Setting Toe

Elle wrote:
>
> "Eric" > wrote
> > Elle wrote:
> >>
> >> Without serious modifications, my 91 Civic (among other
> >> Honda models) permits only one alignment angle to be
> >> adjusted: Toe.
> >>
> >> Has anyone here set the toe themselves? If so, what tools
> >> did you use or devise? Was your effort successful as
> >> indicated by tire wear and steering feel?
> >>
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > If you've had the rear trailing arms replaced, then you
> > need to have the
> > rear toe adjusted.
>
> I personally replaced the trailing arm bushings on Monday.
>

I'm just a little bit curious. Exactly which bushings are you referring to,
the ones labeled as part #12 in this diagram http://tinyurl.com/fwt4y or the
large one in the middle of the rear trailing arm through which bolt #26 goes
to help mount the trailing arm to the car?

Eric

"Eric" > wrote
> Elle wrote:
>> I personally replaced the trailing arm bushings on
>> Monday.
>>
>
> I'm just a little bit curious. Exactly which bushings are
> you referring to,
> the ones labeled as part #12 in this diagram
> http://tinyurl.com/fwt4y or the
> large one in the middle of the rear trailing arm through
> which bolt #26 goes
> to help mount the trailing arm to the car?

I replaced both, but the one to which I refer above is the
larger one (with bolts #26 going through it), Honda part
#52385-SR3000 , only available in the last several years or
so. Schley produced a special (and super fast and super
effective) tool for removing it only in the last couple of
years. I have a fuller discussion at the bottom of
http://home.earthlink.net/~honda.lio...tml#tabushings ,
with some links to excellent sites with photos of the
process.

The bigger TA bushing is replaced with the TA in place, for
the most part. That is, no brake lines need be disconnected
and plugged nor bled.

"Elle" > wrote in
ink.net:


>
> The bigger TA bushing is replaced with the TA in place, for
> the most part. That is, no brake lines need be disconnected
> and plugged nor bled.
>
>


The brake lines and hydraulics don't need to be disconnected when you
remove the trailing arm. Everything including the parking brake either
unbolts or unhooks.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"TeGGeR®" > wrote
> "Elle" > wrote
>> The bigger TA bushing is replaced with the TA in place,
>> for
>> the most part. That is, no brake lines need be
>> disconnected
>> and plugged nor bled.
>>
>>
>
>
> The brake lines and hydraulics don't need to be
> disconnected when you
> remove the trailing arm. Everything including the parking
> brake either
> unbolts or unhooks.

I meant those who intend to take the trailing arm to a shop
or put it into a vise to press out the big bushing (and then
install a new one) would have to disconnect the brake lines.

With the (relatively new) Schley tool, only five bolts need
be removed.

"Elle" > wrote in
ink.net:

> "TeGGeR®" > wrote
>> "Elle" > wrote
>>> The bigger TA bushing is replaced with the TA in place,
>>> for
>>> the most part. That is, no brake lines need be
>>> disconnected
>>> and plugged nor bled.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> The brake lines and hydraulics don't need to be
>> disconnected when you
>> remove the trailing arm. Everything including the parking
>> brake either
>> unbolts or unhooks.
>
> I meant those who intend to take the trailing arm to a shop
> or put it into a vise to press out the big bushing (and then
> install a new one) would have to disconnect the brake lines.



It just occurred to me: You're partially right. Opening the hydraulics
*would* be necessary on a drum-brake car if you were to remove the trailing
arm from the car entirely. If you had rear *disc* brakes, you do *not* need
to open the hydraulics.

Finally I find ONE advantage to having rear disc brakes! LOL



>
> With the (relatively new) Schley tool, only five bolts need
> be removed.
>


Sounds like a boon for drum-brake equipped cars.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"TeGGeR®" > wrote in message
...
> Finally I find ONE advantage to having rear disc brakes! LOL
>

I'm a lurker in a.a.h., and I have noticed that you seem very knowledgable.
So, your comment about rear disc breake intrigues me. I thought rear discs
were desirable? If not, why not?

