Top mount - tip

[DJones]

My Ur has felt like it steers from the rear under acceleration for ages, its such a horrible unsettling feeling.. I have check and swapped everything and nothing resolved it apart from turning the boost down..

Anyway i recently removed the rear top mounts and given the rear axle does not steer (or shouldn't) i welded up (four spots) the bearing in the top mount and hey presto... no more rear steer.. it feels so much more planted.

Anyway I'm sure its been done before but thought i would post my findings...

Darren.

PS don't do it on the front..!

[macspring]

Any photos for the thicks ?

Thanks.

[martinws]

Good job. I was thinking why the rears need the bearings as well a few weeks ago. It would be good if when bambridge makes his top mounts he makes a set or rears with no bearing.

[DJones]

Any photos for the thicks ?

Thanks.

Didn't take pics... but its basically spot welds on the edge of the disc in the picture on the left...

Hope it helps...

[Ian Simmonds]

Isn't there still some mechanical 'twist' in the leg during hard cornering? I can't imagine Audi fitting roller bearings for no reason?
Just a thought.

[Rusty]

Roller bearings are for the front axle, as the while strut rotates with the steering. Interestingly, the new FWD hot hatch suspension systems that Ford, Vauxhall and Renault (amongst others) have invented, removes this strut movement to improve steering and reduce torque steer...

[DJones]

Isn't there still some mechanical 'twist' in the leg during hard cornering? I can't imagine Audi fitting roller bearings for no reason?
Just a thought.

Lol... don't care it handles so much better. Even if it did there is enough places in the leg that would accommodate some twist, the shock absorber ram would spin in the shock body and the coil spring would wind up for one but it would be so minimal.

I think your right with regards to Audi fitting an unnecessary part now but not in the 80's..! As an example you wouldn't find such a robust waste gate on a modern Audi to name but one...

[Ian Simmonds]

It does make sense, as the original design was merely a front end turned through 180 degrees, complete with tied off steering arms. Out of interest, any idea what mounts front wheel drive cars have at the rear? Solid or bearing?

[Rusty]

Not may FWD cars, if any will have MacPherson strut, so it's not really relevant. Most FWD cars have trailing beam, trailing arm, or multi link rear suspension, that work in different ways.

TBH Darren, I think you're just putting too much power through a chassis that was designed in the 70s and tyres that aren't designed for even half that power. Stick on some R888s and run it on a dry road and then see if it still does it

[DJones]

TBH Darren, I think you're just putting too much power through a chassis that was designed in the 70s and tyres that aren't designed for even half that power. Stick on some R888s and run it on a dry road and then see if it still does it

I think your right, its the torque it develops, it just feels so strong, puts the 996tt to shame and that's running 550+bhp, with the associated increase in torque..

The triple 8's are in the shed and will be on shortly... there goes another gearbox...

[Rusty]

The Clio 172 struggles with 205/45R16 in the current conditions, so I think it's a given that something with 3+ times the power may struggle too

[DJones]

The Clio 172 struggles with 205/45R16 in the current conditions, so I think it's a given that something with 3+ times the power may struggle too

Ahh.... lol.. but there's the difference I'm on 215's, not forgetting four wheel drive of course.. i bet it still wheel spins like Clio....

[Rusty]

IIRC, they're Dunlop P600s though, so were OE fit on the Ark

[DJones]

IIRC, they're Dunlop P600s though, so were OE fit on the Ark

Oh no.. no.. Good Year Eagles.... my friend...

[Rusty]