Wheel Alignment shop scams

Page 2 of 2  
no one wrote:


Dang! I've been ostracized from the human race. ;-)
'89 E350, '94 T-Bird, '95 E150
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Welcome to the club!
I drive mine until the bottom falls out!
87 T-bird with 190,000 miles 92 Caprice with 310,000 miles 00 Dodge Caravan with 50,000 miles (I'll be happy if that one makes 100,000)
03 VW Jetta with 9,000 miles.
All cars have original engines and trannys.
psycho
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are not alone: 94 Ranger 4 cyl...235,043 miles...original engine and clutch 67 Cougar XR7...153,433 miles...one rebuild of the engine at 73,000 with trannie swap C4-C6 49 Ford PU with Flat head V8...90,233...original engine and trannie, two clutches and a complete brake overhaul, plus a 12 volt conversion @ 25,000
Love those Fords, the good ones just keep going
--
R. J. Talley
Teacher/James Madison Fellow
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It's not that I don't understand what a 12V conversion is, but it certainly has been some time since I've seen a vehicle that had 6V.
While I certainly do not like Ford, I have to respect anything that will survive longer than 6 years, given the automotive climate.
Vuarra
Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur. (That which is said in Latin sounds profound.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ya well I thought I was alone for a while, driving an '85 full size wagon, 233,000 miles, till I pulled into the 'bun and run' yesterday and parked beside two others. There we were: three wagons, a chev, a pontiac, a buick. Still shiney, rocker panels intact, all three had cracked windshields. nothin's perfect.
Vuarra wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If they were wagons, the cracked windshields were most likely caused by using the roof racks. I've owned three different station wagons over the years, and every one of them had the windshield crack within a few months of using the roof racks for carrying a couple hundred pounds of luggage.
Slicknick wrote:

<snip>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

My poor, '93 Taurus looks like it's been through a war.. black scuff going down the side the car where a drunk sideswiped me, a green driver's side mirror, where the rest of the car is white, a "hole" in the front windshield where the rearview came off and took some of the glass with it (moved the rearview over an inch or two) and a single vertical crack right down the middle of the windshield. (Only had liability on it, and the drunk was uninsured)
Fits in fine down here in rural, southern AL, with all the oystermen and shrimpers' beat up cars and trucks. The '95 Rodeo though is still a fine vehicle. Wife drives it everywhere, just wish it got better gas mileage, and had a little more "get up and go". Takes 10seconds to get to 60mph.. then another 15seconds to get from 60mph to 70mph. hehe (guess it's the 3.73:1 rear-end)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
psycho snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Hahahahaha!
So do I, then I use the parts on other Fords. I'm am now ready to pull the engine & trans outta the 1984 CV. I will convert the front dress and pan to early-style and shove it into my 1973 Montego. The CV get's junked, the Monty get's sold, the Monty's 351C gets rebuilt for the 1968 Cougar. Got my weekends booked for a while.

--
Tom
TS3
http://www.geocities.com/styleline58 /
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yea.. I guess I'm subhuman too.. '93 Taurus, '95 Rodeo..
Chuck
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"no one" wrote

One
with
McPherson
Cost savings are always a part of the equation, but the fact is that the geometry of a Mcpherson strut front suspension makes it less sensitive to camber/caster setting as far as pulling problems. You will just have to trust me on this, as I've had many years of aligment and front end experience at the dealership level. I've rarely seen a GM FWD vehicle (GM is what I work on) that needed adjustments to caster/camber for a pulling condition, unless there had been some sort of damage to components. And in that case you replaced components.

suspension in

lack of

and
This really has nothing to do with frame design. Your 82 truck is probably just set up properly. Believe me, late model GM trucks had all sorts of alignment/wandering/pulling problems that were directly related to improper caster settings right from the factory. These trucks have a wide range of adjustment built right into the front suspension so that you can easily (well, once you have removed some knockouts) make camber/caster adjustments. During one stretch in the late 90's, almost every vehicle in the shop that had a pulling/tracking complaint was a truck, s/truck, or the M/L vans. These all have upper/lower control arm front suspension setups.

back
reasonable
out and

I suppose that if money is the issue, then yes, it's not really worth having to do a frame pull, if that's really what it needs. Just because you hit a pothole, usually doesn't mean that the frame will be out. If you can't bring the suspension back to factory spec with the adjustments that are available, then I would be looking for the damaged components more then a bent frame. If the Taurus has a separate subframe (which I think it does) often you can loosen the subframes and get some camber/caster movement be moving the subframe on the body. We often do this on the GM FWD vehicles and you would be amazed at how much movement you can get between the subframes and bodies.

the
that
but
That
location
are
indeed the

the
He sounds pretty accomodating. If you can't get it exactly to the center of the factory spec range, I wouldn't worry too much about it. You just wouldn't want your cross camber, and/or cross caster measurements to be out of range.

alignment to

Not much labor, as far the part, I don't have access to that info. It looks like about 2.0 hrs to R & R one strut.
Ian
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for your thoughts and advice. It sounds like you have lots of experience on the GM equivilent of this issue.
I will hear from the shop tomorrow AM. I will have to figure out what to invest in what is now less than a $4000 car. We drive our cars until they drop and then a few years past. So, I will find out what the shop manager's confidence level is on a new strut. I guess my mishap of hitting the deep pot hole on the left and my wife's clipping right turns across the curbs for the rear right is not helpful for these cars. Blubump! I cringe every time! It does not help though....
Since you feel the car fram is probably not twisted, it seems that a new strut may be worthwhile.
I was perusing the GM group a few weeks ago.... reading that there was factory advise against any tinkering with alignment (SUV's I think) since the factory machines were so "precise". I guess precision is in the eye of the owner. Then again, perhaps they were referencing the available field tech skills and not based on what the alignment gear does in the hands of a knowing tech. Skill is not free but many times well worth the price.
Ian, thanks again for your thoughts.
No one in maryland
shiden_kai wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.