TBP_ST Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Hey, I have a new Fiesta ST that has never driven right from delivery. Current alignment values are Fr Left Fr Right Camber -1.11 -0.48 Caster 3.10 2.47 Toe is 0.10 both sides. Steering wheel is straight and car does not drift or pull. RR Left RR Right Camber -0.32 -0.15 Toe 0.01 0.15 Thrust angle -0.07. I believe the correct front camber target is -1.18 so the left front is near enough here but the right seems way out of spec, less than half the value of the left. Not sure what correct caster value should be but both sides are over half a degree different. Rears seem rather different values side to side and are not adjustable, this is a brand new car, are these dfiffering values normal/acceptable? Ford dealer is saying this is all in spec and would not effect handling/how the car drives. From my POV the car does not corner well on right hand turns. It doesn't turn in well and then easily washes out. Left hand turns are a lot better. Would like to hear other opinions on this...... Also,anyone know if front camber/caster is even adjustable on the ST? It's not usually on standard Fiesta's i don't think. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Hello.... Well as things stand there's a collective problem.... First the rear beam is off-line hence the thrust position of 7', that is within tolerance but could be better if the cross-member bolts where released and the beam moved. As for the front the NSF camber has a geometric push to the right and the OSF a reduced castor push to the left. This means on a right turn both angles are reluctant to allow a normal steering return compared to a left turn. You can get camber/ castor adjuster strut top mounts.. Problem with these is they adjust/ optimize the camber and castor together so the chances of a correct balance is remote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBP_ST Posted June 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Hi Tony, Thanks for the reply and info. I have the Ford workshop manual specs now so also know that target caster value for front is 4.08 with 1.00 tolerance so the OSF front is pretty far out. Ford's attitude to all this is unfortunately poor. I think I will give WIM a call to get it booked in to see what can be done if Ford will not do anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMARTLY Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Get WIM to do it and send bill to dealer / Ford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 The dealers have no idea about this geometry lark and sadly most tyre shops fall into the same category. The low castor position isn't really a concern? Reason i say that is, and it's hard to explain but the castor angle is a line through the upper front pivotal point known as the "sprung chassis" and the lower pivotal point known as the "unsprung chassis". A deciding factor within the results is the fuel level? The amount of fuel in the sprung chassis will change the rake of the body so in turn change the through pick-up points. Problem is Ford doesn't suggest the amount of fuel needed during a geometry calibration..... Nevertheless the disparity between the NSF/ OSF will remain and that's part of the problem.... As said i feel your issues are a combination of thrust, NSF negative camber and OSF low castor, in truth all of these are a build issue in my opinion. Since the angles in question are not directly adjustable other than a rear beam move for the thrust all we can do is confirm the numbers but with much more information in 3D and triangulate the chassis position. This evaluation and if needs be report would cost you £40 + vat so not end of days money wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted June 16, 2014 Report Share Posted June 16, 2014 You think you have problems now, if you get that camber kit you will have even more - avoid it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBP_ST Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Thanks guys, I will def get it booked in at WIM so I can then at least present Ford with some expert opinion and analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 17, 2014 Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 We arbitrate for some leading car manufactures in the UK offering an unbiased opinion between them and the customers complaint. It's a case of it is, rather than why it is? In your case it could be argued "road trauma" is responsible for the current condition. Reason i say that is the NSF low ( negative ) camber and high ( positive ) castor and a displaced - ( negative ) rear beam could assume an OSF/R event. If true then there will be witness marks visible from the original pick-up points or bolts lets say. Without that evidence then a build issue is hard for them to argue. As said if you apply the tolerance to each angle none are incorrect but collectively there's a problem and i don't like the thrust position at -7'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBP_ST Posted June 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2014 Pretty sure it will be hard for them to argue a road trauma event as the car is 2 months/1500 miles old, I reported the original issue on the day the car was delivered to me. The original issue was that the steering wheel was not straight when road wheels were straight. After 4 attempts by dealer to correct this they removed the sterring wheel to find it was damaged/prematurely worn - the connection between it and the column was rounded off meaning it had a high degree of free play making straight alignment extremely difficult. After a new steering wheel was fitted it was straight and freeplay reduced but the sloppy handling remained. The previous problem with the steering wheel was somewhat masking the true alignment issue i think. I then saw the alignment print out they'd left in the car that shows the poor alignment. From looking at Ford's specs sheet the front Castor is supposed to be 4.08 with tolerance of 1.00 so the OSF sitting at 2.47 is out of tolerance i think and the NSF sitting at 3.10 is only within tolerance by a fraction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 I'm concerned about the steering wheels condition.... Was it the alloy cast that was worn? