Outside edge of front tires stairstepping

One hundred and 5 posts?! Talk about beating a dead horse into powder.

Reply to
Clawed
Loading thread data ...

ing careful to compare the parts and counting treads. I thought I did prett y good and had my mechanic adjust the toe-in. He said it was it was about a n inch off. The truck tracks beautifully now. He did a most wonderful job.

Well, heck I did measure the parts. I ain't dumb! That don't work either wi thout some pretty good measuring tools. OTOH, the point is moot. I wasn't a ssuming that the alignment and my replacing the ball joints would be perfec t. You pretty much have to do an alignment after doing this kind of work. I mean, I ain't dumb! :)

Reply to
dsi1

I hope not.

We mechanics tend to have them, micrometers, vernier calipers, etc. > OTOH, the point is moot. I wasn't assuming that the alignment and > my replacing the ball joints would be perfect. You pretty much have > to do an alignment after doing this kind of work.

You proved it when the mechanic checked it.

I certainly hope not.

I have done thousands of alignments in my time. I know what works and what doesn't. I also have seen what home mechanics can do to their cars and it isn't always pretty.

Reply to
Xeno

being careful to compare the parts and counting treads. I thought I did pre tty good and had my mechanic adjust the toe-in. He said it was it was about an inch off. The truck tracks beautifully now. He did a most wonderful job .

What's your point? Are you saying that you possess perfect knowledge and wo uld be able to replace inner and outer ball joints so that they're somehow in alignment? Mostly you sound like a poser to me. My guess is that even pr ofessionals would have to have an alignment don't after doing a job like th at. Sorry, I'm not impressed, pal! :)

Reply to
dsi1

My point is that I have lots of experience with steering and suspension and, if a set of tie rods is needing replacement, it's likely that the wheel alignment won't have been spot on even before you replaced them. In fact, if I had to replace tie rod ends, I'd be assuming the rest of the steering and suspension has done the same amount of work and be giving it a very thorough check over.

Errr. No. You must be thinking of *God*.

I'd get it pretty close by eye. Not that I would trust that. For one, that would be assuming the alignment was correct in the first instance - and generally they are not. It's rare I would make such an assumption. I prefer starting from a known point and the wheel aligner will give me that. It will also tell me where the alignment needs to be and if anything is bent.

I am a trained and experienced motor mechanic and for the last 20 years of my working career I was a technical teacher in the field. If that's what a poser is, maybe I am. ;-)

Hey, I guess that makes me a *professional* then! I always do alignments after jobs like that!

Now get off your high horse and reread my first point on the topic. I said counting threads is pointless on a *replacement tie rod end*. When I replace tie rods, I always do an alignment check regardless. I said

*you* would be better advised to measure rather than count threads. This was said *assuming* the absence of professional alignment gear and a new tie rod end. I don't bother since I have always had access to 2 and 4 wheel alignment systems at work. I set the car up on the machine and let it tell me how far to adjust those threads. While I'm at it, I'll check every other setting as well and adjust as required.
Reply to
Xeno

re everything

, being careful to compare the parts and counting treads. I thought I did p retty good and had my mechanic adjust the toe-in. He said it was it was abo ut an inch off. The truck tracks beautifully now. He did a most wonderful j ob.

As I said, I did indeed measure. I also said that the point is moot because an alignment was going to be done anyway. I recommend that an alignment al ways be done when replacing these parts. What's your point?

Reply to
dsi1

I think the answer is no, not always.

If caster has a range of 2 to 4 and camber 5 to 7, that doesn't mean that you can put caster at 2 and camber at 7 and everything is even moderately acceptable, aiui.

The range refers to one value at a time, that if the caster has a range of 2 to 4 and you have it set at 1.9, that's bad in itself, regardless of what the other values are. (Maybe in some special situations a skilled aligner can safely go outside the range, I don't know one way or the other, but my point is made in the paragraph above, which I think you think would be acceptable.)

Alignment is a compromise and any particular setting of camber, for example, may well limit the acceptable setting of caster to a smaller range than the range given in the spec. Competent pros know this and allow for it.

Corrections?

I hope you don't intend to tell the shop what settings you want, and will instead tell them your problem** and what you think woudl help, without ordering them to do that.

**I'm not sure why some feathering is worth all this trouble in the first place. Will your tires wear out sooner? How much sooner? How much is that in dollars?
Reply to
micky

Camber is a tyre wearing angle and at 7 degrees would definitely lead to tyres wearing on one side. For road going cars, 1 degree positive/negative would normally be the maximum you would aim for. Competition cars can go to 2 or even 3 degrees.

Caster, on the other hand, has a good deal more leeway since it isn't a tyre wearing angle. It does create self aligning torque so a decrease will affect the car's ability to straighten up out of a turn. An increase, on the other hand, will make the steering heavier.

Toe in changes can affect the understeering/oversteering characteristics of the car and, therefore, affect the handling.

You need to have an understanding of suspension kinematics before you arbitrarily play around with manufacturers specifications. Simply lowering a car will upset the kinematics and, as a consequence, the handling.

It generally isn't. It is an effect of the design compromises in steering kinematics versus vehicle usage. The type of usage described by the OP is the perfect example of an extreme that is outside the manufacturers design expectations. The penalty, if it can be called that, is increased tyre wear. It's no different to expecting increased tyre wear if every launch is like that of a jackrabbit.

Reply to
Xeno

Ed Pawlowski wrote: - show quoted text - "Interesting that you mention that. yes, there is always a range. yet you mention that your tires meet the minimum specifications of the auto manufacturer so they are good enough. Tires come in a rather wide range of specs and characteristics and in your particular situation, you can do better with other than minimum. "

Chaya mentioned range in context to her response to a comment about steering geometry. I always request that the aligner aim for as close to the middle of each alignment spec as possible. I.E. Toe spec is 0 to +0.10 deg (toe in), I'd aim for 0.05, unless vehicle is really old or higher mileage. Then I'd align toward 0.10.

Reply to
thekmanrocks

Chaya Eve posted for all of us...

In the matter of car lines the manufacturers have turned the option list into "lines". In other words if you want basic-no options and want to add collision avoidance you must buy a higher line, if you want a moon roof then you must buy the higher line. Of course they always stick in unwanted items in the higher lines; like premium audio, heated seats. You can't delete them.

I knew a guy whom worked at a major tire manufacturer in quality control. After GM started to reject boxcars of tires, they started loading the exceptional spec tires at the doors of the boxcars after loading the usual spec'd tires in first. The GM inspectors would only check the first out lot then move on.

Your marketing education is just a low level of psychology. You are taking this thread away from the excellent advice of many people who have done this for many years. Where did you get your education and where do you work?

Reply to
Tekkie®

snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca posted for all of us...

I'm sorry Clare, I just wrote a post with the same points as yours. I didn't get down to this level prior to posting. It's getting to be too much with her conflating issues.

Reply to
Tekkie®

Time to plonk the idiot.

Reply to
clare

When I took statistics years ago it was geared toward engineers. The major question was how many samples do you have to examine to ensure the batch is only N% crap. N would be provided by sales and marketing after they determined the economics of repairing or replacing crap versus going for as close to 100% quality product as you could.

Reply to
rbowman

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.