1999-2009 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
[Main 95 Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: Two design flaws, Rear same part numbers? Posted by jeff02 [Email] (#2992) [Profile/Gallery] (more from jeff02) on Thu, 31 May 2012 06:51:23 In Reply to: Two design flaws, Stephen Goldberger, Thu, 31 May 2012 06:08:50 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
So, because I saw someone on the net going through the job of swapping all of the rear suspension parts form an Aero to an Non-Aero in the rear, I assumed that at least some of the parts were really different. What you are saying the only difference is the spring height from the non-sport to sport suspension? I just checked with eeuroparts for Aero and non-Aero and got the same part numbers for the major components in the back. (2001 sedans)
1 Rear Sub Frame 9227696
6 Cross Stay 90538916
12 Cross Stay 90538444
16 Control Arm LH 4689964
If this is the case, then I agree that this was probably not the best thing to do, coupled with a bad spring.....
What I have seen on 5+ cars, Wagons, Sedans, Aeros, etc is that if the ride height per spec is maintained (and aligned), abnormal tire wear is very low (but present) and with proper tire rotations (every oil change or two) it works out and we get at least the proper milage on the tiresl. The only thing is that when we load down our wagon, I don't like how low it goes. Next time will try and use some load rubber spring internal spacers next time for trips with loads.
Also, wagon springs in the sedan is working very well.
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.