Audizine - An Automotive Enthusiast Community

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 41
  1. #1
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Front Lower Control Arms Forward Ball Joint Interchangeability m12 vs m14

    Guest-only advertisement. Register or Log In now!
    I'm going to be prepping for the future where I might need to replace lower control arms as I just replaced my bearing housing (knuckle). There was a lot of confusion due to the various part numbers and interchanges, but I have a 9/2010 BY giving me an m12 lower front ball joint and an m14 rear with a supposedly 75mm hydraulic inner bushing. The question that follows refers to only the FRONT control arm with the ball joint one must press in themselves. Not the rear.

    The question: Do both the m12 and m14 front lower ball joints have the same diameter at the bottom where they fit into the bearing housing? In all of the diagrams, I'm getting "yes", but I don't have side by side and measurements from the various manufacturers. Oddly, the M14 is a bit cheaper for higher-quality ones. I ask because I don't know if I simply got lucky in picking the right bearing housings or if the clamping areas of the front lower ball joints are simply the same size.

    The bearing housing saga and all of the interchanges drove me nuts, but more or less in my case I found the most important thing to be the rear ball joint and whether it's m12 or m14. M12 was in use until around Nov. 2, 2009. The 75mm inner bushing appeared around July 20th, 2009 (and fits in the same spot as the 65). In Germany, there is much confusion of whether the 75mm are hydraulic or not, specifically on the aftermarket, with the concensus being only Lemfoerder is using hydraulic. The primary restriction listed for my replacements were that I had the 8K0407693/4 rear control arms which correspond to m14 as stated in the ETKA as well.

    As for the bearing housings, Cobapress and KSM interchange; the connecting points line right up. My car came with KSM (AA/A suffix), I replaced with Cobapress (AB/B) using 8K0 407 253/4. Some sites say they fit, some not, and I have a strong feeling that the sites saying "no" are doing so because they are trying to keep the manufacturer consistent. In other forums in the UK and in Germany, people have the same issues, they forget about the suffix, and put on whatever is available used with that number and it appears they have one brand on one side, another on the other (which they are none the wiser about), no ill effects. I've also viewed numerous ones and I really think that the majority of the aftermarket/OE quality brands are just getting the housings from KSM or St. Jean (Cobapress) and slapping stickers on the boxes. I've even seen the boxes the different brands come in are identical, just different stickers on them and sometimes different bags inside.

    Also as a note: if you're one of the lucky people that has to do all the control arms, but have an m12 rear and likely the housing has to be replaced, you might as well just get the later m14 bearing housings and m14 front control arms and ball joints and and the rear 14/75mm and be done with it.

    Anyhow, M14 FRONT control arm ball joints will drop right into the bearing housing, even if the car came with front M12s, correct? I'll also tell everyone if you can get a good price, just get new or used bearing housings if your upper pinch bolts are seized. It's nuts, but this is how it's done in Europe, since we can get them for much cheaper here. The problem is when one goes to a shop, the quote is automatically for replacement of the housing and wheel bearings. Mine wouldn't come out with an air hammer, drilling, even with guides proved problematic while the part is on the car, and finally, my upper control arms are also completely seized to the point an air hammer was ineffective. They're so seized, that the car is driveable (though I'm not trusting this and only just drove around to park the car in my garage).
    Last edited by Kolbenringe; 01-31-2021 at 02:28 AM.

  2. #2
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    The bearing housing should be:

    M12 rear, to Nov 1 '09:
    8K0 407 253/254 G then R for CobaPress to Nov 1 '09
    8K0 407 253/254 T for KSM to Nov 1 '09

    M14 rear, from Nov 2 '09 to Nov 14 '11:
    8K0 407 253/254 Q then AB for CobaPress
    8K0 407 253/254 S then AA for KSM

    M14 rear, from Nov 14 '11:
    4G0 407 253/254 B for CobaPress
    4G0 407 253/354 A for KSM

    I don't understand the roll from the 8K parts to the 4G parts on Nov 14 '11, but who knows why VAG does things sometimes. No other change to the front suspension occurred at that time. The change from M12 to M14 front ball joint was three months earlier.

    I also don't get the CobaPress vs KSM thing; I figure just be sure not to intermix them. I know one document that showed one difference between the two, but it was irrelevant for any purpose I could imagine. But as the castings are slightly different, I think again the main concern is just don't have one of each on the car; make sure both are the same make.

    As to the interchange of the front ball joint, I can't say for certain, but the M14 ball joint in the 034 kit dropped into my Aug '08 build bearing housing (originally with M12 front ball joint) with no problem. Your ball joint would have been 8K0 407 689 G. The M14 ball joint was 4G0 407 689 A from Aug 15 '11 to Jan 23 '12, then it was 4G0 407 689 C afterwards.

    There's no question the 75mm bushing on the curved lower is a hydraulic bushing, at least from Audi. OEMs should be sourcing the same, since they are who make what Audi is selling; third party could be making whatever. The 65mm conventional continued to be used in RoW markets (PR-A8S) from Nov 2 '09 to May 17 '10, from what I see.

    "I had the 8K0407693/4 rear control arms which..." The part number simply designates the lower rear (curved) control arm (or guide link as Audi terms it). Without the revision letter, the particular variation is not designated. Yours would have likely been rev S, as you had KSM AA wheel bearing housings? Mine, from Aug '08, was rev F (later K, then N).
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    The bearing housing should be:

    M12 rear, to Nov 1 '09:
    8K0 407 253/254 G then R for CobaPress to Nov 1 '09
    8K0 407 253/254 T for KSM to Nov 1 '09

    M14 rear, from Nov 2 '09 to Nov 14 '11:
    8K0 407 253/254 Q then AB for CobaPress
    8K0 407 253/254 S then AA for KSM

    M14 rear, from Nov 14 '11:
    4G0 407 253/254 B for CobaPress
    4G0 407 253/354 A for KSM

    I don't understand the roll from the 8K parts to the 4G parts on Nov 14 '11, but who knows why VAG does things sometimes. No other change to the front suspension occurred at that time. The change from M12 to M14 front ball joint was three months earlier.

    I also don't get the CobaPress vs KSM thing; I figure just be sure not to intermix them. I know one document that showed one difference between the two, but it was irrelevant for any purpose I could imagine. But as the castings are slightly different, I think again the main concern is just don't have one of each on the car; make sure both are the same make.

