AL Bushings

[Bizzy]

Mels:
...And if our Girlfriends, Wives or Children were driving at speed when the subframe drops? Would I be willing to risk gambling on their ability to wrestle the car safely off the road? No Sir.

Nor would I risk people's lives like that. Subframes aren't dropping out of cars while driving with the bushings I make and sell. Many want to make the case that is only a matter of time, I say ********. They've been scrutinized from every angle, picked apart, put back together, and it seems that the worst things anyone can prove it that the same way a stock OEM bushing can (not all the time) deform the unibody so can ring style AL SFBs.

I have had them on my car for about 25k now, and I have no deforming of the unibody. And I'll continue to have them on there and I'll continue to make and sell ring bushings, because nothing here has proven that they are unsafe, except in the installing or scrutinizing hands of certain individuals.

 

[revhardSHO]

Mels:
...And if our Girlfriends, Wives or Children were driving at speed when the subframe drops? Would I be willing to risk gambling on their ability to wrestle the car safely off the road? No Sir.

you need to relax. No subframes are dropping. Stop being paranoid.

 

[Slo-Sho]

Back when I still had the stock gen 2 SFB's on the car the right front one broke on me by simply placing the car into reverse! No car on this planet is designed to drive safely/correctly with this type of failure, life threatening or not.

 

[NotSoSlowSHO]

This thread seems to be going nowhere fast, but,
If anyone really cares... an update:

NotSoSlowSHO:
I have been following all of these SFB threads very closely, and agree that the ring style does present an issue of pulling the mount through the unibody if over torqued. This is related to the size of the gap, and the size of the mount (recall hardware).

That is the only issue I see even worth bothering with. So, instead of modifying, or swapping SFBs, I modified the mounts to better suit the SFBs.

I will provide pics later, whenever I have the time to pull the carpet and pad back to take some decent pics, but I drew up a crude diagram in PAINT to illustrate:

Recall hardware in purple.
Hardened washer in green.
SFBs in grey.

The washers are nearly the same diameter of the SFBs. I spot welded the recall hardware to the washers. Also, in order for the new 'mount' to fit properly (clearance issues), one side of the washer must be cut/ground flat.

Here is a pic of the said washer:

Simple preventative measure, for a supposed problem. That mount isnt going anywhere with the washer there.

Gee, how fun to quote myself squint

 

[Dr. Tweak]

This is a good idea if you are worried about this, but what about the front ones?

 

[Bizzy]

Kenny - That is kickass. Now your subframe and unibody is even more reinforced than if you had cup bushings.

I'm guessing that when you pulled it apart to put that plate in, there wasn't major ripping nuts thru the body deformation there?

I see the nut has a slight tweak to it, but then again every single recall nut I've ever removed from a body had a slight bow to it like that. I think it has something to do with the nut itself not having any support on an OEM bushing.

 

[NotSoSlowSHO]

There was zero de-formation. Shoot, even my original sub frame bushings were in excellent shape.
But I like knowing that I can torque those things down tight without any issues.

Honestly, I really dont care about the safety of the bushings in general. I was only looking to make MY CAR a bit safer if possible. This thread only provided the means for me to share.

The inclusion of those two washers seem to do the trick. I cannot think of a better way to secure the subframe to the chassis better. And if this makes the car safer, so be it.

 

[Bizzy]

JDLangevin:
This is a good idea if you are worried about this, but what about the front ones?

Per kirks original argument, the thickness of the SF in the front is much less than the rear, I think the gap he was quoting in the front was like .060 or .085, plus the fronts really don't see the same forces that the rear SFB mounts see by a long shot.

If there were a place for problems to occur they would be the rear ones, the front unibody is not in the path from the spray of the tires, the forces of driving (as much) and ring bushings sit closer to the body of the car.

 

[SHODWN]

Good idea on the washer.and the weld!!!

Bruce the nut is flat with no bow..

How many people are willing to add another washer to the inside? If the bushing was made with better tollerences you would not have to do this to secure it properly. The rear has a difference of .185 or 3/16th of an inch. You know that, why you make the gap smaller and smaller is beyond me.

Bruce seeing that you think the idea of adding the EXTRA washer to support the unibody from potential failure is such a good Idea ( I agree with you) would you be willing to provide them to everyone that has purchased bushings from you?

 

[Bizzy]

Nope. Cause there haven't been any failures. If someone wants to go into thier frame rail there and add a washer then thats thier business. As Kenny stated about his car, "There was zero de-formation. Shoot, even my original sub frame bushings were in excellent shape. But I like knowing that I can torque those things down tight without any issues." Just like my "all it's life in the northeast" 94 Opal Frost has no deformation to the unibody after 25k of AL SFB's. IIRC correctly Kenny was one of my first customers after the first round of group buys. I like the idea of a washer in there, but haven't seen the real need for something like that unless there was serious damage already there.

Yes I know the nut is flat, but on every single recall nut that I hav looked at after it has been installed in a car for any length of time (OEM bushings or not) they all come out with a slight bow to them. Not folded up, just a slight bow. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear when I posted it before.

Gap thickness....your post on SHO.com said that the subframe was more than twice as thick in the rear as the front, I seem to remember the gap supposedly being .185 in the rear. So .085-.095 is more accurate than I posted before I guess. JDLangevin was asking a specific question about the fronts and thats what I was answering on. Again sorry if I wasn't clear on what I was referring to.

BTW Kirk, thanks for the free advertizing in your signature. Always good to make unfounded claims about someone else's product. I haven't heard of any subframes falling out from my AL SFB's, not even heard of any comming close to falling out.

<small>[ March 21, 2004, 02:20 AM: Message edited by: netviper ]</small>