Assistance required with orientation of front lower arm bushes.

[WGB]

I am working to the final goal of replacing as many rubber bits as practical on my 6.9 and when the weather cools a little here I will be replacing the subframe yoke bushes and the lower front suspension arm bushes and ball joint.

Thanks to the usual excellent service from autohausaz.com(No stock on Subframe bushes so they were dealer supplied) here is a collection of bits for one side as an example.



My question concerns the orientation in a vertical plane of all the various cutouts so that the front end has the correct compliance while getting the best direct control.

Here is a list of the three components oriented in the manner I assume is correct.



The subframe yoke bush orientation is not given in any manual but I assume some vertical compliance is useful while lateral movement is not desired - hence it should be pressed into the yoke in the orientation displayed.

The rear and front lower arm bushes are displayed in the manual and appear to be pressed in in the orientation displayed in the picture.

The rear bearing allows some lateral compliance but is rigid vertically while the front bush has a small kidney shaped void which should be orientated beneath the arm.

Any comments gratefully accepted.

[Big_Richard]

interesting, Id of just assumed the old ones were correct and just installed the new ones in the same orientation. So far all of my bushings have been original 30 year old items made of decomposing crumbly rubber.

Be sure to post your findings. 

[koan]

The lower control arm bushes are covered in job 33-530 of the manual, cross yoke in 33-150 but doesn't say much about the bushes.  All in the library.

A special tool is used for orienting one of the control arm bushes - by eye is probably good enough.

koan

[WGB]

I have read 33-530 about 10 times and the orientation of the two lower arm bushes is given in that article.

33-150 is dealing with the older style two piece yoke bushes which have been superseded by the new single bush 116 333 56 15 but unfortunately the orientation of that  bush is not given.

I am guessing that rigidity is required laterally to stop the yoke moving from side to side but that some freedom in the vertical plane will reduce bump-thump.

I hope when I pull it apart all will be revealed but appreciate any comments.

Bill

[koan]

I see what you mean WGB.

Not sure but I think I installed the one piece yoke to frame bush.

Your thoughts on lateral rigidity (as opposed load bearing) sound right. I would have installed the bush in the same orientation as I found it but not sure what that was.

Does your 6.9 have the aluminium heat shields on both sides?

koan

[WGB]

Does your 6.9 have the aluminium heat shields on both sides?

koan

Not sure - haven't looked yet.

I did the upper arms and bushes last year as they were flapping about but decided to leave the lower arms for another day.

Bill

[s class]

Bill, my 280SE is a late car - mid 1980 - and it had (I believe original, from the factory), the subframe bushes as in your picture.  When I rebushed it, I installed the new ones as the old ones had come out.  Its some years ago, and I didn't take pictures, but I think the subframe bushes were rotated 90 degrees compared to your photo.  I remember going through the same thought process about lateral stability etc, and concluding that the installation was not as I expected.  However, I say again, my memory of this is fuzzy so I can't be 100% sure.  Perhaps RonB over at the M100 site will know. 

[WGB]

Thanks Ryan - I have left the same post on the M100 site so hopefully RonB or Art will have some knowledge.

Failing that I will have to wait and observe when I tear it apart.

Bill

[Big_Richard]

re those ball joints, are you going to press them in yourself or get the star shop to do it?

[WGB]

I am annoyed I didn't order this tool at the time when I imported some others from the same guy.

Ball Joint Press Tool

He replied in an e-mail that it wouldn't work on a 116 but I'm sure it will.

The "correct" tool is of course this one

ZD Mak

I will start up with my goodwill at Diesels and see if they will either lend me the tool or do it for me and then I will go to the Star Shop and get them to do it for me if I fail at Diesels.

It's the same joint in a 126 so it shouldn't be too hard to get the job done.

It also doesn't look that hard a tool to fabricate (The ZD Mak one)

Bill

[John Hubertz]

To complete this manic-cycle's trifecta of bizarre posts I'll recommend that you be fair - and use a random mix of both straight AND gay bushings.

After all, orientation doesn't really affect performance at most tasks, unless of course you were talking about an electrical connector or trailer hitch.  I must admit that my childhood prejudices show themselves in those circumstances, as I always will only utilize  straight orientation and prefer solid male/female couplings as the other combinations seem chancy at best.

[WGB]

But hey John - that is the problem we are trying to work out what is straight and what is gay here and it will make a difference whether the car vibrates vertically or horizontally.

On a more personal note - what lubricant do you use.

I've heard K-Y jelly is great to use on rubber bushings and as I have a whole surgery full of it I would appreciate an opinion.

Bill

[Big_Richard]

hey bill, do us w116 org members qualify for free prostate examinations ? 

[s class]

Bring your own gloves

[WGB]

By the looks of S classes avatar he's fresh from a walk in the south.

Bill