Camber/Castor adjustment on an 80 Series

[clivehorridge]

I have a problem on my ’95 80 where the front wheel camber angle on the RHS is noticeably positive camber compared with the LHS wheel. It’s a left hooker so the RHS is the nearside/kerbside, but that’s of no consequence. I have had everything on the front axle overhauled with new parts by my local friendly 4x4 service (thanks GTC at Popesti-Leordeni, ILFOV, Str. Sf. Nicolae Nr. 4C) but still have the problem.

Their only suggestion was a bent axle casing. This may not be too surprising as 6 years ago some idiot did hit me full on that hub at about 80 kph totally destroying his Dacia Logan, but there was no visible damage to the cruiser or my old girl’s axle. Anyway, conclusion is the casing’s bent and with no scrapyard/breaker with TLC’s (you lucky guys in the UK where there’s loads of them … hi Karl…) it was a case of do something with my axle or not at all.

Anyway after months of searching, I came across this old 2007 thread on IH8MUD
[attachment=0:1frlesvj]Offset trunion bearings 2.png[/attachment:1frlesvj]
A chance at last I thought to solve my problem, offset camber/caster bearings, what a good idea!. They offer a range of angle adjustments that can be achieved, so I found an alignment workshop and had the old girl measured up.

LHS Camber -0.36 degrees (negative camber)
RHS Camber +1.45 degrees (positive camber)

If nothing else it proved I wasn’t going squint in my old age, secondly it showed that the RHS camber was way off, compared with the LHS. Surprisingly, the print-out also confirmed that the factory tolerance was within range on the RHS but out of range on the LHS! TLC’s are supposed to have rakes of positive camber… can that be right? Comments may be helpful.

Anyway I decided to try to adjust the alignment with these new-found offset camber/caster bearings and bring the RHS camber as close to the camber angle on the LHS as I could. That meant 2.2 degrees to the RHS to bring it close to the LHS camber angle.

I tell you, such a positive camber looks really weird on a cruiser and I’ve never noticed any other truck looking like a Hillman Imp on steroids. It drives OK but that tyre always scrubs on the outside, needing regular rotation to keep them even. All annoying stuff.

So, I contacted Jeff Hargash at Speciality Products Company 4045 Speciality Place, Longmont, Colorado 80504 USA (tel: 8005256505) and he’s a great guy, very attentive and helpful. I gave him my angles and he confirmed that the 2.2 degree set that I wanted to order would do the trick. I made an internet banking transfer for the $51.18 + $25.95 shipping and waited for the bearings to arrive.

10 days for delivery from the USA to Romania was pretty good I thought, so I very excitedly took them to my Service for fitting (Sadly I don't have any facilities or spare time for DIY ).

Bugger damn, the bearings don’t fit. They’re too small, they’re for a 70 not an 80 axle. If only I'd read the post on IH8MUD more closely.

So, another e-mail to Jeff with the bad news. Kindly, he’s contacted their R&D and they’re going to measure up an 80 axle that they have in the workshop and try to make me a pair of 2.2 degree sleeves (as he calls them).

If anyone is interested in these offset bearings, drop Jeff an e-mail.

I’ll post on this thread if I ever get bearings made up that fit, otherwise I’ll have to make do with my old girl having bandy front wheels for ever.

 

[frank rabbets]

Hi Clive

You would have to bend the axle tube a hell of a lot to alter the camber angle. Also it would have to be bent from underneath or on top , not from the front. The gutter side tyre will wear more on the outside as it compensates for the camber of the road. This is witnessed by your steering wheel being turned anticlockwise attitude on a LHD car. I compensate by having my towing adjustment just out from parallel. I expect you have thought of all this? Road tyre treads scrub less. Have you jacked up and made sure you have no play in the side/vertical plane?

Frank

 

[Roger Fairclough]

If you alter the camber angle by fitting "off-set" trunnion bearings, you will alter the position of the seals on the swivel hub. It wont be by much, but it may be enough to promote lubricant leakage.

In my opinion, if the casing is proven to be damaged, you would be better of sourcing an undamaged axle.

Roger

 

[clivehorridge]

Hi Frank,

Thanks for your reply. Yes I have considered all these things, well all the things I can imagine to consider, but I'm open to any other views from you guys, so thank you for them.

I'm not new to cars in general and from an early age I've been aware of why there is caster and camber and the other geometrical refinements on steering systems. Castor is equally important on a bike for example and even a swivel chair or settee for that matter so I'm no stranger to the fundamentals.

I am however fairly new to the finer points of the 80 (I’ve only had one – this one - for 7 years) about which all of you out there seem to be incredibly knowledgeable, hence my post to pick your brains.