    As to the interchange of the front ball joint, I can't say for certain, but the M14 ball joint in the 034 kit dropped into my Aug '08 build bearing housing (originally with M12 front ball joint) with no problem. Your ball joint would have been 8K0 407 689 G. The M14 ball joint was 4G0 407 689 A from Aug 15 '11 to Jan 23 '12, then it was 4G0 407 689 C afterwards.

    There's no question the 75mm bushing on the curved lower is a hydraulic bushing, at least from Audi. OEMs should be sourcing the same, since they are who make what Audi is selling; third party could be making whatever. The 65mm conventional continued to be used in RoW markets (PR-A8S) from Nov 2 '09 to May 17 '10, from what I see.

    "I had the 8K0407693/4 rear control arms which..." The part number simply designates the lower rear (curved) control arm (or guide link as Audi terms it). Without the revision letter, the particular variation is not designated. Yours would have likely been rev S, as you had KSM AA wheel bearing housings? Mine, from Aug '08, was rev F (later K, then N).
    Thanks for the input. I'll post up the part numbers of my takeoff housings tomorrow. The ones I bought are listed as OEM numbers of 8K0 407 253 AA or S. According to ETKA, I can only have the m14 rear. Further confirmation is from a German forum where someone measured the sleeve for the rear ball joint and came up with the same numbers I did: lower hole is about 17mm and the upper is 21, corresponding with the M14 measurements. He also measured the M12 housing and got 15 and 19.

    The note on my housings from Vaico is that they they can only be used with 8K0 407 693 AA, 8K0 407 693 S, 8K0 407 693 AC, 8K0 407 693 Q, 8K0 407 693 AB, 8K0 407 693 T (of course take into account the right side numbers as well), which corresponds with an m14 rear curved control arm. I'll try to get the number off my control arms on the other side tomorrow. According to ETKA, I should have revision S or Q in mine, as the crossover was August.

    It's an interesting topic that there are so many revisions and mostly this ends up being a thing because of the pinch bolt. I'm only changing the housings because the pinch bolts are seized. One year of putting on penetrating oil and nothing. The upper control arms are seized in the housings as well. There's also confusion around the 8K0 407 257 G housing part number as well, but then it all seems to go back to whatever version of the 253.

    I'm also wondering how many people have cars out there that haven't been built to the original spec and are mixed and matched or updated completely to the latest versions. I don't know.

  4. #4
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    I have no confusion on the M12 vs M14; I built a large Excel sheet compiling all the information because it was a confusing mess just looking through the ETKA clone site pages. You certainly cannot intermix the M12 and M14 rear. But the front is set by a separable ball joint the sits into the bearing housing. Thus how I have M14 lower straight on my Aug '08 build. But I had to keep an M12 lower curved unless I wanted to change my M12 bearing housings.

    T is a M12 bearing housing; it would not be compatible with the other revisions in your second paragraph. It's likely a typo on Vaico's end. And I'm not familiar with any AC; parts.audiusa.com does not acknowledge that revision either.

    I figured yours would be S as your original post said you had KSM, but then you said you had AA (which is still KSM, but newer than the S I would have expected on your build date).

    ECS pretty much sums up the current state of replacement parts:
    https://www.ecstuning.com/Audi-B8_A4...ering/Knuckle/
    Notice it's 8K...R for the M12 (to Nov 1 '09), 8K...AB for the M14 (Nov 2 '09 to Nov 14 '11), and 4G...B for the M14 (after Nov 14 '11). Notice it's also only the CobaPress versions, no KSM.

    https://translate.google.com/transla...search&pto=aue
    So we see a means to differentiate the two based on the hole under the wheel bearing. The last paragraph seems to imply the CobaPress spindle should be superior to the KSM one, but I have no idea the source of the assumption. Nor why would Audi have both as the same part number for the same vehicle? Maybe the KSM one was only allocated to lower end engines and layouts? I find nothing else anywhere in the repair manuals or the parts catalog that gives any concern for CobaPress vs KSM. I have to assume the only concern is to make sure both on your car are the same kind.

    In the end, it sounds like you got the correct ones for your car.
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    I have no confusion on the M12 vs M14; I built a large Excel sheet compiling all the information because it was a confusing mess just looking through the ETKA clone site pages. You certainly cannot intermix the M12 and M14 rear. But the front is set by a separable ball joint the sits into the bearing housing. Thus how I have M14 lower straight on my Aug '08 build. But I had to keep an M12 lower curved unless I wanted to change my M12 bearing housings.

    T is a M12 bearing housing; it would not be compatible with the other revisions in your second paragraph. It's likely a typo on Vaico's end. And I'm not familiar with any AC; parts.audiusa.com does not acknowledge that revision either.

    I figured yours would be S as your original post said you had KSM, but then you said you had AA (which is still KSM, but newer than the S I would have expected on your build date).

    ECS pretty much sums up the current state of replacement parts:
    https://www.ecstuning.com/Audi-B8_A4...ering/Knuckle/
    Notice it's 8K...R for the M12 (to Nov 1 '09), 8K...AB for the M14 (Nov 2 '09 to Nov 14 '11), and 4G...B for the M14 (after Nov 14 '11). Notice it's also only the CobaPress versions, no KSM.

    https://translate.google.com/transla...search&pto=aue
    So we see a means to differentiate the two based on the hole under the wheel bearing. The last paragraph seems to imply the CobaPress spindle should be superior to the KSM one, but I have no idea the source of the assumption. Nor why would Audi have both as the same part number for the same vehicle? Maybe the KSM one was only allocated to lower end engines and layouts? I find nothing else anywhere in the repair manuals or the parts catalog that gives any concern for CobaPress vs KSM. I have to assume the only concern is to make sure both on your car are the same kind.

    In the end, it sounds like you got the correct ones for your car.
    Was blind luck, I guess. I prioritized getting at least a better-known brand, but it looks to me like they all come from the same place. As for the KSM vs. Cobapress, I don't fully know what the deal is. The weight difference is minimal, though I noted Cobapress has a bit more material at the tie-rod connection and one of the dust shield mounting points. Since we're working with modular, global architectures, it makes me wonder if further development was done via one of the VAG subsidiaries and it led to a slightly different design. Below is a very short video from St. Jean which shows VAG bearing housings being made in the Cobapress process:



    TBH, I don't think there's much of a deal with it. Of course, every manufacturer is going to pump up their processes and I've seen similar for other parts even as a kid in the 90s, where a cast part is lightly forged in a second step. It would actually not be a surprise that KSM was making the housings for a lower price point since the A4 in much of the world are rental cars, lease vehicles, and so on and they wanted to get them out there and recover investment earlier. More or less, the prices here are very, very close. The funny thing is from reading comments in Germany, people with S4s, at least early ones, also had KSM. I'm guessing tons of cars, especially as they get older and there's less priority on newer parts, will become frankensteined in the front ends making it critical to verify and document what one actually has before the need arises. I am betting tons of cars already have one KSM and one Cobapress housing.

