Front Tyre Wear

[Spoony]

Fulcrum are just up the road from home so will talk to them!

At mate just recommended Ken at Accurate Suspension (Underwood), which is close to work also. Apparently they've sent a number of coons to him from their workshop to sort sh*t.

I don't have ambitions to track it (way more fun on a bike). Nor any want to lower it, standard is a PITA even for some of the place I go.

I figure at 120,000kms the shocks have done their day, but ATM don't really have coin to overhall the whole lot. Maybe bushes now to save tyres and shocks early next year.

Can one run the standard springs with say some bilstiens? I want to keep the ride quite good as do a bit of towing (bikes/skis) and quite a bit of distance at times.

[Guest XR09]

To me it sounds like the Koni's would be your go. And yep on std springs. But save for some newbies or keep an eye on ebay. The oem's are not great. Lots just dump their std springs. Good question to ask the workshop you are getting the work done at. If any good ones around or coming up.

[Adam]

I got 45,000km out of my stock tyres. The inside edge of all 4 was worn away when they were replaced.

What's the road noise increase like after fitting the aftermarket bushes?

[Guest XR09]

It's more expansion joints, pot holes and sharp ridges where you will notice it bangs more with them. Than say going down a course chip motorway and hearing more tire roar.

They do stop inner wear. They give a bit more feel through the wheel as to what the road is doing. Don't know if it was them, but I have 35,000k's on my Brembo's and never had the slightest shudder either.

[Smoke them tyres]

There is heaps in the sticky's and in this section about what I and others think of the std bushes and what you need to replace. A wheel alignment is a STATIC ONLY SETTING. As Pat has said, the std doughnuts are hopeless with anything above moderate loads, or with age.

The front control arm bushes should all be replaced with poly. That will solve your wear issues....easy. Static chassis settings will then mean something under load. More neg camber will help also. No design flaws, just sloppy bushes to make it quiet and have people believe that dead quiet is a quality thing for cars. The trade off is effective suspension control and alignment UNDER LOAD.

The rear also has no design flaw. Remove the rear sway bar and fit poly bushes to the control blades. That is all for moderate use that needs to be done for the rear.

At least Ford only fit these rubber bushes to the arms and solidly mount the rear cradle to the chassis. Expensive Daewoo fit them to both the arms and the cradle to chassis mount. They crack easily and then the car steers from the rear with them moving around. Now that is a concern, but they can be fixed with poly also. All manufacturers are at it with rubber mounts to control road noise/NVH.

Edited 17/11/10 06:45 AM by Smoke them tyres

[Spoony]

cheers for all the advise!!

interesting removing the rear sway bar is positive move. I'm guessing this would make the car less understeer prone? Is body roll increased much?

[Smoke them tyres]

Correct....the car will understeer less because there is less weight transfer to the front when cornering. With the engine in the front, they have enough weight highly positioned there already.

Lack of front camber and the fitment of a rear bar are the way that Ford has dialed understeer into these cars. Front springs that are probably 15-20% softer than they should be is also a contributing factor, although not as much. The rear spring rates are spot on IMO.

The car will squat a bit more in the rear when cornering, but only a bit. Body roll is not adversely affected. The fact that the rear bar can be removed and body roll is still well within limits says something about the the positioning of weight impacting on the rear of these cars. Most of it is in the cradle, which is at a low C of G anyway. Low C of G = low roll couple.

Cornering speeds, control at the limit and tyre life will all benefit.

Edited 17/11/10 12:30 PM by Smoke them tyres

[Spoony]

does removing it present any legal/roadworthy issues I wonder?

[dule]

You sure no rear bar reduces under-steer??? I had mine off for a week or so once and it kept pushing forward in slow corners...

[Spoony]

I know from FWD cars a stiffer rear bar helps move them to a more netural/overstear balance but may not apply to rwd cars.

I would think no rear bar would give more rear end traction/movement but at the expense of the front end, ie the rear end would 'push' on the front?