I can't help agreeing with you on the degree of bend necessary to throw the camber on just one side out by 2.2 degrees like it is, but out it is, it’s a fact. When I sight up the car from the front (or rear) with the steering straight, there's a marked difference between the RHS and the LHS where the LHS appears to be vertical (parallel with the rear wheel) and the RHS appears to have (very) positive camber. The 80 axle is one of the strongest I believe, but having installed new top and bottom trunion bearings both sides, all shimmed up correctly (and the service has double checked them) and the wheel bearings have been renewed and they've been pre-loaded correctly (also double checked) there seems to be no other explanation for the difference. There's no play in anything on this axle (except the diff ) but I'll ignore that for a while longer!

The car has a 75mm OME suspension lift with castor correction, the cc bushes are as good as new (good anyway and checked) so what else could it be?

Between the CV housing unit and the main “tube” of the axle casing, there’s a weld at the narrow point of the casing taper. I would presume that this is the most likely place for a “bend” to be, but because of the profiles, there’s no way to see it with the naked eye.

I know the front hub did have a massive impact when that crazy car driver hit me and I could well accept that it was sufficient to bend something substantial. If the point of impact was just below centre, then that would explain the bend in the opposite direction from the usual (say when a car gets airborne and lands heavily on the front wheels, bending the hubs upward against the spring/bump-stop force downward).
It’s all gone around in my head as to why, but the facts show that it is, and I’m stuck with it. And a measurement paper to prove it!

And thanks Roger for your comment. I've considered that too, but my service thinks the "heavy duty" (whatever that may mean) seals they used behind the inner swivel hub might cope with the downward motion of the shaft that would happen after fitting the offset bearings. That will be suck-it-and-see I'm afraid, if I can get these offsets made up.

It's all a bit of an experiment really, living with this is more of an annoyance than a necessity to cure it.

Thanks guys.

 

[clivehorridge]

[attachment=0:3dq8ujw7]Meas jpg.jpg[/attachment:3dq8ujw7]

Front camber left (stanga) = -0 degrees 36 minutes = -0.60 degrees;
Front camber Right (dreapta) = +1 degree 24 minutes = +1.40 degrees.

 

[frank rabbets]

Hi Clive

Was it a side impact? This MIGHT alter the camber.

If you are not getting associated tyre wear perhaps just live with it.

As an outside possibility was it made like this??

eg My 100 tailgate hinges are not adjustable but welded on but the RHS of the panel is not flush with the body and the seal leaked. Fortunately the bolts had shoulders on which I turned off in the lathe and all OK now. I wonder if all 100's are like this?

Frank

 

[clivehorridge]

Hi Frank,

Sorry, re-reading my post I didn't make it very clear. Yes it was side impact, slightly from the rear but most of the force was at about 80 degrees to my car. He bounced off and shifted the cruiser about 3 meters sideways. That's a jolt to say the least.

As I indicated, the tyre wear can be dealt with by rotation, which is good practice anyway. It's more annoying than anything else and the thought of these bearings solving the problem was too tempting to pass up. I'll pursue them with Jeff in the states and take my chances. I can always fall back to what I have if it doesn't work out. The car runs fine, no pulling over or any other steering issues.

Of course a replacement casing would be the answer. I believe its the same as the RHD 80, with the only difference being the anti-roll bar brackets which can be cut from mine and welded onto the RHD unit.

Getting one here is my problem though. Any offers?? It's a long way to haul a rusty axle on the back of a moped...

Maybe I should do an overland to the UK with a grand in my pocket to spend at the breakers. I've a list as long as... I don't know what!

Seats, trim, carpet, door cards, a LH side front door, oh my goodness....

Many thanks all...

 

[clivehorridge]

Just to come back to Roger's valid point, the offset bearings are both top and bottom in opposite directions, so the hub unit would rotate about the mid point. The up/down shift of the driveshaft would be the same, so the same concern that the seal may leak would remain. But the camber angle adjustment towards the negative would be balanced, top "in" bottom "out" so to speak.

Thanks...

 

[clivehorridge]

And a pic to indicate how it looks. When you sight-up the front RHS wheel to the rear wheel, (picture left) you can see that the front wheel has prominent positive camber.

The same process on the LHS (picture right) shows the camber looking normal.

Surprising to me that according to the measurement sheet, the RHS wheel (picture left) is within Toyota's spec and the LHS wheel (picture right) is not!

 

[Rodger]

I maybe speaking out of turn here as I don't have an 80 but I think that the knuckle steering arm is below the hub on an 80 (?) which begs the question in my mind... did that arm get slightly bent when the guy threw his car at your 80? Would only need to be bent a fraction out of line to throw the angle out.

Just a thought...

Regards,

 

[clivehorridge]

Hi Roger,
You can’t speak out of turn, every little helps thanks!