    Since this is still a current topic in various countries and they often reference other forums, I will put this out there: the biggest priority is to know for sure which rear control arm one has and if it's m12 or m14. The front control arm's ball joint will fit regardless of it's it's m12 or m14 and if you want to upgrade to m14, you'll simply need to change the control arm to a compatible one, but both will fit in the bearing housing.

    As for KSM or Cobapress: the connection points are all identical and while it appears some people are mixing manufacturers with no ill effects, you should want to maintain consistency, just to be sure. If replacing both, then one may pick whatever is available that has the right rear ball joint mounting point. Also, if you are going to replace the bearing housing due to the pinch bolt and the upper and lower control arms are going at the same time, might as well upgrade all around to the m14 front control arm and ball joint, m14 rear control arm with the 75mm inner bushing and be done with it. And for the love of god, put anti-seize on the upper pinch bolt and the ball joints. Yes, this will require new bearings or if you installed your old bearings with anti-seize and they will come off, then a transfer over with new bolts.

    Now to the 4G0407253B of the later models: I looked at photos and at a minimum, the sleeve for the tie rod end extends lower on this model as compared to the earlier ones. Or simply less aluminum was used and it is just an evolved version of the housing that can be interchanged, I don't know.

  6. #6
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Hey, could I bug you again to confirm the torque values?

    There are numbers all over the place now and I"m not totally sure. Even a major autoparts supplier in Germany has a video on these replacements and they are being called out for odd torque values.

    Tie rod ends: 70NM
    Lower pinch for the forward ball joint at the housing: 40NM
    Lower rear control arm to housing: according to FCP it's 145NM, other places 140, other places are between 100-120. ECS has their own sheet and some values aren't even close.

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    Tie rod end ball joint nuts. There are three kinds. They are all "replace if removed".
    - to Dec 15 '08, hex collar nut WHT 000 785, torque spec 20Nm+90°
    - fr Dec 15 '08, 12-pt combi nut WHT 004 593, torque spec 100Nm
    - not used on B8 A4?, hex combi nut, torque spec 110Nm
    The repair manual includes that last reference, but it seems not relevant to B8 A4.

    If by tie rod end, you mean the securing nut that is loosened during an alignment, that's 60 Nm.

    Lower pinch bolt, yes, 40Nm, always replace if removed.

    Ok, so like the tie rod end ball joint nut, the lower control arms' ball joint nut is a convoluted bag as well.
    - to Nov 3 '08, M12 front & rear -> hex combi nut N90 848 404, 18mm span, torque spec 110Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/48723865/N90848404.html
    - fr Nov 3 '08 to Nov 2 '09, M12 front & rear -> hex collar nut WHT 000 785 B, 21mm span, torque spec 145Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/49048071/WHT000785B.html
    - fr Nov 2 '09 to Aug 15 '11, front M12 -> hex combi nut WHT 004 995, 21mm span, torque spec 120Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/48775887/WHT004995.html (click on pic to see the nut correctly)
    - fr Aug 15 '11, front M14 -> hex combi nut WHT 004 898, 21mm span, torque spec 140Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/62879895/WHT004898.html
    - fr Nov 2 '09, rear M14 -> same as the front M14 in the line above
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  8. #8
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    Tie rod end ball joint nuts. There are three kinds. They are all "replace if removed".
    - to Dec 15 '08, hex collar nut WHT 000 785, torque spec 20Nm+90°
    - fr Dec 15 '08, 12-pt combi nut WHT 004 593, torque spec 100Nm
    - not used on B8 A4?, hex combi nut, torque spec 110Nm
    The repair manual includes that last reference, but it seems not relevant to B8 A4.

    If by tie rod end, you mean the securing nut that is loosened during an alignment, that's 60 Nm.

    Lower pinch bolt, yes, 40Nm, always replace if removed.

    Ok, so like the tie rod end ball joint nut, the lower control arms' ball joint nut is a convoluted bag as well.
    - to Nov 3 '08, M12 front & rear -> hex combi nut N90 848 404, 18mm span, torque spec 110Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/48723865/N90848404.html
    - fr Nov 3 '08 to Nov 2 '09, M12 front & rear -> hex collar nut WHT 000 785 B, 21mm span, torque spec 145Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/49048071/WHT000785B.html
    - fr Nov 2 '09 to Aug 15 '11, front M12 -> hex combi nut WHT 004 995, 21mm span, torque spec 120Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/48775887/WHT004995.html (click on pic to see the nut correctly)
    - fr Aug 15 '11, front M14 -> hex combi nut WHT 004 898, 21mm span, torque spec 140Nm - https://parts.audiusa.com/p/62879895/WHT004898.html
    - fr Nov 2 '09, rear M14 -> same as the front M14 in the line above
    Man, so glad I'm asking because FCP, ECS, various sites in Germany for mechanics all have different values and you gave the most specific answers with dates. For the tie rod end I mean the securing nut at the bearing housing. For the most part, I am in the range. Crazy how everyone has different values.

    Many thanks!

  9. #9
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Crazy stuff which I didn't notice where I worked on the car before (poor lighting and didn't really look beyond connection points). I did the other side with lighting again and examined the old ones from both sides: Cobapress. No clue why I thought KSM. Guess I was just confused. Now here's the interesting part: the takeoffs are 8k0407257G (and whatever the passenger side should be). The passenger side should have been easier, and to some extent it was, BUT the lower rear ball joint was impossible to align and to get the whole assembly to shift back

    Still waiting for both wheel speed sensors to come in. There was simply no pulling them out any which way. I tried minimizing turning, tried straight out, tried oil, nothing.
    Last edited by Kolbenringe; 02-03-2021 at 04:13 AM.

  10. #10
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    Yeah, you have to wonder sometimes who is running things back at VAG parts numbering.

    Take the B7 A4. curved lowers wheel bearing housings are 8E0 407 253 E / 254 E. Then there's a 254 F for the right side for whatever reason. But we see that while the parts catalog part number is 253/254, the comments note:

    254 E - marked with:
    8E0 407 242 B
    8E0 407 242 D
    8E0 407 242 G
    8E0 407 242 J
    8E0 407 258 F

    254 F - marked with:
    8E0 407 242 C
    8E0 407 242 E
    8E0 407 242 H
    8E0 407 242 K
    8E0 407 258 H

    ? What's the point of forging the parts with different part numbers than what you're cataloging them under?

