Poly bush on Avant upper wishbone - Stuck :(

[mcandmar]

Did you source the correct bolts? I've been running them on mine so the bushings are fine.

[Ross]

Did you source the correct bolts? I've been running them on mine so the bushings are fine.

No I bought longer ones to cut to length. NLA on the shorter bolts.

Do you recall them being an exceedingly tight fit? The bushes have a 45 deg angle on the inside, which matches the outside shape of the wishbone, but not the inside where they should be seated.

Do you modify them at all? Do the bolts fit inside the wishbone due to a shorter bush on yours too?

If I can get absolute confidence I could fit them, but until your post I haven't had anyone who has actually fitted power flex bushes without modifying them and only seen concern about the design - which I already have...

[Lago Blue]

Very cheap and easy poly bushes

Attached photo was my mock-up to trial the idea.

a) 1st link gives you the Brand & P/N (Big Mouse's original article uses them on the front suspension w/ stamped A-arms):

https://www.audiworld.com/forums/audi-90-80-coupe-quattro-cabriolet-22/after-long-last-poor-mans-polyurethane-control-arm-bushings-writeup-2124619/

b) 2nd link details my use of the above idea and items on B4 rear upper inner, on both stamped & forged arms:

https://www.audiworld.com/forums/audi-90-80-coupe-quattro-cabriolet-22/poor-mans-b4-rear-upper-arm-inner-poly-bushings-2129366/

c) 3rd link is an update to the above:

https://www.audiworld.com/forums/audi-90-80-coupe-quattro-cabriolet-22/poor-mans-b4-rear-upper-arm-inner-poly-bushings-2129366/

d) As these bushings where for a popular American truck, I imagine they would still be available.

e) Perhaps most important last point is that because the above collectively shows how a bushing which fits the small stamped front A-arms can be easily re-purposed for the B4 Rr upper inners. That will widen your field of possible candidates.

Hope this may help,
LB

[mcandmar]

No I bought longer ones to cut to length. NLA on the shorter bolts.

Do you recall them being an exceedingly tight fit? The bushes have a 45 deg angle on the inside, which matches the outside shape of the wishbone, but not the inside where they should be seated.

Do you modify them at all? Do the bolts fit inside the wishbone due to a shorter bush on yours too?

If I can get absolute confidence I could fit them, but until your post I haven't had anyone who has actually fitted power flex bushes without modifying them and only seen concern about the design - which I already have...

I honestly cant remember the finer details, but i didn't have to modify anything. As with all the poly bushings initial fitment will require a little bit of persuasion with a hammer, but as long as they are properly lubed up they will work just fine.

A modified bolt should also be fine, as long as you have enough threads to tighten up against the metal inner sleeves of the bushings.

[PaulJ]

Hi Ross

I have the whole powerflex kit on the back of mine, Top wishbones on mine were pressed and all slotted together with no issues at the time ... now 5 years on and everything has tightened up somewhat, so much so its almost impossible to move wishbones by hand, so in the process of rebuilding everything, cleaning, regreasing etc etc, luckily plenty of graphite grease used so bolts come out easily
Thing that made the biggest difference for me was going solid on the subframe mounts, so much so I went back to oe on the front and considering the same on the rear
Hope the roads down your way are better than the crap Scottish roads, you spend half your time dodging potholes up here !
Nice to see progress ;-)
Paul

[mcandmar]

While i had my head under the rear arch i snapped a couple of pics of the upper a-arms, its hard to see anything with all the gunk stuck to them but the bushing seems to end at the outer edge of the arms on mine.

[Ross]

Thanks Mark,

That answers it for me - something not right. I've got some pics today showing the two different kits fitted. I fitted the 209 kit (for pressed) to the cast wishbone for the other side today and it all fitted up perfectly.. took a bit of persuasion but nothing a bit of grease and rubber mallet couldn't solve.

I don't understand why there is a need for a different kit, it all fits perfectly and the bolt doesn't need cutting down now either! Perhaps they did it simply to fit the shorter bolt?! I did borrow the slightly thicker washers from the 212 cast kit for the outsides as cover the full face, and I suspect would be a slight upgrade

So after all this I plan to use the pressed bushes on the forged arms, with the longer bolts, and if all goes well she will sit on the ground for the first time in 3 years this weekend

Pics to come...