You’re correct that the steering arm does come from the bottom and below the knuckle on the 80, but as far as I can understand a bent arm would only affect the steering alignment and not the camber or caster angles.
My problem is excessive positive camber on just the RHS front wheel, which is solely reliant on the top and bottom swivel bearings (and of course a straight axle casing!). Both top & bottom swivel bearings are new and shimmed up correctly, which only leaves the conclusion my service shop came to that the axle casing may be bent.
My steering alignment is spot on at 0.5 degrees toe-in, the car drives straight with no drift or pulling and I could easily ignore this problem.
However, every time I see that RHS front wheel doing impressions of s “Hillman Imp” I want to do something to correct it. It’s become an obsession!
Just look at the photo at the bottom of page 1…

 

[Rodger]

Yes it was the photo that made me think about the steering arm - perhaps a twist, as a result of the impact, could give correct steering readings but maybe pulling the trunion out of line.

I've just spent the last 4 months sorting the front end of my 40. Having renewed and checked everything I stood back at the back of the truck and realised that when the steering wheel was straight the wheels were out of line... the professionals had set the steering wheel straight to adjust the tracking etc but not checked that the pitman arm was straight. They had then adjusted the tracking and it gave the front end a most odd look with poor steering qualities. I know that that is not your problem but often using your own eyes and a logical measuring sequence will produce results, after no-one will know your truck as well as you.

Good luck in your search

Regards,

 

[clivehorridge]

This is true Roger.
I had a number of e-mail exchanges with Speciality Products Company in the USA where one of Jeff's colleagues has a rock crawler Jeep and he had the opinion that because my RHS (the side I want to change) was within the spec range, I should change the LHS to suit. This is logical thinking of course, from just looking at the numbers on the paper.

But looking at it in the photo, and moreso in reality, the LHS (picture right) looks like any other 80 I've seen, it's the RHS (picture left) that needs changing.

Can anyone offer an explanation why the spec shows a positive camber of between +0 Degrees 15minutes and +1degree 45 minutes on an 80? It seems very strange to me.

Anyway, I do know my truck fairly well now, and I'll continue with my venture to get both front wheels looking reasonably vertical and at the least similar to each other.

Thanks,
Clive

 

[Cptsideways]

most likely a bent trunion pin imho

 

[clivehorridge]

Mr. Sideways (sorry Captain!)

Thats one I didn't think of... and neither has any of the other people I've been boring to death with this one

I'll look into getting this checked !!

Many thanks

 

[frank rabbets]

I had thought of a bent pin but I don't think so IYSWIM. They are deeply seated in the bearing.

Frank

 

[clivehorridge]

Hi Frank,

It has to be worth a look-see, because I really have checked everything else.

Trouble with a "bent" axle is that you can't see it. The narrow tapered part where the CV ball is welded to the narrow 'rectangular' end of the tapered casing looks the most vulnerable place for a bend to occur, but for 2 degrees (which may seem a lot) it's not much of a bend on heavy metal.

I've even thought of taking the axle off and heating it up (oxy-acetelene) to try to straighten it, but by how much? Potentially I might really damage it beyond further use.

I'll keep looking and with luck my USA contact may come up with the goods.

Thanks...

 

[frank rabbets]

Hi Clive

When you had the side impact did the wheel get damaged?

I agree that with only about 8 inches between the lower and upper king pins it would not take much bend in the tube to see the wheel lean over.

Frank

 

[clivehorridge]

No Frank, it wasn't.

The wheels at that time were the standard steels they fitted to the 1995 European Market 80s. Very strong but narrow with a 215/70/16 tyre would you believe!

The hub took a direct hit though. I don't know what the casting is called that protrudes through the centre of the wheel, the one with lots of studs all the way around it to access the bearings. Anyway that was shattered by the impact and the outer bearing race was mashed by the cast being rammed into it.

It was enough force to bend something substantial. It was only luck that the other car hit something so solid. If he'd impacted 6" forwards or back from where he did, I would have sustained major body damage. As it was, the wing had some deformation, but the hub took the brunt of it.

Obviously, to transmit the impact to the axle, the top & bottom king-pins would be the only connection to the hub.

It will be a while before I will have time to strip it down. As my DD, I need to choose my moment!

Cheers!

 

[Acronymous]

I'm digging up an old thread here but I've got much the same problem with my 79 series twin cab. Front right wheel has too much +ve camber. I haven't measured it yet but it's noticeably more +ve than the left side. Wear on the outside of the tyre is also significant.

I've never been a fan of +ve camber. It increases understeer for one thing and there's enough of that present already without having +ve camber add to it.

Thanks to the OP of this thread, I will be looking for a solution.

Jules