    So I assume the 257/258 vs 253/254 for the 8K0 versions is the same story. The problem is the revision letters are a mismash relationship between the stamped part numbers and the catalog part numbers.

    The 8K parts page does not reference a "marked with" list, but it says to review parts bulletin 4-36. I've yet to find an online resource to look at whatever these parts bulletins say. The PCV has one too.
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  11. #11
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    It's crazy and I've seen this part number elsewhere being referenced as confusing. So for anyone that might search, 8k0407257G can be interchanged with whatever comes up for 8K0 407 253 AA (at least these parts suffixes are valid for Europe). Just make sure your rear control arm ball joint is the correct type. I used Vaico's v10-3512 and 3513, with some sites saying it won't fit, some sites saying it would. Ultimately, it turned out to undoubtedly be from the same foundry. Even the casting lines and flash are identical.

    I also tried finding those parts bulletins and have had no luck.

  12. #12
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Wanted to update another thing: I ended up with pinch bolts that were actually too short. Luckily, I bought a bag of hardware from Sidem and originally I thought they were wrong because the pinch bolts were longer than the ones I ordered by the Audi part number. Turns out they were the right ones. The other thing is they are either chrome or nickel plated and the only ones in the bag like that. I'm guessing this is their fix for the corrosion issue. Regardless, I still covered the bolt with two types of anti-seize. If you're unable to source the Audi bolts that have the reduced radius in the middle, try to find chrome or nickel plated ones. They're probably from marine applications.

    Anyhow, thanks for the help. This whole thing has been stressing and disappointing, to say the least, but at least I made it out the other side ok. Did a 230kmh run on the highway and all is good.

  13. #13
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    The pinch bolt has some versions to it.

    Until Jun 6 '11, it is N10 491 802, a M10x110x21 bolt, which is still the current part for that date range.
    After Jun 6 '11, it was N10 770 901, a M10x110x24 bolt, but that has been superseded by WHT 007 963.
    WHT 007 963 is your reduced middle bolt.

    parts.audiusa.com shows the roll date at Mar '11 (https://parts.audiusa.com/p/48760877/N10491802.html), essentially the start of MY12 production.
    The C7 ETKA page shows the same Jun 6' 11 roll, but the WHT page for parts.audiusa.com shows the Mar '11 date (https://parts.audiusa.com/p/Audi__/S...WHT007963.html).
    The WHT is listed for B8 and C7; I assume the part change was more of the consolidation of B8 and C7 parts. But why carry on with the 802 bolt instead of switching all the B8 to the 901 and then the WHT bolt?
    And is there more to the difference between the 802 and 901 bolts than 3mm of thread to make the 901 need replacing but allowing the 802 to carry on?
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  14. #14
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Hah, thanks for that. It's also weird- I ordered the reduced bolt by part number and only got the regular bolt direct at the Audi parts counter. I already ordered Febi Bilstein bolts by the earlier part number and they ended up being the ones too short. They fit, I could get the nuts on, but only a couple threads. The Sidem bolts, which all come from the same manufacturer of the Audi bolts anyhow, are a couple millimeters longer than factory. Meanwhile, I searched around and the reduced bolts I could buy from Lithuania on Ebay. I just don't get how Audi works and meanwhile, ones with marine finishes like what I have are available, but I only by mistake do I have them at all.

    I just checked Ebay again and still, multiple listings for 963, all Lithuania, but also this from Lemfoerder, which a completely confusing photo: https://www.ebay.de/itm/LEMFORDER-Re...UAAOSw94Nf-w1y

    Also Ebay's parts matcher there says the bolts won't work with my specific car (the parts matcher here is kind of a binding thing and if the parts don't fit, one can return the item for free and it uses a different number from the VIN that's not used in the US). The corresponding reference numbers in the listing also show the 8K (we use that instead of B8 here) parts, like the control arms. The Audi parts systems are extaordinarily messy here.

    I tried the 963 number in AHW's parts finder (a German VAG dealership with an online parts department) and also nothing found. To me, it looks like these bolts are for certain markets and they don't think the German one requires it. Probably because there's no DIY culture here and everyone just goes to workshops and pays crazy amounts of money for poor work.

  15. #15
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    The Audi bolts for the 8K pinch are all 110mm (length without the bolt head). So simple enough to measure the stray bolt and determine if it's incorrect. Appears prior gens used a 100mm pinch bolt, e.g..

    Yeah, 8K would have been much better than B8, but getting people to fix themselves is a lost cause. It hasn't been called VagCom for 12 years yet people still don't call it VCDS. The problem with B8 is now it represents four body types, 8K sedan/avant/allroad, 8T coupe/sportback, 8R crossover, and 8F (iirc) convertible. So saying B8 in fact does not imply being an A4 like it did for prior Bx designations.

    But like I said, pointless trying to fix establishments. Even the second time around, it's still "B9" instead of 8W.
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  16. #16
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    The Audi bolts for the 8K pinch are all 110mm (length without the bolt head). So simple enough to measure the stray bolt and determine if it's incorrect. Appears prior gens used a 100mm pinch bolt, e.g..

    Yeah, 8K would have been much better than B8, but getting people to fix themselves is a lost cause. It hasn't been called VagCom for 12 years yet people still don't call it VCDS. The problem with B8 is now it represents four body types, 8K sedan/avant/allroad, 8T coupe/sportback, 8R crossover, and 8F (iirc) convertible. So saying B8 in fact does not imply being an A4 like it did for prior Bx designations.

    But like I said, pointless trying to fix establishments. Even the second time around, it's still "B9" instead of 8W.
    +1
    When I was in the Audi world back in the 5000/200 days, there were shades of this back then, but nowhere near as bad. Then I switched to Mercedes and it was beyond easy. It makes me wonder if people at Audi are just trying to make sure they keep their jobs somehow. I get updates when things need it, but we're talking a dozen revisions and now the issue is getting to the point where there's so much doubt on entire assemblies.


    As for the Allroad, I think that's 8H, if I'm not mistaken, but yeah, noone cares and meanwhile, my shocks are all 8T part numbers, as are numerous parts in the car. I ran the part numbers through some parts sources and some say compatible, some say no. So this will start all over again if or when I need them.

