we have on this site and there's only 1 steering column shaft for E-Bodies.  There was a mid year change on the B-Bodies.

So my guess is it's a running change and mostly a 74 thing.  And if it's only "taller" then it's not going to affect any other parts.   

Here's the 73 part books:

[Cuda Cody]

Now I'm going to be looking for Couplers at the swap meet next week!  I want to find a 3.5" so I can measure it and see how it's different.   

[Cuda Cody]

Just a guess here, but I'm thinking that there may have been a design change that needed more grease capacity or maybe the suspension travel changed that required more room to move?

[1 Wild R/T]

Not sure but I think the reason for the longer couplers was the rubber isolated K members that started in mid 73...  Chrysler may have initially started with the 3" coupler but had concerns about the potential for a failure with all the movement that the isolated frame allowed...

[Burdar]

Not sure but I think the reason for the longer couplers was the rubber isolated K members that started in mid 73...  Chrysler may have initially started with the 3" coupler but had concerns about the potential for a failure with all the movement that the isolated frame allowed...

That was my thought as well.  If that's the case, then only B-bodies in 73-74 needed the updated coupler.

I wish my 73 was here so I could measure it.  I had a problem installing the shoes/spring inside the coupler on a 68 and 72 3" coupler.  My Challenger coupler gave me no problems at all.  Now I'm wondering if it has the longer coupler and that's why the shoes/spring went together easily.  I realize the coupler length should have no bearing on internal shoe/spring fitment but I had to reuse the old spring in the other two couplers because the new one was too tall a hit the side of the coupler.   

[Cuda Cody]

You might be on to something!!!  Good thinking. 

And 1 Wild R/T don't think you can sneak in here without a big     Super glad to see your name pop up!     I was hoping you would find us.   

Not sure but I think the reason for the longer couplers was the rubber isolated K members that started in mid 73...  Chrysler may have initially started with the 3" coupler but had concerns about the potential for a failure with all the movement that the isolated frame allowed...

[A.Gramz]

First one came out of my 1973 second out of a74 both auto and power steering. My 74 with manual steering and trans  is around some where just can't remember where.

[71TA]

Great info. Thanks!

[Cuda Cody]

Thanks buddy!  It's looking like this is a 74 change, but still need to get more photos to confirm the exact change over time.  But your photos really help.   

First one came out of my 1973 second out of a74 both auto and power steering. My 74 with manual steering and trans  is around some where just can't remember where.

[Bullitt-]

My '73 power steering coupler is 3"

[cataclysm80]

Great info. Thanks!

Great to see you here Jim!  I've been thinking about sending you a message to tell you about this place.   

Tav