replacing front springs and tyres and the alternator question.

[cc]

Had another alignment done by someone recommended by a local Brisbane alfs specialist.
Turns out the front has too much camber and is excssively wearing the inside of the tyres..
As camber is non adjustable the aligner said it may be due to the suspension wearing... (not the case as has new upper and lower w/bones.)It may also be the wrong height spring currently installed.
The question is. When a 156 has the front lowered by 30mm, does this cause excessive wear on the inside of the tyre..

Further with the suspension, someone has rounded off the lock nut on the ball joint so will need to replace. Maybe i could have put some wd 40 on the night before.
The passenger rear alignment was ok, so the excessive tyre wear may have occured before i swopped out the radius arm with the worn bush.

Question
If original new springs are put in, would this fix it?
I also spoke to a guy at Bob Jane who suggested it may also be a bent stub axle spindle...

Am looking at putting on Pirelli P1's, have been quoted $146-139 each tyre.

While the car was up on the hoist, had a quick look to identify the alternator. No luck! Couldnt spot the serial no, and the back of it doesnt look like any seen on the web.

Anyone had experience with changing the regulator? there are a couple of case examples on the web
The engine is a V6 32401 body 932a1001
birthed 3rd Jan 2002 from Marco Fazio in Italy, with 3/2002 on the compliance plate.

Interestingly the  aligner guy spoke of an aftermarket upper w/bone adjustable for caster, anyone heard of this?
Also, can someone recommend a spring supplier? King springs only make a lowered 156 spring.
cheers

[colcol]

If the front suspension has too much negative camber, ie  //-----\\ the front wheels tip in at the top and splay out at the bottom, then the inside of the tyre will chop out.
If you can get a camber adjuster, it would require the bottom arms to be shorter and the top arms to be longer.
A old style camber kit works on a cam style offset washer that moves the arms in and out from the body.
This would not work on a 156 as the top arm is at an angle and this would change the caster settings.
The arms that would be adjusted back towards the body, would most likely foul on the subframe.
An easier solution would be to put the standard springs back in, that would lengthen distance between the top of the strut and the lower ball joint causing the wheels to splay in at the bottom and tip out at the top, that would give you less negative camber and more positive camber and it would straighten the wheel up.
When you change the camber you will also have to reset your toe as the tie rod position will change and pull or push the position of your tie rod.
Try going to a wrecker and getting some standard springs off a V6 156, they will be different to a 4 cylinder, as the weights are different between the motors.
You will find that the spring for the offside will be slightly longer to compensate for the weight of the driver, and i am not making this up, measure the free lengths of the springs.
Try to get springs from a low kilometre car, as over time and distance the springs can sag and cause alingment problems like you are having.
If this happens you can get the springs re heat treated and made longer as they were when new.
You could put some WD 40 on the nut, the night before and hope for the best, otherwise, they might have to get some heat on the nut, to get it moving, Colin.

[Darryl]

You could go to an event where the Berrys are running their 156 and ask them about their suspension setup?
Kings will make any spring you ask for - you just have to know what you want. Obviously though, custom costs more.
This used to exist - not sure if it still does - and other vendors may have something similar (it's an eccentric bush plus whatever way of stopping it rotating in the arm)

[colcol]

It would be interesting to see what the camber is, if it is different on both sides, then it may have a bent stub axle, but if it is the same, then its the lowered springs that are causing the problem.
The camber adjuster is moving the top control arm, but seeing the top control arm is at an angle to the body, the adjustment would be minimal as it is not moving the arm in and out 180 degrees from the body, and you would be also changing your caster.
The racing 156's would benefit from more negative camber as they are cornering, the tyres are working hard on the outside edge, if you look at race cars front on, they have 3-5 degrees negative camber, but for a road car you need 30 minutes or so of negative camber, Colin.

[jorritkooistra]

Back in holland someone makes camber kits for the 147/156/GT. Its cnc machined and works briliant to counteract the camber you get from lowering your car. Maybe he is willing to send a batch over to australia iff there is enough buyers.

Also for the alternator, ive done one on my GTA a few weeks ago. Its a pain to do, but not impossible.

I am in brisbane and iff i look at the starting post, so are you. I can have a look at the car at work and see what needs doing. Mechanic by trade and a passion for Alfas.

Sent from my Agora 4G using Tapatalk

[dcc236]

I have used Fulcrum suspension for my 4 wheel alignments for over 10 years. I've never had a complaint.