  17. #17
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    BTW- the identifiers we use are on the vehicle document we keep in the car. It has technical data of the car on it, but it's the HSN TSN fields and that's how we find parts and apparently, it's more exact than the VIN, which is nuts to me, but whatever.


  18. #18
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So glad to have this thread because I very likely have to replace lower control arms after hearing a characteristic groan, almost like a toad, when turning left and sometimes braking. Now to decode the specs and make sure I order the right parts.

    Due to widely-reported bad experiences out here, I will not buy the Meyle kit (the saying in Germany is "he who buys meyle does the job twice"), even though I've had ok experiences in the past on the Mercedes side of things. I will likely do Lemfoerder, Spidan, or ***, or a combination because availability is spotty.

  19. #19
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So I ordered a full Lemfoerder set of lower control arms, the ball joints, hardware, and also the stabilizer bar links in plastic over the aluminum. There's a weird thing about the aluminum ones where they're either super cheap Chinesium ones, middle priced ones are the plastic, then the higher priced ones are aluminum again and listed for Porsche and Bentley applications alongside Audi.

    Some parts store on Ebay assembled the full kit (sans stabilizer links) with Lemfoerder parts and all the Lemfoerder hardware. It also appears that no matter where one goes, if they're going for the lower front control arms as a pair and the ball joints, they will be funneled into the M14 variant. Others are saying similar, as well as for repair shops funneling people into the M14.

    I also verified that the rear control arms have the 75mm inner bushing.

    I looked at Meyle HD, but the bad reviews are too numerous in Audiland out here. There is a rather credible suspicion that the bushing material is harder than OE, which is fairly known, but this works to its detriment, especially when the vehicles are used in cold weather. The testimonials are often "20,000km" or less. Some get about 50k km which is also not that good, IMO. My OE lasted thus far about 160k km.

    I looked at TRW, but pricing was also not favorable and oddly, same for Febi Bilstein. I have an inspection coming up and I don't want to deal with a fail, so these are getting done. At the last inspection in 2020 I saw the inspector jamming a prybar into the inner bushing area and really going to town and peeking in to look for cracks, so I'm guessing they already looked questionable. I have so much work to do on this car including another water pump and a check for front ABS sensor wiring that goes haywire in heavy rain. And front brakes that are starting to go borderline.

  20. #20
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    The sway bar links are metal or plastic on the B8. Base part number is 8K0 411 317.

    Rev B is 110mm metal, for super early A5, until Sep 19 '07. Ie, almost none of them.

    Rev E is 170mm metal, used until Q4 '09, then replaced by D.

    Rev D is 170mm plastic, pretty much used across the board, but dropped in 2014, replaced by 4G0 411 317 A (metal), which itself was dropped in 2018 and replaced by 4M0 411 317 (metal), which then rolled to rev J last year.

    Audi doesn't seem to care too much which you use, so long as both are the same kind, plastic vs metal.

    Rev C is 170mm metal, used RS5 DRC. Don't know how they differ from rev E. Dropped Oct '11, replaced by 4H0 411 317 A, later rolled to C in Apr '13.

    So looks like they started out with metal E, moved to plastic D except for the RS with DRC (used C), but then dropped both D and C and replaced them with metal ones from 4G (C7) and 4H (D4). Maybe the plastic wasn't going to cut it for the heavier products, but it didn't save enough to bother having multiple parts to stock?
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  21. #21
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    The sway bar links are metal or plastic on the B8. Base part number is 8K0 411 317.

    Rev B is 110mm metal, for super early A5, until Sep 19 '07. Ie, almost none of them.

    Rev E is 170mm metal, used until Q4 '09, then replaced by D.

    Rev D is 170mm plastic, pretty much used across the board, but dropped in 2014, replaced by 4G0 411 317 A (metal), which itself was dropped in 2018 and replaced by 4M0 411 317 (metal), which then rolled to rev J last year.

    Audi doesn't seem to care too much which you use, so long as both are the same kind, plastic vs metal.

    Rev C is 170mm metal, used RS5 DRC. Don't know how they differ from rev E. Dropped Oct '11, replaced by 4H0 411 317 A, later rolled to C in Apr '13.

    So looks like they started out with metal E, moved to plastic D except for the RS with DRC (used C), but then dropped both D and C and replaced them with metal ones from 4G (C7) and 4H (D4). Maybe the plastic wasn't going to cut it for the heavier products, but it didn't save enough to bother having multiple parts to stock?
    I can't believe they're so goofy about revisions even on these things. Even though mine is a model with the factory sport suspension and I drive really fast, I really doubt I will notice anything having an aluminum sway bar link.

    Ohhh, now I'm seeing something different: for cars optioned with the 1BV s-line sport suspension, they specify the aluminum sway bar links whereas 1BE still has the plastic.
    Last edited by Kolbenringe; 10-30-2022 at 02:03 PM.

  22. #22
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    Curious; I don't see any accommodation based on suspension PR code. Looking at only B8.0 and B8.5 catalog A4Q, I see the plastic rev D across the board (though that's dropped now, replaced by the 4G metal), except for Russia and "BY" in B8.5, that used 4G metal right offhand.
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  23. #23
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    Curious; I don't see any accommodation based on suspension PR code. Looking at only B8.0 and B8.5 catalog A4Q, I see the plastic rev D across the board (though that's dropped now, replaced by the 4G metal), except for Russia and "BY" in B8.5, that used 4G metal right offhand.
    That's interesting. The Russia thing I'm reading in the parts catalogs, too. I watch Russian dashcam videos, so I can see why they would specify metal. For the quality of the roads in Sweden, Finland, and Norway, I would then consider the metal ones, but I already have mine on order, so I'm done with it. I also should have specified that it's the online parts sellers that are funneling 1BV into the aluminum links.

    Not sure if NA got the 1BV suspension, but it's supposed to be dropped an additional 10mm and supposed to have a 26.5 mm stabilizer bar. The parts catalogs and the suppliers appear to be selling the same springs and dampers for 1BE and 1BV/sport suspension (Sportfahrwerk) applications. I'm also reading on another forum someone else can't make heads or tails out of this, as it appears a desirable upgrade is to go with the 1BV suspension for an additional 10mm drop (30 total) and still be more or less OEM so one doesn't run afoul of inspectors.

    What I just found is that one could buy Bilstein OE and B8 dampers specifically for 1BV applications and there are 1BV-specific tie rod ends from Lemfoerder that are pretty pricey. I have the 1N7 dynamic steering package, so I have no clue if there's a specific rack for the 1BV, but the parts catalogs only have 1N7 steering racks and a specific hose. Bump stops for 1BV are about 66mm as opposed to 72 for 1BE and the damper is different. Coils appear to be the same.

