[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