[Craig_m67]

It would be interesting to see what the camber is, if it is different on both sides, then it may have a bent stub axle, but if it is the same, then its the lowered springs that are causing the problem.
The camber adjuster is moving the top control arm, but seeing the top control arm is at an angle to the body, the adjustment would be minimal as it is not moving the arm in and out 180 degrees from the body, and you would be also changing your caster.
The racing 156's would benefit from more negative camber as they are cornering, the tyres are working hard on the outside edge, if you look at race cars front on, they have 3-5 degrees negative camber, but for a road car you need 30 minutes or so of negative camber, Colin.

156 doesn't have a stub axle. The (rotor/wheel) hub is an interference fit inside a bearing, which itself is fitted through the front upright (secured on the outside face). The drive (half) shaft is a splined fit inside hub.

To my thinking, Camber of the upright could only be varied by the position of the top or lower wishbone wishbone mounts. Unless the upright itself is bent, which I'd doubt as it's very, very stout or the wheel bearing is about to fall out the upright (which would be pretty obvious I'd suggest).

[colcol]

I know that the 156 doesn't have a stub axle, but Bob Jane was refering to assembly where the wheel bolts on, the front bearing on the 156, it looks easy enough to replace, unlike Suds and 33's!!.
If the front got a bit of a whack, the bearing could get noisy.
Just looking at it, i think that if you adjusted the bottom control arm back towards the body, then it may foul on the body.
Also the top control arm would only move out at an angle, changing the caster and changing the camber by not very much.
But somebody out there may make a kit that will fix this camber problem as i am sur this is not the first 156 thats been lowered, Colin.

[Craig_m67]

I was simply trying to help.
There were several posts that discussed checking the stub axle as a cause.
The 156 doesn't have one.

It's also not that easy to replace, the hub is a press fit in the bearing, which is a press fit in the carrier which is bolted to the upright. You can't get access to the bearing carrier bolts to remove it from the upright without pressing out the hub from the bearing as they're hex bolts and the hub face is in the way. Pressing out the hub invariably destroys (separates) the bearings (in my experience).

[bazzbazz]

Yup, whenever I have a client with a stuffed hub bearing I always suggest to replace it with the newest and best condition hub assembly from wreckers. It is just SOOOOO much less hassle. (and way less expensive.)

Baz

[josh18]

Hi I'm new to Alfas and find it hard to believe there is no camber adjustment. Ive never come across another modern car where it's fixed. Also, excess front toe in can cause wear on the inside edge of the tyre due to the way the castor causes the wheel to lean in as it turns. if it has too much toe in it is basically turning in slightly all the time. I would reckon this might be a more likely cause as with wrong to in there is a scrubbing action as well as opposed to just leaning in like excess camber. Is you front camber really noticeable to look at? Although excess front toe in can/ will look like excess -ve camber.
On my other car I run a fair bit of -ve camber both front and rear but I have adjusted the toe in to close to zero and I don't notice much excess wear at all. Also I do my own alignments now as I have had it done wrong by shops too many times.
Cheers

[colcol]

A lot of cars haven't had camber adjustment for many years, as it is another way the bean counters can slice things off to make them cheaper, cars are better built as well so when they roll off the line, they just need a tweak on the toe.
In my experience a pot hole or kerb mostly always moves the toe.
Lowering a car, even from the factory gives the car more negative camber that will wear the tyres out on the inner edge, Colin.

[johnl]

It does seem increasingly common for cars to lack a means to adjust either camber or caster. It's older cars that are more likely to permit relatively easy camber and caster adjustment. Having said that, most things can be changed if you really want to do it badly enough.

It is possible to alter camber or caster by 'slotting' the holes (in chassis) that position the bolts that attach the aluminium castings that the upper 'wishbones' (control arms) attach to. This moves the whole casting and so moves the upper wishbone, so repositions the upper ball joint. If the chassis holes are lengthened longitudinally then caster can be altered, if laterally then camber can be altered. I've adjusted camber on one side of my car, and caster on the other side. The car now has equal camber and caster side to side.

If the casting (and so upper wishbone, and upper ball joint) is moved by approximately 1cm then this will equal approximately 1° of either camber or caster change. I've slotted my chassis holes by approximately 4mm for 0.4° of angle change (camber one side and caster the other side). I'm not sure what the limitation is, but I'm sure at least somewhat more adjustment is possible.

Note the aluminium 'lug' on top of the casting (about the size of a 20c piece), which protrudes through the 'strut tower'. This lug needs to be 'trimmed' to allow the casting to be repositioned.

Note also that the shape of the large hole in the top of the 'tower' includes three protrusions that will limit by how much the casting can be repositioned. Where these protrusions inhibit range of camber or caster adjustment, I cut some slots in the casting. It would also be possible to 'trim' the chassis protrusions.

Regards,
John.