Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum
Arnott
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-08-2021, 11:54 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,318
oldskewel is on a distinguished road
As long as your tire wear is not a problem, I'd say you have nothing to worry about, but if you want to think more about the alignment ...

---------

Nice pics! They look a whole lot nicer than what I found in my car, posted in the link above. Those are from the nut side, so hopefully the bolt side (forward side of the swing arm) look equally good.

The first thing I notice is that the third pic (left side) is not adjusted to its full travel. At full adjustment, you'd have the center of the bolt pushed a little further to the right, and the eccentric washer would be symmetric top to bottom. So that means just by adjusting that bolt you could reduce your left camber a little.

But why didn't they do that? Well the printout shows -2*38' left and -2*55' right (2.63* and 2.92* vs. the 1.83* spec). So maybe since the right side was out, they did not want to fully correct the left side since it would create too much of a cross-camber between left and right.

And BTW, cross-camber is one of the few things in an alignment you'd actually notice from the driver's seat - the car would pull to one side. When my car had its ball joints, etc. issues it still drove perfectly. Tight, straight, etc. My only issue that I noticed was tire wear, and I think that situation (suspension / alignment issues / accelerated tire wear, yet it drives great) is common with these cars.

But when I looked again at the printout, I see that the "before" rear camber numbers were closer to spec than the "after" ones. So the alignment process made camber worse. I know the guide links back there were adjusted to correct rear toe, but the effect of those on camber is pretty minimal, so ???

Also, I see the right side one has a flattened bottom, as if the car was once jacked from that point, but not a problem.

In general, as I think I mentioned in that other thread I linked, deciphering things now as you are doing is a tougher problem than doing it yourself since you need to try to figure out the why and what was done by the pros.

I have a Klein Tools 935DAG digital angle gauge

https://www.kleintools.com/catalog/l...auge-and-level

that gives very repeatable measurements (sub 0.1 degree), and can be easily calibrated. A straight edge (I used an 18" bubble level) laid vertically against the rim edges with the DAG on it gives a very accurate camber measurement. Your top pic shown in the parking structure looks like you have a flat place to park. You could measure the slope of the floor, correct that out, and quickly do some measurements to confirm what's going on. But that's just what I'd do ...
__________________
2001 X5 3.0i, 190k miles, AT, owned since 2014
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #12  
Old 05-08-2021, 09:53 PM
X5only's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 1,252
X5only is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldskewel View Post
As long as your tire wear is not a problem, I'd say you have nothing to worry about, but if you want to think more about the alignment ...

---------

Nice pics! They look a whole lot nicer than what I found in my car, posted in the link above. Those are from the nut side, so hopefully the bolt side (forward side of the swing arm) look equally good.

The first thing I notice is that the third pic (left side) is not adjusted to its full travel. At full adjustment, you'd have the center of the bolt pushed a little further to the right, and the eccentric washer would be symmetric top to bottom. So that means just by adjusting that bolt you could reduce your left camber a little.

But why didn't they do that? Well the printout shows -2*38' left and -2*55' right (2.63* and 2.92* vs. the 1.83* spec). So maybe since the right side was out, they did not want to fully correct the left side since it would create too much of a cross-camber between left and right.

And BTW, cross-camber is one of the few things in an alignment you'd actually notice from the driver's seat - the car would pull to one side. When my car had its ball joints, etc. issues it still drove perfectly. Tight, straight, etc. My only issue that I noticed was tire wear, and I think that situation (suspension / alignment issues / accelerated tire wear, yet it drives great) is common with these cars.

But when I looked again at the printout, I see that the "before" rear camber numbers were closer to spec than the "after" ones. So the alignment process made camber worse. I know the guide links back there were adjusted to correct rear toe, but the effect of those on camber is pretty minimal, so ???

Also, I see the right side one has a flattened bottom, as if the car was once jacked from that point, but not a problem.

In general, as I think I mentioned in that other thread I linked, deciphering things now as you are doing is a tougher problem than doing it yourself since you need to try to figure out the why and what was done by the pros.

I have a Klein Tools 935DAG digital angle gauge

https://www.kleintools.com/catalog/l...auge-and-level

that gives very repeatable measurements (sub 0.1 degree), and can be easily calibrated. A straight edge (I used an 18" bubble level) laid vertically against the rim edges with the DAG on it gives a very accurate camber measurement. Your top pic shown in the parking structure looks like you have a flat place to park. You could measure the slope of the floor, correct that out, and quickly do some measurements to confirm what's going on. But that's just what I'd do ...
Thanks for the heads-up about the camber being closer to spec before the alignment. I didn't notice that until now. I'll call them on Monday.
__________________
'05 E53 X5 4.4i, '97 E39 528, '07 E92 335i, '16 F86 X6M.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:57 PM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.