If the OP eyeballed the alignment what would he expect? Really would be pretty darn hard without some sort of measuring tools needed here.....
Crazy alignment problems
- Thread starter Craig Burriss
- Start date
-
sccachallenger
Well-Known Member
A long time ago, a buddy with a '73 Swinger said his front end was weird.
The strut rod bushings had been replaced with the wrong ones, and you'd see the front wheels move an inch or more when pulling forward and then backing up. And the stock K member is centered with the 4 tapered bolts that bolt it to the unibody.
How do the aftermarket Ks accomplish this?
The strut rod bushings had been replaced with the wrong ones, and you'd see the front wheels move an inch or more when pulling forward and then backing up. And the stock K member is centered with the 4 tapered bolts that bolt it to the unibody.
How do the aftermarket Ks accomplish this?
rustycowll69
Well-Known Member
I've "eyeballed it in" at least a dozen times, and never had a problem. It has actually steered pretty darn good on the way to the alignment shop every time.
I think the posts about the idler arm, Pittman arm, and center link may be onto something. The geometry should make it obvious, if something is wrong there. When the car is LEVEL, and the tires/wheels are pointed straight ahead, and the steering box centered in its travel, the center link should be 90 degrees to the longitudinal centerline of the vehicle when viewed from above or below. Similarly, the center link should be parallel to the ground when viewed from the front.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
I've changed toe dozens of times on various cars, setting on concrete..... jouncing the car a few times makes it settle in to the new toe setting.
IMHO, look at his photos again. Tie rod settings and idler angle are way off from what they should be on the passenger side. Driver side tie rod length is close to what it should be while passenger side is waaaay long. That seems to indicate that the draglink and steering arms out at the spindles are not matched properly. Looks like it could be an early-late component mix problem.
Hopefully the OP can help us ID which year parts are used where.
sccachallenger
Well-Known Member
Didn't see the answer on this? Are the arms marked drivers side, passenger side?
Most aftermarket arms claim to give more positive caster, if installed backwards they'd do the opposite.
And yea moving idler arm up or down will definitely affect bump steer.
And we can certainly set ride height on an uneven surface, factory service manual has you comparing two measurements on the same side of the car. as long as tires match that should be sufficient.
Just by looking at the pics, I see the adjustment selves, one is clearly out of adjustment. Just look at the tread length of each, tie rod end. I have to agree with brain6pac you really need plates. Bouncing is not the best way, at the very least you should push the car forward a half a dozen feet and then push it back.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
I have not been able to figure out those pix in the 1st post. The last 2 do look like a lot of toe-in, but also looks like some positive camber. That kind of camber issue might be adjustment... I don't think it is waay off like if the early UCA's and later spindles were mixed.
Based on the later pix of the passenger side, I think the long pass side tie rod is a symptom, not the core problem. Draglink, idler, pitman look to be all '72 & earlier. I suspect the lower BJ's/steering arms are '73 and later.... don't think those pieces properly match up. But I don't have the parts in hand to compare and see.
It looks like it has pos camber because he drove it forward with a lot of toe in and it sucks the tires in at the bottom and forces them out at the top.
As far as the linkage goes it really makes no difference, it will change bump steer and it can change toe out in turns but that is it if the toe is right than it will roll back and forth all day long and still be right on.
As far as the linkage goes it really makes no difference, it will change bump steer and it can change toe out in turns but that is it if the toe is right than it will roll back and forth all day long and still be right on.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
Something looks fishy to me in the t-bar clocking, but I would appreciate if others would look and comment. Look at the position of the t-bar cam in the right LCA in the 3rd pix in post #17. With the LCA at full droop, the cam arm is almost straight out sideways and the adjuster bolt looks to be fully turned in. I wonder if this is why the OP says he has the adjusters as tight as he dares.. they are 'bottomed out' in the adjuster bars.
OP, did you keep track of the left and right side position of the t-bars? They usually are for one side or the other. And if these are the original t-bars with their lower spring rate, then the t-bar has to insert into the t-bar socket when the LCA is rotated well below the the normal full droop position. The LCA has to be something like 60-70 degrees below horizontal. You need to have the lower BJ and shock disconnected, and strut rod loose, to get it to insert right. Then you will probably have to jack up the LCA a bit to get it to where things will all go together.
This might explain why the front is moving up and down as the car rolls forward and back... part of the load is on the bushings rather than all on the t-bars.
OP, did you keep track of the left and right side position of the t-bars? They usually are for one side or the other. And if these are the original t-bars with their lower spring rate, then the t-bar has to insert into the t-bar socket when the LCA is rotated well below the the normal full droop position. The LCA has to be something like 60-70 degrees below horizontal. You need to have the lower BJ and shock disconnected, and strut rod loose, to get it to insert right. Then you will probably have to jack up the LCA a bit to get it to where things will all go together.
This might explain why the front is moving up and down as the car rolls forward and back... part of the load is on the bushings rather than all on the t-bars.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
Yeah I can see what you are thinking.... What gets me about the tie-rod settings is that the driver's side looks close to normal while the passenger side looks waaay out. If you moved them, then it seems like both would be too far extended. Plus look at his 1st and 3rd pix in post #1, which I think are showing the driver's side wheel after backing up and moving forward, respectively. I don't see any tire distortion but the camber and toe have really changed. That is why I am suspicious of some parts issues and other problems.
But let's run with your idea as your are right on one matter 100%: the OP indeed does need to get the linkage centered to be anywhere close, regardless of whatever else may be going on.