Thanks,

-- R Flowers

"TeGGeR®" > wrote
> "Elle" > wrote
>> "TeGGeR®" > wrote
>>> "Elle" > wrote
>>>> The bigger TA bushing is replaced with the TA in place,
>>>> for
>>>> the most part. That is, no brake lines need be
>>>> disconnected
>>>> and plugged nor bled.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The brake lines and hydraulics don't need to be
>>> disconnected when you
>>> remove the trailing arm. Everything including the
>>> parking
>>> brake either
>>> unbolts or unhooks.
>>
>> I meant those who intend to take the trailing arm to a
>> shop
>> or put it into a vise to press out the big bushing (and
>> then
>> install a new one) would have to disconnect the brake
>> lines.
>
>
>
> It just occurred to me: You're partially right. Opening
> the hydraulics
> *would* be necessary on a drum-brake car if you were to
> remove the trailing
> arm from the car entirely. If you had rear *disc* brakes,
> you do *not* need
> to open the hydraulics.
>
> Finally I find ONE advantage to having rear disc brakes!
> LOL

Yes, I was only talking about drums as well as thinking of
the coupla sites that talk about how this new tool makes
life easier. Guess they too were only thinking of drums.

I trust you are correct about the discs. I hadn't thought
about it.

>> With the (relatively new) Schley tool, only five bolts
>> need
>> be removed.
>>
>
>
> Sounds like a boon for drum-brake equipped cars.

Yes, I'm sure you can tell I'm just tickled about it. Best
$140 I've spent.

Of course, the job's not done until all is newly aligned...

"R Flowers" > wrote in
m:

> "TeGGeR®" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Finally I find ONE advantage to having rear disc brakes! LOL
>>
>
> I'm a lurker in a.a.h., and I have noticed that you seem very
> knowledgable.



I pretend well, huh?



> So, your comment about rear disc breake intrigues me. I
> thought rear discs were desirable? If not, why not?
>



Rear dics brakes in a FWD car are desirable to the marketing department.
Buyers tend to get a woody over them because they sound so hi-tech and
sporty. They enable the sales department to have greater success liberating
greenbacks from your wallet.

Rear discs in a road-going FWD car are otherwise utterly useless and
trouble-prone. They never work hard enough to get very hot, so they rust,
seize and wear out with distressing haste and regularity unless the car is
used in SoCal or Arizona.

Any more questions?

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

"TeGGeR®" > wrote in message
...
> Rear dics brakes in a FWD car are desirable to the marketing department.
> Buyers tend to get a woody over them because they sound so hi-tech and
> sporty.
>
> Any more questions?
>

No, just a comment. I guess their marketing worked well, because I didn't
even think about it. Back in the old days, many cars had drums all around.
Then the front 2 discs came out, and I guess people thought "Well, if 2 are
good, let's do all 4!" I remember sports cars in the 70s and 80s touting
their 4 wheel discs.

-- R Flowers

Elle wrote:
>
> "Eric" > wrote
> > Elle wrote:
> >> I personally replaced the trailing arm bushings on Monday.
> >
> > I'm just a little bit curious. Exactly which bushings are
> > you referring to, the ones labeled as part #12 in this diagram
> > http://tinyurl.com/fwt4y or the large one in the middle of the rear
> > trailing arm through which bolt #26 goes to help mount the trailing
> > arm to the car?
>
> I replaced both, but the one to which I refer above is the
> larger one (with bolts #26 going through it), Honda part
> #52385-SR3000 , only available in the last several years or
> so. Schley produced a special (and super fast and super
> effective) tool for removing it only in the last couple of
> years. I have a fuller discussion at the bottom of
> http://home.earthlink.net/~honda.lio...tml#tabushings,
> with some links to excellent sites with photos of the
> process.

OK, thanks for clarifying the work that you did.

> >> But I gather your advice does not change.

No, a four wheel alignment is definitely in order.

Eric