944 Control Arm Failures

T

timo944

New member
A couple fo weeks ago at Road Atlanta, there were a reported 5 failures of aluminum control arms on 944's - presumably the majorioty at the ball joint.

Whats the story on aftermarket replacements - has anybody in the past seriously lobbied the board to allow in-kind replacements?

timo
 
Several have tried to get replacements approved for other failure modes - the Rabbit front wheel hubs jumps to mind - and all have failed. You can use exact replacement aftermarket parts, but improved aftermarket parts are a no-no.

Doesn't hurt to ask, but I can't imagine the ITAC/CRB opening that Pandora's box... - GA
 
I believe it has happened twice:

1. Volvo 142 valve springs and

2. Rear hub/disc conversion on the GM Quad 4 cars.

The others as Greg mentioned were shot down.

Seems like a lot of 944 guys do fine --- what are they doing? Loading the suspension differently?
 
I believe it has happened twice:

1. Volvo 142 valve springs and

2. Rear hub/disc conversion on the GM Quad 4 cars.

The others as Greg mentioned were shot down.

Seems like a lot of 944 guys do fine --- what are they doing? Loading the suspension differently? [/b]
Click to expand...



I have seen many failures of the 944 control arms but I must admit they were the Turbo's. Chris C. would be the one to ask on the NA 944.
 
Lowered cars bind at the ball joint. i am not a big fan of the alm stuff anyway. crack too much and gives no warning. i like the steel a arms. raise the car back up and the risk drops a lot but the car is too high to corner as well. its dangerous so the board should alow aftermarket a arms. could limit bearings or something. the spindels break on the early cars because of the hole for the speedo cable. you can change it out and no one says anything. whys that? (left front)
 
I had a fender get pushed into a tire, cutting the tread. If we hadn't caught it, the tire would have failed. Steel fenders are obviously a safety issue, so the ITAC should allow fiberglass fenders on the MkIII VW Golf. They would be safer.

K
 
Depending on the track, I have brake failures, melted caliper seals, every race or every couple of weekends. I sure would like to use vented rotors and change out those drums in the back since this is a safety issue.
 
Yep, my power steering system overheats, causing lines to rupture. not only is it a safety hazard to me, but to others on the track as well.

In the interest of safety, the ITAC should let me remove the power steering system on the NX2000.
 
Timo, don't want to make light of something that can be a safety issue, but this is one of those things that you just have to deal with in IT unfortunately (or fortunately). If the car can't be lowered past a certain point without risk of failure, then that is a performance limitation (in order to avoid a safety one).

For example, on my side, I have to do a number of things to minimize my brake problems. I have to use a less aggressive pad (with corresponding less stopping power) to minimize heat. I'm going to have to run 15" wheels to get better cooling, even though 13"s are better for gearing at most tracks. I have to run SRF fluid, even though it is expensive. And, I have to manage the brakes during a race. I get 3-4 laps of hard stopping power (hopefully enough to open up a decent gap to the next car) before I have to take it easy on the brakes.
 
Audi's are so well built we don't have any of these issues ;) You all need to get a good car :)

Raymond
[/b]
Click to expand...


Hmmmmmm, didn't one of you have a wheel fall of and end up in the swamp?? I'll stick with my Saturn, thank you!! :D
 
Hmmmmmm, didn't one of you have a wheel fall of and end up in the swamp?? I'll stick with my Saturn, thank you!! :D
[/b]
Click to expand...

us, never... We have not ever had any safety ot other misc failures from VW Rabit type/sized parts on an Audi boat...

I don't want Timo to go away from this site angry at our sarcastic, but fun reply's... My reply is in good fun, and I wnat to point out that this is the correct place to ask about these questions. All of us "old timers" (not just you Jeff) need to remember that (if anyone was not just "having fun with the reply." I hope that Timo realizes that most of us were/are having fun with the reply's.

Since our family is building a 944S for ITS, I do appreciate Timo for bringing up the topic as it is something that we should maybe keep our eyes on :)

Raymond "Go Germany" Blethen
 
Yep, not trying to piss Timo off, and I feel for him. That is a nasty failure. Just no real way to fix it in the IT milieu.
 
Preventative maintinence. The rabbit/scirocco you replace wheel bearings every few races if not sooner. MK2 golf you replace the wheel bearing and hub every season or face failure. RX7's go through front rotors like flaggers go through beer at the beer party. Each car has its quirks and issues and the only way to avoid them is knowing the problem areas and properly maintaining and preparing the car.
 
Yup. What they said.

I'm out of the rules NERD biz but there's a LONG history in this club of rationalizing allowances by playing the safety card. Almost anything can be put in those terms.

K
 
If I remember right, Kip had a failure and hit the wall hard last year in his 944s - big repair bill and a nasty scare. Ball joint or control arm failure.

Comp board really should consider this.
 
I believe it has happened twice:

1. Volvo 142 valve springs and

2. Rear hub/disc conversion on the GM Quad 4 cars.

The others as Greg mentioned were shot down. [/b]
Click to expand...

If the Volvo valve spring allowance ever happened, it must've been many years ago. There is no such current allowance, nor has there been for at least the past 4 years. The GM rear hub allowance however, is currently in the ITCS spec table "Notes:" column.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top