Talk:Steering

Automated steering

I did not found the word automated in the page.

However, automated steering might exist when a classification of those automated steering functions exist.

European union, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom and other territories follow UNECE 79 regulation (see list of countries in https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/ECE-TRANS-WP.29-343-Rev.29-Add.1.pdf ) which classifies automatically commanded steering functions:

• Category A function helps the driver at speed no greater than 10 km/h for parking maneuvering;
• Category B1 function helps the driver to keep the vehicle within the chosen lane;
• Category B2 function "keeps the vehicle within its lane by influencing the lateral movement of the vehicle for extended periods without further driver command/confirmation";
• Category C and D and E are related to specific manoeuvres such as lane change (see category descriptions in http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/2018/R079r4e.pdf )

Some words, a link or a paragraph should provide some relevant pieces of information related to automated steering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.136.215.10 (talk • contribs) 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Overreliance on primay sources and general lack of sources

Much of the article relies on primary sources such as websites of automakers: ZF, BMW, Renault, Porsche, Audi, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Thrust... Pretty much everything before the steer-by-wire section is reliant on primary sources, and everything after it is unsourced. HueSurname (talk) 02:10, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

The idiotic photo of a bike with training wheels.

ref https://repository.si.edu/handle/10088/2423 pp1-7 does not say bicycle steering is primarily via turning the handlebars. Greglocock (talk) 05:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Indeed it doesn't. As for how a bicycles actually steers, see Bicycle and motorcycle dynamics for a reasonable explanation of the complex dynamics involved. AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Two “Steer by Wire” sections, Inaccurate Cybertruck Statements

In the first “Steer by Wire” section, the article states that Tesla’s Cybertruck is the first automotive vehicle to enter production with steer by wire in place, despite the section “Steer by Wire” section detailing that the Infiniti Q50 and Q60 have had steer by wire since 2013. The second section also mentions the Lexus RZ 450e and Toyota bZ4X also having it since 2022 or so. Vehicles with rear-wheel steering also used steer by wire prior to those.

It also seems unnecessary to include the Cybertruck in the “speed-sensitive steering” category, considering the technology has been in place for quite some time and the Cybertruck doesn’t add anything particularly notable in the space. Kevinsja (talk) 04:22, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to split the article

The classical automotive steering mechanism is only one specific item of the topic "steering", but it takes most of the article. The other types of steering (aircraft, rocket, ship, bicycle, caterpillar) cannot get a similar level of treatment here.
The article should be split, making each section into a separate article, and leaving here only little more than a disamb page. The bulk of this article should become car steering system or something like that. Jorge Stolfi (talk) 15:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Proposed external resource: rack-and-pinion vs steering-box systems

I propose adding the following resource to the External links section:

• Rack-and-pinion vs steering-box systems – practical comparison

The resource provides a practical comparison of rack-and-pinion and steering-box systems, including their mechanical layouts, steering linkages, applications, wear points, and differences between rack-and-pinion and recirculating-ball steering designs.

This is directly relevant to the article's automotive section discussing rack-and-pinion, recirculating-ball, worm-and-sector steering systems.

I am affiliated with the website and am requesting independent editor review rather than adding the link directly.

~2026-48480-35 (talk) 05:51, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Informative. Well laid out. No glaring mistakes. Doesn't try to sell stuff to the reader (there is a very minimal list of company details at the bottom of the page).  Stepho  talk  06:06, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

@Stepho-wrs The version I removed is WP:REFSPAM and I'm pretty confident the IP above is the same as the user I just blocked that inserted it the first time - a series of accounts known for spam. Izno (talk) 00:24, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

I oppose this as well. Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:External links pretty clearly state "the content guidelines for external links prohibit linking to "Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services"" and this source doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria for the listed exceptions. TKOIII (talk) 00:46, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

I disagree with it being refspam. I followed the link and found it informative. Many other similar pages from companies blatantly lace them with "our product is the best" and "buy our product" but this doesn't. It only has a standard header and footer containing banal things like basic company info. Not a single reference to any of their own products. Not a single word urging you to buy. Which means that the page's primary reason is not to sell products.  Stepho  talk  13:35, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Pages like that are clearly intended to help a company sell products. They may give technical information, but they do so in a manner that directs the reader towards their products. In this case, quite explicitly: For replacement purchasing, verify the OEM number, vehicle model, year, steering type, LHD/RHD specification.... What technical information they give is inevitably going to be written in a manner that encourages purchases of products they sell. And note that there are two 'Request a quote' buttons on the page, as well as links to contact details etc. Including links like this might even look like product endorsement to the reader. We don't do that. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:06, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

The article may not be as pushy when it comes to selling their products as other, more blatant, examples of link spam, but it's pretty clear to me that the primary purpose of the article is to promote the company's website. This is a well established practice among people looking to boost their website's SEO. Website owners will find citation needed tags in prominent Wikipedia articles and write articles on their company's website specifically to use as a citation for that claim, with the goal of boosting their website's domain authority and search rankings by having links to their website from Wikipedia, which itself has strong domain authority. I have been cracking down on this practice recently and have seen this exact formula used in dozens of articles. TKOIII (talk) 16:48, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

+1 on that. They just re-edit the wiki content and post it on the sites so an SEO picks it up. I vaguely remember ELs are deprecated to stop articles becoming link farms. Greglocock (talk) 07:57, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

 Not done per above. Izno (talk) 06:36, 11 September 2026 (UTC)