Manual Steering Box Lubrication

I'm looking for someone to refresh my memory as to the correct manual steering box lube. I haven't had my 73 CJ on the road for about 8 years and am now starting a complete differential up overhaul. It seems to me that, in the past, I had used 90w differential lube. I now look in my Hanes Jeep CJ manual and it states that after checking the lubricant level, if it's low, to add chassis lubricant to the proper level. My thinking is that they really mean the 90w, :? not grease.
Any opinions will be appreciated, Rick :?

 

no, it takes white lithium grease.

 

I suppose for a grease I could use Lubriplate 105. At least the seals wouldn't leak. It just seems that I had used 90wt,I guess my minds going. :drool: Rick

 

Definitely chassis lube, ie grease. Fords take oil, but Saginaws take grease.

 

OK, I'll use grease. I use the lubriplate 105 in older outboard motor non-shift gearboxes and it's great. It should be just the ticket for a steering box.
Thanks for the help ! ! Rick

 

How full do you fill it?

 

The '70s TSMs says use 11 oz after service, but that would be empty except for what grease was used for assembly. The '80s TSMs say to pack the assembly with chassis grease on assembly, and don't specify the "11 oz." It you are topping off, I'd suggest you fill it to the bottom of the fill hole. It's supposed to be full of grease, but no need to pack it in, I'd think.

 

What about the Ross box? Grease or Oil?

 

Thanks Timgr. In the meantime I found it on You Tube. Bottom of the hole just like you said.

 

Not sure. Oil I think. Ask in the Early CJ-5 forum - those Jeeps have Ross steering from the factory.

 

Thank You. I didn't notice this was an intermediate thread. Just gathering info.

 

SoCal, so my '77 CJ5, 258 ci came with a Ross box?

 

Jeff, 1971 was the last year for Ross steering in a CJ.

 

Amc made a lot of improvements when they purchased jeep. Saginaw steering box was a positive move. So was the dana 20 transfer case.

 

The 20 has some advantages like more durable and much quieter than the 18, but it has a feeble low range ratio. I wonder how much of the change was an upgrade and how much was just bowing to the inevitable. Plus it probably lowered their costs to eliminate the outmoded Dana 18. I also wonder what role Dana-Spicer had in the change? Would not be surprising if they priced the continued production of the Dana 18 to force its elimination.

The 300 is even better.

 

Yes you are right, the dana 20 has a feeble low range and the t15 needed a lower gear also. Gear wise the pre 72's were geared a lot better.