  24. #24
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    US didn't get 1BV, but it's in the parts catalog all the same. Audi didn't put metal on the 1BV according to it, not until the plastic got dropped entirely and replaced by the 4G metals. Even the RS5 standard suspension got plastic; only the RS DRC was always metal. But either or, it's all metal now, at least for Audi OE parts. The plastic D rev got dropped 8 years ago.

    B8.5 1BV up front had its own dampers (there were two, one for low axle load codes, one for the bulk of the axle load codes) and it's own shorter bump stop (66mm, vs 72mm for 1BE/1BD and 81mm for 1BA). It used the same springs and ARB as 1BE and 1BD. I presume the 10mm decrease was in the length of the damper. I never made a chart for B8.0 1BV or for 1BV rear, so don't have that to just glance at to repost here.

    Bilstein always had the B4 standard as 1BA match (ie, 0" drop), B4 sport as 1BE/1BD match (ie, up to 1" drop), and B8 as for lower configs (ie, 1-2" drop). So 1BV would fall into the target range for the B8 dampers. And we see that match in the B8 equivalent list, 8K0 413 031 CK. https://web1.carparts-cat.com/defaul...4&14=4&12=2192

    I never understood who Audi sold 1BV to. Was it an option for A4 and S4? Why have an option for A4 that was even lower than S4. I presume it was targeted to German autobahn cruisers. 1BV was supposedly "quattro GmbH", but why wouldn't that be on an RS then? Seems like it was a left over from long ago ways; got dropped for B9.

    The rack doesn't care about the suspension PR code, only the steering PR code (1N1, 1N3, 1N7 for B8.0).
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  25. #25
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    US didn't get 1BV, but it's in the parts catalog all the same. Audi didn't put metal on the 1BV according to it, not until the plastic got dropped entirely and replaced by the 4G metals. Even the RS5 standard suspension got plastic; only the RS DRC was always metal. But either or, it's all metal now, at least for Audi OE parts. The plastic D rev got dropped 8 years ago.

    B8.5 1BV up front had its own dampers (there were two, one for low axle load codes, one for the bulk of the axle load codes) and it's own shorter bump stop (66mm, vs 72mm for 1BE/1BD and 81mm for 1BA). It used the same springs and ARB as 1BE and 1BD. I presume the 10mm decrease was in the length of the damper. I never made a chart for B8.0 1BV or for 1BV rear, so don't have that to just glance at to repost here.

    Bilstein always had the B4 standard as 1BA match (ie, 0" drop), B4 sport as 1BE/1BD match (ie, up to 1" drop), and B8 as for lower configs (ie, 1-2" drop). So 1BV would fall into the target range for the B8 dampers. And we see that match in the B8 equivalent list, 8K0 413 031 CK. https://web1.carparts-cat.com/defaul...4&14=4&12=2192

    I never understood who Audi sold 1BV to. Was it an option for A4 and S4? Why have an option for A4 that was even lower than S4. I presume it was targeted to German autobahn cruisers. 1BV was supposedly "quattro GmbH", but why wouldn't that be on an RS then? Seems like it was a left over from long ago ways; got dropped for B9.

    The rack doesn't care about the suspension PR code, only the steering PR code (1N1, 1N3, 1N7 for B8.0).
    The rack question I brought up with respect to the tie rod ends since Lemfoerder is offering a 1BV-specific tie rod end and those are in the steering rack diagrams, but as you mentioned, the steering rack can be ordered independent of the suspension package (or at least to some extent).

    I always assumed the 1BV was made for the S4, but all the remaining S4s I see around aren't low and in fact, mine already looks pretty low with 18 inch wheels. They typically are running 19-20. I chose my care due to it being the only one with sport suspension, dynamic steering, no electronic dampers, and the selector pod on the dash. TBH, a 20mm drop is already good enough and roads in Germany aren't as good as people think and it's sometimes jarring. I'm already worrying about bottoming out in driveways and it's completely inappropriate to go lower for parts of Germany, let alone the Nordic countries. I saw an A4 last week driving home from the Arctic and it was completely dropped with the wheels tucked inside the fender wells and something underneath the car sparked against the highway on a bumpy section. I have to admit being interested in getting OE 1BV dampers, maybe the roll bar, and the bump stops, but I really think I would be losing so much and gaining so little, especially since I drive in the snow in the Alps or in the Arctic and I already got stuck on a mild amount of snow. The advantage here is the use of OE parts and no real fuss with getting the modification registered with the motor vehicle department compared to plug and play kits from Koni, Eibach, Bilstein, and others t come with certificates to register.

    As for what I know about 1BV: it was an S-Line sport suspension upgrade. I can't fully determine if my car was an S-Line or pre-S-line before it became a thing because it has pretty much everything a later S-line has, outside of the badges, but the car was refurbed by Audi due to rust on the fenders after a couple years out of the factory, so they could have left them out, I don't know. I have the S4 seats without the embroidery, for instance. I'm guessing it was for people who wanted a dropped look, regardless of which engine the car was outfitted with. We also had packages such as "Ambition", which my car is, with the sport package. I don't know if they got rid of that for S-Line. So it would have been something like "Ambition Sportfahrwerk 1BE or 1BV". I believe the sport suspension was NOT available for the Ambiente edition.
    Last edited by Kolbenringe; 10-31-2022 at 01:58 AM.

  26. #26
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    Curious. The Audi parts catalog shows only a single tie rod end pair for B8.0 A4/A5, without regard for suspension code. Just 8K0 422 817 B / 8K0 422 818 B (replaced rev A in late '08 or so; my Aug '08 build has the A revs). So not sure what they're trying to offer as 1BV specific vs 1BA/1BE/1BD/1BL.

    If you have an S4, which comes 1BD unless you got the 1BL adaptive, you already have the springs and roll bar of 1BV. Would just need the dampers and bump stop. I don't see how they get the extra 10mm drop in the rear since it's all the same parts except damper and bump stop; that can work for a front strut, but how does that work in the rear. The damper isn't going to pull in the spring that much.

