View Poll Results: What's the status of your Mirage's rear axle?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • Rear axle replaced under warranty; new axle within specs

    8 19.05%
  • Rear axle replaced under warranty; alignment is still off

    4 9.52%
  • Waiting for warranty replacement axle

    9 21.43%
  • Axle temporarily or permanently aligned with DIY fix

    4 9.52%
  • Rear alignment inspected & deemed within specs by dealer

    19 45.24%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 4 of 110 FirstFirst ... 234561454104 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 1099

Thread: Rear Wheel Misaligned? (UPDATE: some rear axles out of spec; warranty replacement)

  1. #31
    Senior Member Cani Lupine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    634
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 215 Times in 114 Posts
    Oh wow, that's a big difference. Definitely would cause a pull to the side.


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 49.2 mpg (US) ... 20.9 km/L ... 4.8 L/100 km ... 59.1 mpg (Imp)


  2. #32
    Я R01k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    US
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    544
    Thanks
    161
    Thanked 87 Times in 64 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Cani Lupine View Post
    Oh wow, that's a big difference. Definitely would cause a pull to the side.
    I see that you have 0.41 and 0.36. Do you notice any pull or something? I don't, but since the wheel is veered to the left I have to tilt the steering slightly to the right to go straight. Guess I'll be wearing tires like rolling on sand paper.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 automatic: 37.6 mpg (US) ... 16.0 km/L ... 6.3 L/100 km ... 45.2 mpg (Imp)


  3. #33
    Senior Member 3dplane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    USA Florida
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    291
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 288 Times in 141 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mpaton View Post
    Thanks guys. I'll maybe have my dealer measure mine and add to the complaints to Mitsubishi.

    How stiff are the trailing arm rubber bushes in the axial direction? I woner if there is any scope for grinding something off the center bushing on the outside and adding washers on the inside. i like the steel cable idea better than accidentally juacking the car up on the torsion beam :-).
    Hey that's very good thinking!I did not think of that but I doubt it would put enough force spreading the front to go as much as we need the geometry to change.

    Plus you would have to drop the front of the beam completely out of the mounting ears to access the side of the bushings and cut a lot of thickness off. If it worked though,it would be way more elegant compared to what I'm doing.

    My other idea was to go brutal on it.Set it up on the alignment rack, hook a come-along (ratcheting winch) near the lower shock mounts and cold bend it while watching the alignment monitor live to see the results.

    Hooking it low also removes some of that crazy negative camber as well as positive toe. (visible on my printout)

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 66.3 mpg (US) ... 28.2 km/L ... 3.5 L/100 km ... 79.7 mpg (Imp)


  4. #34
    Senior Member Cani Lupine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    634
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 215 Times in 114 Posts
    I don't notice any pull on mine, but I wouldn't mind doing something to correct it. Having the tires up to 50 PSI seems to keep the contact patch small enough so that it lessens the effects of the toe. I sent an email out to Mitsubishi to at least document my complaints for when something gets figured out to fix this problem.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 49.2 mpg (US) ... 20.9 km/L ... 4.8 L/100 km ... 59.1 mpg (Imp)


  5. #35
    Я R01k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    US
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    544
    Thanks
    161
    Thanked 87 Times in 64 Posts
    Me too. I'm waiting for a reply from them.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 automatic: 37.6 mpg (US) ... 16.0 km/L ... 6.3 L/100 km ... 45.2 mpg (Imp)


  6. #36
    Senior Member Cani Lupine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    634
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 215 Times in 114 Posts
    Got the call back from Corporate, and their answer was to take it to a dealer to have it diagnosed. Basically, runaround. I went though the same thing when I had excessive camber before installing the lowering springs, but that camber apparently went into increasing the toe after the springs were installed. They just said "We can't do anything unless something's broken."

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 49.2 mpg (US) ... 20.9 km/L ... 4.8 L/100 km ... 59.1 mpg (Imp)


  7. #37
    Я R01k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    US
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    544
    Thanks
    161
    Thanked 87 Times in 64 Posts
    So, they want you to have diagnosed and then what? Go home happy?

