Lenkverhalten Audi 80 B4 | Posts 16+

Hello.

How about the hinge joints? Are they installed correctly?
I personally drove a B4 TDI until almost 390,000 km, and we had another B4 in the family that experienced similar problems with the axle. After an almost exhaustive search, we discovered that a "workshop" had swapped the tie rod ends from left to right when they were replaced by the previous owner.
Since the two ball joints are asymmetrical to achieve a certain amount of offset, they must be installed correctly. The curve must face forward.

To adjust the angle between the suspension arm and the shock absorber, using the two large screws for clamping, I always placed an aluminum measuring ruler against the damper tube.
Then, measure the radius of the damper tube at the bottom and align it with the center of the ball joint cone, or adjust it by repositioning the strut and the suspension arm. (The strut and suspension arm must be removed). This ensures that the center of the strut aligns with the center of the ball joint cone, which is important to prevent misalignment.
Tightened and the entire shock absorber assembly is installed.
Rough alignment of the camber using the adjustment holes, aligning with a spirit level on the rim. The vehicle should be level. I always adjusted it so that the bubble level was exactly aligned with the outer edge -> camber slightly negative.

During wheel alignment using a laser device at a Bosch service center, the camber was usually within the tolerance range, or only slightly outside of it.
The track still needed to be adjusted.

I have applied this procedure a total of 4 times on the B4, always with a consistently "good" result, considering the measurement method .

Perhaps this will be helpful...

Regards, Mpire.

Hi,
I have compiled the data from previous surveys and attached it for your reference.
The problem started around 50,000 km after switching to Michelin tires, and I initially dismissed it for a long time because of the asymmetrical tread pattern.
From the beginning, a noticeable amount of toe-out was present on the right side, which has now been compensated for by adjusting the steering knuckle (play). Adjustments to the camber on the right side, as described elsewhere in the forum, did not have any effect.
The low spread value on the right side, observed in the last measurement, has only just come to my attention. In my opinion, it's not explainable in the same way as the low values in the most recent measurement, because the missing 10 degrees between the dome support and the ground would correspond to several 10 centimeters.
The control arms and steering knuckles should be installed in the correct orientation. They should match the diagrams and can also be distinguished by their part number. The wheels should be centered within the wheel wells.
Repairs: 2004, before inspection: rubber bushings for the control arms and the engine mount; 2006: shock absorbers, wheel bearings; 2011: complete engine mount (rusted).
I hadn't loosened the screws on the shock absorber/wheel bearing housing before, but that's a good tip.
hg
Herbert.

Quote:

The problem started around 50,000 km after switching to Michelin tires, and I initially attributed it to the asymmetrical tread pattern for a long time.

At what approximate mileage was this reading taken, so that it can potentially be correlated with previous measurements?

It is noticeable that in 3 measurements, a 10° spread is missing, which is not realistically possible.
In the surveys conducted in May 2002 and December 2004, the total angle was measured as being 1.5-2° too high.

- Either the RE component is faulty, or hopefully, the entire front axle is just misaligned.

The Li values from the old measurements almost match the values I posted. Therefore, if something is really wrong, I think it's likely due to the RE (likely referring to a specific component or process).

You can almost completely disregard the final measurement. Look at the deflection values before and after --> they are almost the same, while the spread has changed by more than 1° --> this is theoretically and practically impossible if the strut bolts were not loosened before adjusting the coil springs.

The biggest problem is finding someone who knows what they're doing when it comes to surveying.
Unfortunately, many people are not sufficiently qualified and don't know the correct procedure. For example, you might only replace the shock absorbers. If a hole (for the alignment bolts) is not drilled 100%, the tire technician will misalign the entire geometry (as stated in the manual, that the camber is adjusted at the ball joint ), instead of fixing the actual problem. Then, not only is the track width incorrect, but also the overall angle and the steering radius are off.

You'll probably have to start from scratch.

- Visual inspection of all components.
- Compare the suspension struts, for example, as Mpire suggests. This way, you would theoretically have the same overall angle for the left and right sides.
(For a simple check, you can also use a ruler.)
- If the parts are free of defects, measure the vehicle.
- The 20° routine should be repeated after adjusting toe-in/toe-out. Most measuring devices automatically calculate this, but...
However, it is often (as one can see) untrue. Don't forget the parking brake.
Important: It must be ensured that the total angle (included angle) LI + RE is correct, if necessary by adjusting the set screws.
...on the shock absorber. This way, you'll also achieve the same tilt and spread values. As a reference, I would suggest using...
Use the posted values. The overrun (delay) may need to be set slightly larger to counteract the effect of the road declining after the initial section.

With the delay function, you can experiment with different settings before the measurement to check the effects.

Hi there.
The switch to the other tire brand, which subsequently caused the misalignment, occurred before the second alignment.
I'm posting the measurement data again here. In the table with the very first measurement, the spread value on the right side was completely incorrect. In the table with the last measurement, the spread value after the decimal point is wrong (a transcription error). I apologize for the inconvenience, but I assume this doesn't change anything about your conclusions.
hg
Herbert.

