[200q20v] Re: fixing what's broke

QSHIPQ at aol.com QSHIPQ at aol.com
Wed Jan 31 12:34:23 EST 2001

In a message dated 1/31/01 11:10:31 AM Central Standard Time, pjberr at home.com 

> Is it possible and/or worthwhile to then interchange some parts for a better
>  front end set-up.
Maybe.  Let's take a look at what you *want* to do:
>  If I took the S4/6 control arms, V8 front struts and strut bearing 
>  V8 sway bar and eliminated the rubber sway bar bushings in favour of a 
>  mounts that eliminated lateral movement, then my 1990 200TQ would handle
>  considerably better?

Problem:  The S4/S6 and v8 C/A will go into your car, but you need a hub, 
outer cv, wheel bearing, upper strut plate, brake rotors, caliper bracket, sb 
bushings and front retainters (that's the obvious list I can think of off the 
bat). The track is different on those cars as well, which means you are now 
addressing the rear too, to make this maybe work.  For "eliminating" the 
rubber, ck out the 2Bennet warning on just the delrin bushings -Urs4.com (a 
swabar snapped because of this, in my case I installed these bushings on a 
customer car against my recommedation:  Swaybar nuts backed off, even with 
2B's double nut idea (all puns intended on that fix).  I recommend you put 
new rubber in the car, and leave it alone.  That rubber is there for the 
slop.  You want better, build a better subframe.
>  The solid mounts would be a bit of engineering but I think it could be 

Well, I've put several posts up on this subject.  The problem with 
eliminating the slop is that you exacerbate the toe, caster and camber 
problems going stiffer.  There is a reason big bushings are used on the 
swaybar, remember as a swaybar twists, one side gets shorter than the other.  
With rubber, some of that can be flexed out.  Solidly it can't at all, until 
something does in a big way

>  Perhaps solidly fixing the center on the sway bay as in a torsion bar with
>  an additional sway bar to connect left and right?

Something will break, most likely the swaybar itself.  That bar has to be 
able to move fore and aft in the control arm and subframe.  Time and dollars 
is better spent on eliminating the triangulated swaybar alltogether.  Before 
you advocate any of these fixes, you *must* understand what the current 
system limitations are in terms of travel, arc's and Ackermann.  There is 
*NO* easy fix for this at all.  

>  I could send a diagram if my wording is to convoluted.

I know what you want to do, just recommending that you *not* do it.  You are 
masking the inherent engineering problem with a triangulated swaybar.  There 
isn't any fix for that bad engineering short of eliminating it.

Peter: get new rubber bushings per audi application, and forget about it.  
The real alternative is designing a new subframe and control arms.  That's a 
massive undertaking for a 1 off, btdt, and your liability trying to recoup 
your money won't be worth the effort.



More information about the 200q20v mailing list