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 automatic: 37.6 mpg (US) ... 16.0 km/L ... 6.3 L/100 km ... 45.2 mpg (Imp)


  8. #38
    Senior Member Cani Lupine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    634
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 215 Times in 114 Posts
    After the diagnosis, they determine the proper course of action, like replace broken parts, if any. Since nothing's broken and it's simply a flawed design the dealership can't do anything about, it would be a complete waste of time and gas to drive 3 hours round-trip to go to the dealership for them to tell me what I already know.

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 49.2 mpg (US) ... 20.9 km/L ... 4.8 L/100 km ... 59.1 mpg (Imp)


  9. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    62
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 13 Times in 11 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 3dplane View Post
    Hey that's very good thinking!I did not think of that but I doubt it would put enough force spreading the front to go as much as we need the geometry to change.

    Plus you would have to drop the front of the beam completely out of the mounting ears to access the side of the bushings and cut a lot of thickness off. If it worked though,it would be way more elegant compared to what I'm doing.

    My other idea was to go brutal on it.Set it up on the alignment rack, hook a come-along (ratcheting winch) near the lower shock mounts and cold bend it while watching the alignment monitor live to see the results.

    Hooking it low also removes some of that crazy negative camber as well as positive toe. (visible on my printout)
    I think the negative camber may be quite intentional.

    i have no experience with cars with torsion beam or twist beam axles, but they have an interesting interplay of forces acting on them.

    That torsion beam effectively provides camber control, toe control and acts as an antisway bar. The angle of the pivot points of the trailing arms have an effect also.

    The Mirage pivot points angle forward as you go towards the centerline of the car, and so if they were semi trailing arms with rigid bushings and no torsion beam, then as the wheel rises you would get

    1 more positive camber
    2 more toe out

    In bump the effect of the torsion beam will be to lessen the amount of both of the above

    So it might be that the system has been designed for a lower ride height.

    If you're able to, it would be interesting if you were able to measure camber and toe with different amounts of weght in the trunk.
    I don't believe these syspension systems will be "in spec" at all ride heights, so I'd certainly expect what you measured to change, and might even be "right" at some ride height.

    With the torsion beam, and the body leaning as in going round a turn, things seem to get even more interesting.

    The camber will increase (more positive) as the body leans because the pivot angle is close to directly across the car.
    The cornering force will try and rotate the trailing arm around its longitudinal axis, resisted by the torsion beam which doesn't want to bend.

    The cornering force aft of the trailing arm pivot points will try to push in the wheel end of the trailing arm, thus reducing the toe in on the outer wheel, resisted by the torsion beam, which doesn't want to turn into an S-shaped beam (as seen in plan vew).

    As the outer wheel rises relative to the body, and the inner wheel drops relative to the body, the torsion beam will be twisted, acting as an anti sway bar.
    At the same time the distance between the 2 wheels will increase, resisted by the torsion beam, which doesn't want to stretch. This will reduce the toe in while cornering, and in combination with the increased camber will lead to oversteer.

    So it's all rather complicated.

    The easiest way for mitsubushi to make these axles come within spec is of course to change the spec.

    3dplane, I think your best possible mod is to do what Opel apparently have done of the new Opel Astra, and add a Watts linkage for lateral location.

    See http://www.richardaucock.com/vauxhal...nsion-a-twist/

        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage ES 1.2 manual: 46.0 mpg (US) ... 19.5 km/L ... 5.1 L/100 km ... 55.2 mpg (Imp)


  10. The Following User Says Thank You to mpaton For This Useful Post:

    Eggman (02-25-2016)

  11. #40
    Senior Member Cani Lupine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Country
    United States
    Posts
    634
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 215 Times in 114 Posts
    After I lowered mine, the negative camber was reduced and the toe-in increased.


        __________________________________________

        click to view fuel log View my fuel log 2014 Mirage DE 1.2 manual: 49.2 mpg (US) ... 20.9 km/L ... 4.8 L/100 km ... 59.1 mpg (Imp)


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •