C2-Suspension/Steering/Alignment Questions
Nothing, recently at any rate, has frustrated me more than lower ball joints, toe-in alignment, and steering issues.
I've recently read many posts on this (these) subjects and find that I still have questions.
Duke Williams (and others, I'm sure) have stated that when measuring/setting toe-in what is first needed is to establish the longitudinal center line of the vehicle and then measure outwards from that center line to establish a parallel string line on each side of the car for use in establishing the desired toe-in. While I'm sure this could well be the proper way of doing this it appears to be quite difficult to do accurately and an alternative would be to merely consider that on C2s the track is 3/4 (0.8) inches wider in the rear as opposed to the front. Use that fact to establish a parallel string line on each side of the car (i. e,. on each side the front road wheel would be 3/8" further from the string line than the rear. Now I realize that these cars were built with a permitted tolerance (usually plus and minus) which is going to affect the accuracy of the string lines given the individual tolerances present on any given vehicle. However, it would appear that the same inaccuracies would occur with the center line method given that establishing the center line would also necessitate taking measurements from known points such as suspension attachments. I'm not sure I can see that one method is likely to result in greater accuracy than the other and the second method is far easier.
I have a book on steering/suspension/alignment procedures (not specific to any one vehicle or model) which states that when setting toe-in it must first be ascertained that the tie rods are exactly the same length else the steering geometry will not be the same on a left turn versus right turn. This requirement seems a little odd to me given the tie rods are certainly not going to be the same length after setting the toe. Has anyone determined what the tolerance on tie rods lengths should be?
It would appear to be far more important to get the toe-in set the same on both sides, have the vehicle track straight down the road, have the steering wheel centered when traveling a straight road and ensure that the steering box is on high point. When I have the toe-in set as I believe it should be (about 1/16" on each of the four wheels) the tie rods (at the front) vary in length by about 3/16 of an inch. Any comments as to whether this difference seems excessive? I cannot seem to locate a stake mark on the worm shaft on the end where the rag joint attaches. At present, I'm reluctant to remove the steering box or pull the steering shaft into the cockpit to gain a better look at the end of the shaft on the upper side of the box. The steering wheel stake lines up with the stake on the upper end of the steering shaft and the stakes are at the 12 o'clock position when the wheels are straight ahead, and the steering wheel turns through 1 3/4 turns each way (which would seem to indicate that the steering box is on high point) or 3 1/2 turns lock to lock. Six hundred thirty degrees of steering wheel movement and a 20.2 to 1 steering ratio would allow the road wheel 30 degrees max. in a turn. I see nothing wrong here.
I'm certainly not young any longer (who is?); however, the car is definitely not happy negotiating a curve. It tracks a curve FAIRLY well at the posted speed limit but ANY attempt at a faster speed requires excessive steering wheel correction at speeds which should not necessitate any correction. I'm not young anymore but its not me, its the car.
As pertains to the above comment my belief is that the lower control arm bushings could use replacement and I feel this is having an adverse effect on the toe setting and hence the rear, in a curve, cannot track the front as it should. Finally, I've never read in the archives as relates to lower control arm bushings and specifically ball joint separation, but has anyone separated the upper part of the ball joint from the control arm as opposed to separating the joint from the knuckle, tried grinding the head of the rivets off and unscrewing the upper nut from its stud. This would save the original ball joint as opposed to destroying it by removing by way of separating lower stud from knuckle.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
Bill
I've recently read many posts on this (these) subjects and find that I still have questions.
Duke Williams (and others, I'm sure) have stated that when measuring/setting toe-in what is first needed is to establish the longitudinal center line of the vehicle and then measure outwards from that center line to establish a parallel string line on each side of the car for use in establishing the desired toe-in. While I'm sure this could well be the proper way of doing this it appears to be quite difficult to do accurately and an alternative would be to merely consider that on C2s the track is 3/4 (0.8) inches wider in the rear as opposed to the front. Use that fact to establish a parallel string line on each side of the car (i. e,. on each side the front road wheel would be 3/8" further from the string line than the rear. Now I realize that these cars were built with a permitted tolerance (usually plus and minus) which is going to affect the accuracy of the string lines given the individual tolerances present on any given vehicle. However, it would appear that the same inaccuracies would occur with the center line method given that establishing the center line would also necessitate taking measurements from known points such as suspension attachments. I'm not sure I can see that one method is likely to result in greater accuracy than the other and the second method is far easier.
I have a book on steering/suspension/alignment procedures (not specific to any one vehicle or model) which states that when setting toe-in it must first be ascertained that the tie rods are exactly the same length else the steering geometry will not be the same on a left turn versus right turn. This requirement seems a little odd to me given the tie rods are certainly not going to be the same length after setting the toe. Has anyone determined what the tolerance on tie rods lengths should be?
It would appear to be far more important to get the toe-in set the same on both sides, have the vehicle track straight down the road, have the steering wheel centered when traveling a straight road and ensure that the steering box is on high point. When I have the toe-in set as I believe it should be (about 1/16" on each of the four wheels) the tie rods (at the front) vary in length by about 3/16 of an inch. Any comments as to whether this difference seems excessive? I cannot seem to locate a stake mark on the worm shaft on the end where the rag joint attaches. At present, I'm reluctant to remove the steering box or pull the steering shaft into the cockpit to gain a better look at the end of the shaft on the upper side of the box. The steering wheel stake lines up with the stake on the upper end of the steering shaft and the stakes are at the 12 o'clock position when the wheels are straight ahead, and the steering wheel turns through 1 3/4 turns each way (which would seem to indicate that the steering box is on high point) or 3 1/2 turns lock to lock. Six hundred thirty degrees of steering wheel movement and a 20.2 to 1 steering ratio would allow the road wheel 30 degrees max. in a turn. I see nothing wrong here.
I'm certainly not young any longer (who is?); however, the car is definitely not happy negotiating a curve. It tracks a curve FAIRLY well at the posted speed limit but ANY attempt at a faster speed requires excessive steering wheel correction at speeds which should not necessitate any correction. I'm not young anymore but its not me, its the car.
As pertains to the above comment my belief is that the lower control arm bushings could use replacement and I feel this is having an adverse effect on the toe setting and hence the rear, in a curve, cannot track the front as it should. Finally, I've never read in the archives as relates to lower control arm bushings and specifically ball joint separation, but has anyone separated the upper part of the ball joint from the control arm as opposed to separating the joint from the knuckle, tried grinding the head of the rivets off and unscrewing the upper nut from its stud. This would save the original ball joint as opposed to destroying it by removing by way of separating lower stud from knuckle.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
Bill
Comment