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBP_ST Posted June 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 I'm not sure, was described as the connection between wheel and column, i think they said it's an angled shape and the corners of each angle of that were roudned so when the wheel was turned there was free play before any action on the column. It's booked in a WIM at 3pm this Sat now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 19, 2014 Report Share Posted June 19, 2014 Good, thanks for that..... It's an odd one but once we have an image of the chassis we will know immediately what direction to take ( excuse the pun ) Another reassuring point is the team know they have one chance to find a solution since our customer base is national. My law is if there's a car on the ramp then there's a problem with it, "find the problem!" and it's not until we find the problem do we get paid. It's a hard call for the guys constantly looking outside of the box but it's an honest arena for the customer........ No solution, no cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBP_ST Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2014 Good stuff Tony, look forward to coming down tomorrow to hopefully get some answers.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdsGUK Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 Sorry to revive an old thread. Was just curious if the issue was resolved in the end? I have a new fiesta ST with the same symptoms and alignment figures, all bar the steering wheel condition. I understand the camber isnt adjustable, im wondering what would cause such difference in camber figures at the front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 Many reasons for the difference in camber from build issues to impact..... Have you had yours measured and if yes what numbers do you have for the front? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdsGUK Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 Have -1.11' front near side and -0.45' offside, like the OP No signs of any impact and no suspension noises, leaks ect. For some reason (might just be me) but there seems to be less space on drivers side wheel arch making ride appear lower on that side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted August 29, 2015 Report Share Posted August 29, 2015 Have you got the printout? If yes are there any numbers for the front SAI also called KPI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdsGUK Posted August 31, 2015 Report Share Posted August 31, 2015 Heres the printout I received of current condition.No sign of SAI or KPI figures Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 1, 2015 Report Share Posted September 1, 2015 Well ok....... From what i can see there really isn't a problem. The front cross camber is ideal for the UK and reduces the drift left due to the road crown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdsGUK Posted September 1, 2015 Report Share Posted September 1, 2015 Ok, thought that might be case. I seem to get a slight drift to the right. But unsure if that caused by thrust angle, would 0.07' have a major impact. With the toe figure out of spec at the back, ive heard shims or releasing the axle and re aligning can fix this. Is this something youd recommend. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 With the OSR toe to far positive it looks like the beam has moved already or there's a build issue, nevertheless at 7' thrust it's not desperate.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdsGUK Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Thanks, so doesn't appear to be any major concerns. May possibly be down to tyres possibly or Ford maybe aligning with incorrect fuel load then. Probably doesn't help that I have different tread depths on my two front tyres after I had to replace the front ns after a puncture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Ford don't inform us how much fuel should be on board for the geo but logic would says yours was a bit light judging by the rear cambers...... As for the pull try moving the front wheels/ tyres side-to-side and test drive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdsGUK Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Releasing a little pressure from the front NS helps, of course has more tread than OS so sort of evens out. May be the tyres cause a little pull maybe. Ive heard other car models can pull with the Bridgestones Potenzas installed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 4 out ot 5 pulling complaints are tyre related number one being a pneumatic drift caused by construction alignment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.