Quote:

I'm sorry for the circumstances, but I assume that doesn't change your statements.

That's right. The trend is the same, but the first measurement really doesn't fit either --> see overall track width of the front axle.

Herbert wrote:

Hi, 2011 combined carrier, complete (deteriorated). hg Herbert

Was ist der Text?
If it's not right, the entire alignment of the front axle no longer matches the rest of the car/rear axle, etc... therefore, every wheel alignment becomes a difficult and complex process or a compromise .

The brush assembly is attached to the frame with four screws, each inserted into adjustable threaded bushings, allowing it to be moved in all four directions. The brushes cannot rotate because they are fixed to a large plate (approximately 5x5cm) within the frame. When the screws are tightened from below, they automatically clamp the assembly within the "frame tube" (Quattro models up to B4 have this on the rear axle as well).
Often, with older vehicles, it's no longer noticeable that the bushings are meant to be movable, as they tend to become corroded and stuck.
After removing the engine mount, treat the four points on the underside with rust remover. Screw in one of the old mounting bolts and tap it from below, then from the front, back, left, and right, etc. If it starts to move, the engine mount that wasn't properly secured can be aligned with the body. There are adjustment points on the underside, at the strut mount, and on the frame from which you can check the specified dimensions and position.
"Any reputable auto body shop should know this information, as it's often necessary to reset these parameters after a frame damage (accident)."

Best regards, Mpire.

Quote:

Was the aggregate carrier aligned with the body after the change? If it's not right, the entire alignment of the front axle no longer matches the rest of the car/rear axle, etc... therefore, every wheel alignment becomes a difficult and complex process, or a compromise.

The tolerances are too large, both within the frame and on the mounting plate. This can easily result in a difference of 5mm. That's why we use elongated holes or adjustable threaded plates.
Unfortunately, this only provides a rough estimate, or it's a matter of luck.
For a precise alignment, you need a skilled technician, and it can only be done with the vehicle on a lift.

When , it usually takes more than 1 standard deviation. It's not really possible to do it in 15-20 minutes. Fortunately, this axis can be adjusted in all directions, provided you have someone who knows how and can recognize when and how to adjust things.

Okay, here's the translation:

"Guys, I didn't find any adjustable threaded plates there, just threads. The engine mount only had some play within the tolerances of the bearing bush holes, hardly any play for shifting, but the tolerance of the holes allowed for rotation."
"Accordingly, the RLF mentions drilling out broken screws and inserting threaded inserts."
VagCat shows pre-welded nuts on the front, while the rear only has plates (presumably replacement parts for accident repairs?).
I installed it myself. Afterwards, the camber was checked with a laser alignment tool, and the toe was adjusted using a straight edge across the strut mount and a plumb bob. The camber was immediately within the tolerance range, but I adjusted it together with the toe to bring the toe within the tolerance range on the right side.
This also aligns with the values obtained from the most recent survey.
hg
Herbert.

Hi,
Let me pick up the topic again after the vacation break.
Here's what I've researched about wheel alignment:
- The toe and camber can only be accurately determined using an alignment machine if the wheels are locked with the brakes. Otherwise, the wheels will roll slightly when the steering is turned, which generates an additional signal on the sensors. I understand the measurement method to mean that the inclination of the rotating axis – i.e., the line through the strut and the suspension joint – is measured using the sensors, based on the rotational movement of the locked wheel caused by the steering angle. Any additional rolling of the wheel will produce a signal that is opposite to the intended measurement.
The wheels were definitely not locked during the measurement.
- To determine the caster angle, the rear wheels must also be on stands, which is often omitted when the rear axle is not adjustable. This also means that the caster angle readings will be inaccurate, as the rear of the vehicle sits lower by a few millimeters.
- The rim run-out compensation is also performed when using an axle measuring system by rotating the raised wheel.
So, the measurements regarding spread and lag were essentially meaningless.
I still need to arrange that with the workshop.
Meanwhile, I continued my search at the VA, using the limited resources available to me.
Measured from the top of the shock absorber mounting points, the right front of the car is approximately 6mm lower than the left. This result is reproducible; I have repeatedly checked the car and the ground using a straight edge and a spirit level.
A difference in the track width on the left and right sides is unlikely to be the cause, as that would mean the right wheel would have to be about 20mm further out than the left.
Could it be that the feathers are arranged differently?
Depending on the weight distribution, one wheel at the front or rear would be less stressed.
hg
Herbert.

Hello Herbert,

Quote:

To determine the toe-in, the rear wheels must also be on plates; this is often omitted when the rear axle is not adjustable.

This also means that the toe-in values will not be accurate, as the rear of the vehicle sits lower by a few millimeters.
Let's say that the vehicle has to be positioned horizontally.

You can ignore the height differences between the individual wheels, which are "only" 6mm. It's negligible.