Suspension Brakes 1st Gen Most liked posts in thread: Rear Trailing Arm Bushing

I would say a big NO to that style bushing. The motion of the pickup point of the rear trailing arm, like the front control arm, is not happy with such a rigid bushing.

 

Greg and I have ongoing debates about BA bushings..

but fundimentally he's right. The design is less complient than the location and movement requires, but I don't see it as big a negative as he does. But then, Greg actually builds race cars..... But these aren't nearly the design "sin" that the ones for the front control arms are!

Anyway, if you're going to replace the bushing there, look around for more options. And the stock units on the rear arm aren't nearly the problem that the stock units on the front arms are either!

Matt

 

Are the rears the same design as the fronts or similar in that they have fixed centers and twist and possibly tear when going through extreme travel?

I.E. should I take a look at mine considering the massive range of travel mine are subjected to? I honestly haven't ever thought to look at the trailing arm bushing as I (possibly naively) assumed it was more free moving than the one up front.

 

The rear...

doesn't use a hexogonal shaft. And the BA unit has a metal sleeve that MAY rotate in the bush. It could if properly designed. But like the front, the rear moves in a somewhat strage motion as the mounting axis is neither in line with the motion nor perpendicular to the motion. But because of the length of the rear control arm, smaller forces at the bush hold it in place than on the front, that can get some massive torques on it that change toe and the like. Actually, the rear would be a great place for a spherical bush.

Matt

 

Hmmmm...gonna have to look into it.

Thanks, matt

 

Not really much.
Depending on what you are doing with your car and how you maintain it then my system is really the best available......,but not to be repetitive, I am not trying to push them on daily drivers. Otherwise I would just look into filling the voids in the factory bushing with RTV or go with a softer insert from a vendor here.

There is in fact a pretty sevier twisting motion in the rear trailing arm, more so then the fronts.

 

Be aware there are two different mounts for early and late model (May 2003 up) trailing arms; one rocks mostly, and the other rotates mostly. The exact demarcation date is not clear, here's what to look for.
Late model - primarily rotating within the bushing.


Early model - primarily rocking motion.


Having used the poly inserts on the rear on an early model, I would caution against a poly replacement. The inserts added an unpredictable rise in spring rate to the rear. I value uninhibited range of motion.

 

So what do you recommend? OEM? Spherical Bearing?

 

You have a unique application, I recommend observing your trailing arm mount while lifting the wheel. Look to see if the bushing is being stressed beyond its capability, it may even be limiting further lowering. If no binding or stretching, then OEM. If overstressed, then a custom fabrication. I'm not a fan of conventional rod ends though.

 

So, I am having a real problem dialing the date that these new designed arms came in. I was under the impression it was late '05 but when questioned by Nathan I figured i'd better do a little homework. My findings were not what I had thought, but this post makes me think I should not have doubted myself so much.
Thoughts?

 

First part of that statement is correct. the only AL arms on the R53 were on the GP's.

 

I have a August 06 Checkmate JCW with steel trailing arms and 12 MM lug bolts