From searching the backroom I find that "wheel alignment" and "tracking" are the same thing?
From what I have read and enquired you can pay between £20 and £65 for an "4 wheel alignment check with basic adjustment"
Do you tend to get what you pay for? The diferrence in costs seems to be very high.
How often should tracking be done? When tyres are replaced, or yearly (as ATS suggests) or only when a problem is identified?
|
I had two front tyres replaced after a cyclist and bike decided to wrestle with the front of my car. The garage did adjust the tracking without my permission/knowledge and charged £20. Now I am told that if the tracking is off a) the car will tend to pull to one side on a flat straight road, and b) the edges of the tyres will wear in preference to the centre. Apparently the tyres will not last as long if the tracking is off.
In my case I was ripped off. Fnarrrr.
|
|
|
"From searching the backroom I find that "wheel alignment" and "tracking" are the same thing?"
SimonJ,
not so take a look at this link and you will find the answers you want including links further on to deeper and more info.
Esp see the posts by John S and Dizzy. In case you hadn't noticed they're all on the Ford Ka siezed sparkplugs thread busily modelling anoraks to each other. hope this helps.
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/?f=4&t=5878
|
Despite asking the the previous thread, I am still confused.
If I go to ATS (for instance) and pay them £25 for "tracking" they apparantly put the car on a "supertracker" - www.supertracker.com/product1.html which according to the website can cope with all "cars such as Mercedes can easily be adjusted with Multi Link suspension" and "Means accident damaged VW's or Audi can be aligned"
How does this compare to "4 Wheel Alignment" or "Suspension Geometry" as described at www.chemix-autocentres.co.uk/technical.htm
Why do some places charge £60 when others charge £20? Is it the same thing??
|
If your tyres wear unevenly due to incorrect wheel alignment and the wheel alignment is subsequently corrected, the car will still pull to one side and/or have a crooked steering wheel until the tyres are replaced.
This can be proved by rotating front and rear tyres and doing a test drive.
I would refuse to have the alignment done unless a printout is given of the angles before and after. You can then compare and contrast to any subsequent alignment work.
I think much of my disappointment in the past has been because I cant check what work they have done. When the car comes back still pulling or with crooked steeering wheel it is also disappointing. However as mentioned above this may be just the tyres.
Perhaps it it worth only having alignment done at the same time as replacing 4 tyres?
|
|
|
|
I think I've had my share of postings under the Ka Spark Plugs heading. So I'll start again here!!
John S said, in the previous thread on this subject: "In most cases, though, only the tracking needs adjustment, ...".
I agree, especially since castor and camber are often preset and cannot be changed by simple check-and-adjust. Sometimes it could be desirable to check the alignment of all four wheels but, again, no easy way to adjust on most vehicles, so what's the point?
So we are left with tracking check-and-adjust as probably the only feasible check-and-set operation outside of a major suspension/steering rebuild. Going back to basics ...
A front wheel tracking check is a measure of the distance between the two wheels taken at two points (forwardmost and rearmost points on the rims with the car on flat ground, wheels facing forwards) and a simple calculation from this to show the existing toe-in or toe-out. Tracking adjustment may then follow, this being an alteration of the length of the tie-rods (for instance) to bring the toe-in or toe-out within the maker's specification, the adjustment being carried out in equal increments on each side so as to maintain steering wheel centralisation and correct Ackermann set-up.
To get to the point(!): Why do we need to spend £20 or more, even £100+ in some cases, for an electronic tracking check-and-adjust that could be carried out perfectly with the simple Dunlop gauge (the one with the mirror and the rotary scale) that used to be commonplace ... or even with a length of wood. Are we being conned, or is there a real advantage in complicated and expensive electronic checking over a simple mechanical check?
Your thoughts, please.
|
On most modern cars you can adjust the rear toe as well, which affects the front.
Some claim that they adjust the front to allow for the rear even if the rear is non adjustable
|
Keith,
Thanks for the note about being able to adjust the rear wheels on most modern cars. I have to admit to being unaware of that. On the other hand, my old Triumph 2500 rears are adjustable with shims - though this is not a job for the local fast-fit guys.
No doubt mechanical checking is just as viable on the rear wheels as the front so I'm still open to any (polite) suggestions as to the advantages of all-singing, all-dancing, electronic checks.
|
Mechanical checking on the rears would be very difficult as it is necessary to set the rear about the centreline of the car. A thrust would otherwise be present, effectively steering the car from the rear.
This can easily be achieved with a sensor on each wheel mounted about the centre of each wheel.
PS Ever seen a Mini with the rear subframe bushes shot 'crabbing' down the road!
|
|
|
|
Don't know the answer Dizzy but I think that normally the car would come out of the factory with the tracking spot on and the steering wheel perfectly aligned by design.
If at a later date front wheel alignment was carried out and the car was returned with the steering wheel misaligned this could only mean one of two things.
One is that they have made an adjustment on one track rod only.
Or secondly some steering component has worn or been damaged.
Would you agree?.
alvin
|
The prize winning LPG powered MkII Golf of mine sits on OE+2 rims (i.e 17") and has height adjustable suspension down to minus 120mm. I have had to have my tracking *and* wheel alignment done as they are different elements.
A car that has had no other change other than a few potholes/kerbs etc will only need the tracking checked as the actual camber/toe should be unchanged (I'm repeating what's already been said - I know!)
This work has set me back £80 whereas tracking would be less than £20 and could be done with simple equipment.
I can't think of any routine reason for doing wheel alignment. Usually this is only done in cases of non-original wheel/tyre size or ride height.
Rear wheel alignment is only done on 4WD is it not????
My old Mini 850 was a demon at the old sideways sweep!!
[it was also good at locking up the nearside rear due to a seized calliper but the less said about that the better!]
If only everything in life was as reliable as a Volkswagen.
communities.msn.com/honestjohn
|
Im intertested, how have to managed to correct the negative rear camber with such a low ride height (or do you not run the car lower than about minus 45mm)?
Ben
|
I don't run it -120.
Normal ride height is -80.
Negative rear camber is just one of those things I'm having to put up with. It's nowhere near as bad as the rear camber on a lowered beetle anyway!
If only everything in life was as reliable as a Volkswagen.
communities.msn.com/honestjohn
|
|
|
|
|
|
![2021 Nissan Qashqai 1.3 DiG-T 160 [157] Acenta Premium 5dr DCT](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/assets.heycar.co.uk/t_default-export/f_auto/application_assets/vehicles/pictures/da990225dbcac5ecfadc85d8ad4e2654/690936625217cd1efba5c9cdd4bc42f1.jpg)