    Your all's TUV certs and all that process is a lot more rigid than what we have to consider here. Only regulatory limitations here are CARB certification for emissions related things (cats, tunes), in emissions enforcing regions. Then things like glass and tires and headlamps and such have to be DOT approved. But nothing like "you can only put this thing on this car in this config" ....
    Last edited by Smac770; 10-31-2022 at 10:10 AM. Reason: sentence structure
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  27. #27
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Yeah, the inspection thing is very, very annoying. That's why I don't go to TUV, but to another company, but it's a misnomer we have here where we just call the inspection "TUV" when it's a company. In my experience, TUV is really shady and they like failing for shit that's not an issue like rust on the outside/vane surface of in spec rotors. This is why I fret about the inspection because it can be really bad sometimes, or it can be a reasonable person. The technical change thing is also annoying, like going with 345mm rotors when the car was equipped with 320. My neighbor is currently having problems with his fairly new Mercedes with factory wheels. They're all supposed to be "voreingetragen" meaning registered as a valid combination from the factory, but the station keeps failing him, so he just drives in with the winter wheels. Someone can drive a heavily modified car from another country here, but we can't do the same without registering everything. I don't have any mods except a DV+ and that is a technical change as well. This makes it difficult to outfit an off-road vehicle for overlanding as well.

  28. #28
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So I ordered the Lemfoerder package with bolts and it unfortunately arrived with the M12 front ball joints and control arms, despite being advertised with M14. I only found out when I went to verify the parts by their numbers.

    Then the fasteners weren't even from this car and I only got half of them. The seller tried to verify everything and even requested the weight class sticker from the engine compartment to determine the load class. In the end, they requested themselves that I return the package because they can't establish fitment, particularly with the fastener kit. They offered the Meyle HD which is tempting because everything is in there, but I will go Lemfoerder, Febi, or SKF and will make sure to go m14 for the fronts. The fasteners I'll have to order piece by piece from Audi who doesn't make it easy.

  29. #29
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Parts are ordered; I ordered the Lemfoerder lower rear control arms, same as what I received in the package deal. I ordered TRW m14 front control arms, considering they're an OE supplier here and they're also a ZF company. The TRWs are about 30% cheaper than Lemfoerder and look identical in the pics to the Lemfoerder. I ordered SKF m14 ball joints. Not all front control arms are easy to find in the M14, even when ordering by OE part number, but there's an easy way: whichever fits the 2014-up Porsche Macan is the M14 variant.

    The question I'm having now is with respect to the fasteners: it appears that Audi/VW have replaced the XZN/triple square fasteners for the subframe ends of the control arms to hex head. Is this correct? I have been having a hell of a time finding the fasteners and it turns out I bought a bag of fasteners in 2020 that contains one pair of these factory-style bolts, but the others are all hex head. The diagrams show hex heads and N10731501 (position 9 in the diagram, RCA-subframe) is being replaced by N10704401 which appears to be hex head. There's no mention of a washer, despite the smaller head and it looks as if the hex head was always there for the FCA, but the tutorials and videos are all showing M12 bolts. I even ordered a smaller pack of bolts and fasteners for super cheap just in case and they are factory suppliers- all hex heads.

  30. #30
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    I remember the lower straight control arm to subframe bolt being XZN, and the wheel bearing bolts being XZN. But I believe I remember all the rest being hex. Lower straight = lower control arm, lower curved = guide link, in Audi terms, but I just call them straight and curved.

    lower straight to subframe connection:
    WHT00 1949 - M12 bolt, internal XZN
    WHT00 1987 - M12 nut, external hex

    lower curved to subframe connection:
    N 1073 1501 - M12 bolt, external hex
    WHT00 1987 - M12 nut, external hex

    The catalog shows that to be the same for all type 8K (B8 A4) years, and doesn't show any of them as being superseded. And nothing about any washers.


    N 1070 4401 - this was initially used on the type 8T and type 8K, but was dropped from usage back in 2009. Suitable substitute is the N 1073 1501 bolt. The bolts are otherwise the same that I can see. Looks like at some point over the years, the catalogs were updated to just reference N 1073 1501 and not bother with identifying the initial usage of N 1070 4401.

    https://parts.audiusa.com/p/audi__/B...N10704401.html - available for order, but if you did, you'd get a message later of "we can't actually get this".
    https://parts.audiusa.com/p/49041619/N10731501.html - in stock

    https://www.ecstuning.com/b-genuine-...ach/n10731501/
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  31. #31
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    I remember the lower straight control arm to subframe bolt being XZN, and the wheel bearing bolts being XZN. But I believe I remember all the rest being hex. Lower straight = lower control arm, lower curved = guide link, in Audi terms, but I just call them straight and curved.

    lower straight to subframe connection:
    WHT00 1949 - M12 bolt, internal XZN
    WHT00 1987 - M12 nut, external hex

    lower curved to subframe connection:
    N 1073 1501 - M12 bolt, external hex
    WHT00 1987 - M12 nut, external hex

    The catalog shows that to be the same for all type 8K (B8 A4) years, and doesn't show any of them as being superseded. And nothing about any washers.


    N 1070 4401 - this was initially used on the type 8T and type 8K, but was dropped from usage back in 2009. Suitable substitute is the N 1073 1501 bolt. The bolts are otherwise the same that I can see. Looks like at some point over the years, the catalogs were updated to just reference N 1073 1501 and not bother with identifying the initial usage of N 1070 4401.

    https://parts.audiusa.com/p/audi__/B...N10704401.html - available for order, but if you did, you'd get a message later of "we can't actually get this".
    https://parts.audiusa.com/p/49041619/N10731501.html - in stock

    https://www.ecstuning.com/b-genuine-...ach/n10731501/
    Thanks for clearing this up. The wheel bearing bolts are XZN, correct. From all of the photos online and one from an online Audi dealer, the XZN for the front control arm may be getting replaced with the external hex. I definitely have such in the replacement pack I ordered, but the Spidan pack I have from a couple years ago has an XZN that's likely the bolt (and nickel plated, to boot). I'll see what I can end up piecing together from both of these packs. The biggest problem I have is how hard this is going to be to do the job only with a jack and jackstand. It probably won't be terrible until I have to torque ant TTY the bolts.

  32. #32
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So order #2 and the control arms are all correct- m14 all around. The problem is the supplier subbed SKF balljoints for Monroe- the worst garbage possible. One boot even has a rip in it already. I squeezed them and there's pretty much no grease inside, so be forewarned and stay away.

    Luckily, I looked on the local classifieds and a guy had a pair of the exact SKF balljoints I needed, but he apparently had m12 control arms, so couldn't use them, so I put in a bid, he sold them for a great price, and I'm good.

    It's good to see Monroe never changed and is still a garbage brand.

    I can only imagine that the M14 change for both ball joints was something they were standardizing across platforms, particularly when Porsche began speccing the parts for the Macan and the RS4 came around and they wanted stronger connecting points.
    Last edited by Kolbenringe; 11-15-2022 at 11:31 PM.