[Ross]

See attached:

The inside of the cast wishbone has a square edge, yet the outside has a chamfered edge.

What's odd is that the 212 bush for the cast wishbone is shaped to fit into the chamfered edge - yet it goes on the inside which is square! No wonder it was such a forced fit. I tapped it onto the outside just for fun, and it fits nice and snug.

As you can see in the pic, the 209 is also a 'square cut'.

As the 212 is longer than each half of the 209 bush I'd have had to get it cut down to use. Probably the best plan, making a hybrid of the 2, but I figure the square bush on the chamfered edge will not cause problems on the outside, and I've used the wider washer from the 212 kit to ensure pressure across the bush as seen in my post below.

[Ross]

Comparing the Powerflex 209 "pressed" upper wishbone kit to the 212 "cast" kit. Both fitted to a cast wishbone. Note, the washers on the 212 kit are wider and thicker; I used them on the outside of the bushes but the thinner ones as supplied with the 209 kit, because the poly lip is slightly thicker than the 212.

The combined thickness of bush + washer is the same for each.

[mcandmar]

Your upper arms are not like any i have seen on an S2. Are they from a B5?

[Ross]

How did I miss that yours are quite different!

Answer is that I can never be sure, I bought them with a pair of rear lower wishbones from someone here on the forum as a set of Avant rears, after I bent the pressed arms removing the bushes.

I had assumed they were the correct part but perhaps that is the issue! Or there's 2 variants of forged just to make things complex. I will check the part numer. It all seems to measure up to the pressed arm with old bushes so hopefully all is good.

[Lago Blue]

Bushed by re-bushing?

Ross,

Your install looks right and proper now. No doubt it will wear slower and remain more sealed-up compared to your previous trial fit.

Mark,

Yes, there are two versions of forged upper arms, the forged & "lightened " like your's and mine are the least common. Same P/N as far as I know. My garden-variety B4 sedan had them, there may not be a reason why a particular car has them or not.

Ross,

I think the reason for the two kits may be that unfortunately, they (PF) are not quite understanding the requirements here, and are trying to mimic the Audi O/E format I have seen on some of the A4 cars using your type arms where the stock rubber bushes are inserted from the outboard ends towards the center, has an overly long metal core; and the rubber does not fill the arms. IIRC, it is also these installs, where the longer bolts come from. Are the PF supplied metal cores in both kits the same length?

With what you've done (the "209" solution?), there is no real requirement for the outboard bush flanges to even be present, the brake/accel. loads are taken by the more fully engaged square inner interfaces, see my "Energy Suspension" mock-up shown previously which does only that. Perhaps most beneficial over the "212" version in my view, is that your outboard bushing ends are better shielded from debris entering now. In the above mentioned A4 stock short-rubber long-core bush config, of course no sealing of the bush to core interface issue exists.

Do you think there is a gap between each pair of installed bushes where water might become entrapped, or does each pair kiss together? Any gap could be grease filled for some protection, if required. The single sided install of the very long "Energy Suspension" bushes avoids this altogether.

Pressed bushes, forged solution. I think your write-up may help a lot of folks.

[Ross]

Lago - thanks for you feedback and comments (and Mark as always ). It makes sense that the outer bush is not really such a requirement and explains why the '212' kit has a longer single-sided bush.

The 209s do indeed 'kiss' in the middle on the forged arm I have - I thought the bushes were different on Mark's version as bolt doesn't seem to sit so far inboard, but more likely the bush is actually slightly narrower instead. If you can get a measurement Mark we could compare that for future reference, as the 209s then wouldn't fit without cutting them shorter.

I think we can conclude that the 212s would fit either - just looks a bit odd and is very tight on my heavyweight forged arms. Although the now-NLA short bolts would be needed (or cut down on the longer bolts which are still available.

Jury is out on whether the 209s fit both, but they definitely fit my type, with the longer bolt.

The benefit of the 209s for me is that (1) I could fit it with my new 'long bolts' without cutting them down, and (2) I think it's better to have more bush coverage and protect the inside with the outer flange (this does not apply to women).

Feeling very motivated now, offside just waiting a new eccentric bolt for the hub then I'll torque it up and fit the shock to strut bolt, and then back to the stuck tie rod on the other side, only thing holding me back now.