OP, I'm gonna assume you have manual steering. (That may be wrong.) If so, look at post #27 in the thread linked below to see how to find the center of steering in your steering box. Once found, put some tape on the steering wheel and another reference point on or around the dashboard, so you can go back to this position to know where the center of steering should be. This will be the steering location around which you will initially adjust your tie rods to get both wheels straight ahead.
steering wheel - alignment
Wow this is a lot of information. Looks like I have way more to look into than I thought.
After reading all of this I’ll probably just tear the whole front end apart and start over. Because when I moved I had to just throw the car together good enough to get it on a trailer. Every post on this thread makes a lot of sense.
I’ll post better pictures before I start tearing everything down to try and answer some of your questions.
I’ve got to replace the throw out bearing in my daily before I dig into the Duster though.
Thanks again everyone. This is a huge help.
After reading all of this I’ll probably just tear the whole front end apart and start over. Because when I moved I had to just throw the car together good enough to get it on a trailer. Every post on this thread makes a lot of sense.
I’ll post better pictures before I start tearing everything down to try and answer some of your questions.
I’ve got to replace the throw out bearing in my daily before I dig into the Duster though.
Thanks again everyone. This is a huge help.
Here’s some more pictures.
The car is sitting on the ground after being driving around the yard back and forth.
All of these pictures were taken after I pulled it forward into its spot making the front end go down and the tires toe out.
Toe out, negative camber.
Not as much negative camber, slightly toed out
Passenger LCA and tie rod
Driver side LCA and tie rod
The car is sitting on the ground after being driving around the yard back and forth.
All of these pictures were taken after I pulled it forward into its spot making the front end go down and the tires toe out.
Toe out, negative camber.
Not as much negative camber, slightly toed out
Passenger LCA and tie rod
Driver side LCA and tie rod
just start with getting some turn tables, if that's impossible get some sheet metal and grease and make some plates that the front tires can slide around on, this is the first thing you need to do!
rustycowll69
Well-Known Member
the top of the head of the adjuster bolt(s) should be near flush with the bottom flanges of the LCA +or - 1/4". And the bolt heads should be pretty even left LCA to right LCA.
maybe you could shoot a pic showing where the heads are situated now
maybe you could shoot a pic showing where the heads are situated now
rustycowll69
Well-Known Member
torsion bar adjuster bolt. My point being if he has the head of the adjuster bolt buried into the LCA crazily, he probably did "mis-clock" the LCA t-bar hex socket. I couldn't see the head of the adjuster bolt in any pics, but I can't tell if the views shown are just inconvenient, or he really does have the adjuster/hex mis-clocked.
Can anyone tell me why the center link is hitting the oil pan passenger side.....am I seeing this correctly?
Well I think that is impossible because it only has 6 sides.
sccachallenger
Well-Known Member
Great catch on the torsion bars! I know with stock upper arms if you remove the rubber re-bound bumper this will get you a little more "droop" when installing the bars. At stock ride height the torsion bar adjusters shouldn't be tightened all the way with stock bars. I think re-clocking the bars is a good first step. And yeah, the first time any of us do this job by ourselves we realize how much we don't know.
Yes you are seeing it correctly. I had to dent the brand new pan that’s designed for a big block in a duster just to be able to turn
rustycowll69
Well-Known Member
something else I noticed in the pics: I don't know what it is technically called, I'll call it the "saddle-nut" in the LCA, wherein the t-bar adjuster bolt threads, looks catty wampus. I was dicking around with my 67, today, and I checked how mine sit and the top of the "saddle-nut" sits pretty level, whereas yours are at a pretty extreme angle, which suggests to me, again, that the LCA hex sockets are clocked wrong.
X2 I would have not believed it, but it is what my Duster was doing after I re-done the front end.
I screwed around with it forever trying to get it set correctly.
Finally I gave in and drove it to a local old-school alignment shop, the tech gave me crap that he did not want to touch it because of the after-market parts, but he ended up doing it.
He told me I had the front end towed in 3", and loose bolts, to this day I think he was BS me, there was no way I could have had it that far off, but the car drove much better on the way home.
I did hear him using an air gun with authority on the front end, which to this day still concerns me.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
It has been done! With stock t-bars, the LCA's have to be dropped down to something like 70 degrees below horizontal to get the t-bars to clock properly; with the stock k-member, you just push the LCA's down to where they jam against the k-member to get the LCA's around the right angle. The thinner stock T-bars twist a LOT further to take the load than 1" and larger ones, so that is why the LCA's need to be pushed down so far below horizontal for proper clocking. That being the case, you could also clock them in with the LCA's being just slightly below level; that is the mistake that gets made.
IMHO, the OP needs to re-visit this to be sure; he has not told us what T-bars he has nor if he may have swapped them left and right. The location of the t-bar 'load cams' and the extension of the adjusting bolts looks all wrong so that is the clue.
If the t-bars do not take the full load, then the rest of the load ends up as a twisting load on the bushings (and a bit on the gas shocks). If the OP locked down the UCA's at full droop, then their bushings would be twisted hard and take some of the weight. Works 'til they get torn up. Ditto on the LCA bushings if locked in place at full droop, but he has poly's there per his info so that ought to not be happening.
You have actually done this yourself ?? I don't think so. looking at the LCA the jounce bumper is off the frame so that says the t bar is holding up the car, right. Now let's turn the LCA down 60* hook every thing back up and adjust it, if you can. There is no way in hell you are going to twist that t bar that far. do you get the picture, the T bars have nothing to do with the problem this guy is having.
-