  33. #33
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So as another update: the SKFs arrived and I have not yet sent the Monroe garbage back. Upon inspection, the SKFs are noticeably heavier, but what is the biggest difference is the fit of the ball into the socket. The Monroes are not truly loose, but they can be moved with the most minimal of effort from a finger. By comparison, the SKF feel so seized that I haven't even been able to move them yet. Of course, I could put them in a vice and swivel them around, but I'm not looking to mark the bodies up. They have more grease in them (the Monroes pretty much have nothing more than a film), but I am considering injecting just a bit more. If we're going by the ease at which the Monroes can be swiveled, I am guessing they won't go for long before play develops.

  34. #34
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So more bad luck: One SKF ball joint is good, the other had the tiniest of pinholes in the boot right under the tang for the flat retaining wire. I think there's some flash there and I'm glad I thoroughly inspected it, but silly me, I did so only after installing them to the arms. I have another on the way and ordered a backup one from Amazon from Febi with free return just in case. The supplies of the OEM and higher-quality ones suddenly dried up a bit here for the m14s to the point that prices shot up between Wed and yesterday about 50% in some case while the lower quality ones are in good supply.

  35. #35
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So I finally did the job- all lower control arms plus the stabilizer links and as I suspected correctly, the driver's side rear inner bushing was torn, but it appears not that critically- was a tear from the outer ring, about 2xm long. I also had a very, very slight thud for years. So slight it didn't always show up and was so slight that one could have even taken it as just the tires hitting the a drainage grate in my garage (where it almost always showed up if I went too fast). The thud is now completely gone. The ball joints all felt fine, but I injected them with chassis grease two years ago when I changed the bearing housings and when the grease squeezed out, it was the same color. They feel fine, but I think something had a tiny bit of play. The stabilizer links were likewise ok. All bushings had a slight bit of peel at the bonded inner rings, but they were still ok.

    The job was not good at all. I bought a heavy duty jack and had really no room for the rear inner bolt so I did whatever I could do with two wrenches for leverage.

    Everything is M14 now, proper nickel-plated hardware. The only issue was I put a pinhole in one of the inner tie rod boots while trying to get the bolt in. That will be replaced in a few weeks because the replacement CV boot on that side that I installed 18 months ago is already torn. My rear arms appear to be Lemforder, while the front arms look more like the TRW replacements I bought.

    Thanks for the guidance here.

  36. #36
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Jul 16 2018
    AZ Member #
    422473
    Location
    Atlanta

    Yeah, the +180° on the guide link subframe connection is a beast to get done if you don't have the car on a full lift. Congrats on the job complete.
    2009 A4 Avant 2.0T quattro Prestige, 275k miles

  37. #37
    Veteran Member Four Rings
    Join Date
    Mar 31 2008
    AZ Member #
    27118
    My Garage
    eS-4
    Location
    CAL*SO

    Quote Originally Posted by Smac770 View Post
    Yeah, the +180° on the guide link subframe connection is a beast to get done if you don't have the car on a full lift. Congrats on the job complete.
    "its like bench pressing, 1 click at a time"

  38. #38
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    From the "what went wrong..." thread. It's funny how these things turn into multi-year projects. Regardless, I'm so happy that I did the upper pinch bolt a couple of years ago and anti-seized it with aluminum and copper anti-seize. It looked like new coming out, but the bolt was also nickel-plated, so that may have helped. I fixed the upper pinch bolt situation by just changing the bearing housings and putting in new bearings when changing the upper control arms.

    So in changing the lower control arms a few weeks ago, I put a pinhole in one of the steering rack boots when getting the front control arm to subframe bolt out and then back in. At the same time, I noted the outer CV boot I replaced in 2019 was ripping near the small clamp on the same side. The CV job went ok; not as easy to get the axle this time as last, but luckily I anti-seized the upper pinch bolt a couple years ago when installing new bearing housings and upper control arms and thankfully, the bolt came right out and the antiseize was still there. So made clearance for the axle that way.

    The problem was in going to the boot for the steering rack- the tie rod end bolt just kept spinning and I found out why: it's completely corroded to the ball joint stub and the place for a tool to hold it from spinning is damaged/stripped/whatever. In addition, the ball joint is loose in the socket, with about a 5mm gap between the bottom of the nut and the housing, so the corrosion was keeping it from falling out completely. Have a new tie rod end on the way and will cut the old one off and measure really closely so I can avoid an alignment. Not fun, but I'm really glad I checked all this out. I ordered a tie rod end and a steering rack boot for the other side just in case.
    I'm really hoping to avoid an alignment when putting the new tie-rod end on. I still haven't decided on whether I will drill it or grind it off. I also tried to seat the ball joint stub in the bearing housing by putting a hammer under the ball joint and lowering the car on it to get some pressure so I could hit it with an impact- nope, doesn't work, either. The nut is completely seized.
    Last edited by Kolbenringe; 12-28-2022 at 12:50 AM.

  39. #39
    Veteran Member Three Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 24 2018
    AZ Member #
    429604
    Location
    Germany

    So I was able to pull the tie rod by cutting through the bolt and shank and got the steering rack boot on and off without a fuss, did an incredible amount of measuring and I think I got the tie rod really close to where it should be- nothing remarkable while driving. The major problem I had was the large clamp for the steering rack boot. OMG, these things are so cheap. The moment I squeezed the pliers the two tangs ripped right off. Luckily, I had another boot, so I stole the clamp from that and that didn't go well at all, but it didn't break and I went super easy on it. One boot is TRW, the other Lemfoerder, both OEM and both are identical, down to these incredibly cheap clamps. Any idea on getting better quality ones and in what size?

  40. #40
    Veteran Member Four Rings mtroxel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 24 2004
    AZ Member #
    858
    Location
    Minneapolis

    Quote Originally Posted by Kolbenringe View Post
    Any idea on getting better quality ones and in what size?
    Last time I did a rack boot, I used a zip tie. As long as it chokes down enough to prevent the boot from moving, Who cares? That was about 90K miles ago so I'd say its road tested.
    11 A4 Q, Prestige, Black
    207,000 miles, APR Stage 1

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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


    © 2001-2025 Audizine, Audizine.com, and Driverzines.com
    Audizine is an independently owned and operated automotive enthusiast community and news website.
    Audi and the Audi logo(s) are copyright/trademark Audi AG. Audizine is not endorsed by or affiliated with Audi AG.