![]() |
I had a 2006 Shelby 22 classic with a 496HO ran 77-78 without a problem and had the stock steering the boat came with. Drove and handled awesome and wouldn't have changed anything about the steering..
Joe |
Originally Posted by yeller
(Post 4490227)
IMO, hydraulic steering on a stock 496 boat is a waste of money. You already have hydraulic steering (of sorts). Your boat has cable steering to run a hydraulic ram. I don't see how removing the inside ram and replacing it with 1 or 2 outside rams is going to significantly change anything.
With the stock steering in my 2004 it was a 1 finger operation to steer the boat. It's much harder to steer now that I have full twin-ram hydraulic. I wish I could go back. I had handling issues, but torque steer was never one of them. My intent is to add the external piston as a safety measure on my 20year old stock cable and Merc system. I'm not expecting to notice much more than a little less torque at the wheel. I fully understand that the "add on" system does not get rid of the play at the cable helm. As for a full hydraulic to the helm, I agree that on a stock powered boat, that 5K is probably not worth it on a boat that does not have handling issues... |
WOW.... Do I feel stupid??? was talking to a friend of mine about my steering torque and he asked if I had checked the power steering fluid? No because it could'nt possibly be that! Bingo, reservoir was bone dry. I filled it up and turned the wheel several times added a bit more fluid then took it for a spin and no problem with steering. I needed to find out why it was empty and the hose clamp on the line going into the reservoir was loose and I think that was the culprit.
Too late to do any more testing this season so time will tell? I think I just saved myself several thousand bucks! |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:00 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.