2Gether FS : 01945 585322

Mitsubishi Delica Owners Club UK™
Mitsubishi Delica L300, L400 and D:5 Owners Club
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   Watched TopicsWatched Topics   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your personal messagesLog in to check your personal messages   Log inLog in 
CalendarCalendar  dynamic online chat serviceChatrooms   Delica Club ShopClub Shop  MDOCUK Classified Ads serviceClassified Ads
MDOCUK home pageMDOCUK Home  Yellow Diamond ClubsYellow Diamond Clubs  Delica Club (CA)Delica Club (CA)  Delica Club (AUS)Delica Club (AUS)

Front drive shaft play and cv boots.

Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Mitsubishi Delica Owners Club UK™ Forum Index -> Wheels, tyres, suspension, brakes and steering
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 18:31    Post subject: Front drive shaft play and cv boots. Reply with quote

I’m trying to get to the bottom of an unpleasant noise from the front left axle area. It’s making an intermittent rubbing/grinding noise which gets worse when turning right and stops when turning left. There’s nothing obviously rubbing (mud flaps, brakes etc).

The cv boots have been displaced for who knows how long, I packed with cv grease and put them back on today. They’re Milner units and they seem too short to me. They can only be correctly located with clamps in the securing grooves by extending the boots almost to full stretch, they then tend to get pulled off as soon as the steering is turned.

Whist in the area I had a look at the drive shaft. There is a couple mm play when pulling/pushing it in and out. Is this correct or a potential cause of the rubbing sound?

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
Google
Sponsor





PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 18:31    Post subject: Google Ads keep this community free to join!


Back to top
Deker



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 3833
Location: Borehamwood

PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 15:11    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, the "In/Out movement is necessary to allow change of length due to angular movement of the suspension.

Mr D
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 22:29    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Mr D. Good to know, unfortunately means I’m still searching for the real cause.

Cheers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 20:25    Post subject: Reply with quote

okay, I’ve been giving this some more thought today. There is a bracket that the shock absorber top mount is fitted to, this bracket has zero clearance with the new upper LHS wishbone, this is obviously wrong. Part of the reason the wishbone was replaced was as an attempt to resolve this clearance issue. The RHS has about 8mm clearance.

I’m thinking that the intermittent noise I’m hearing, which coincides with undulations in the road, especially when turning right and especially when at a steady speed or decelerating, is drive shaft noise being transmitted to the chassis when contact is made between the wishbone and shock absorber bracket.

Obviously I need to increase the clearance between bracket and wishbone but it’s not clear how the clearance was lost in the first place. Green grouch has suggested reindexing the torsion bars/ride height. This may help a little but I doubt it is the cause. I’ve also considered the lower wishbone bushes may have disintegrated, allowing the entire suspension to sag at an incorrect angle. Camber angle may also need resetting to improve things further. If I thought it was possible I’d suspect the shock bracket or chassis was deformed. No crash damage in the 6 years I’ve owned it. Lots of ridiculous speed bumps on my daily commute though.

Any suggestions, please?! 😉
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
Green Grouch
Lifetime member
Lifetime member


Joined: 14 Feb 2012
Posts: 1264
Location: Dorset

PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 21:01    Post subject: Reply with quote

There must be a simple solution here.?

It must be either bent badly, indexed badly, or bottom camber very badly adjusted. And or, something wrong with your shock length?

Can you think of your exact repair history?

When, what replaced?

Symptoms after etc.

I'd love to know the reason myself.

I'm still definete on the indexing, but also do get it wrong 😂.

If the shock is rubbing, the upper arm must be angled too low, which is dependent or caused on what angle the arm is, when the splined shaft on the torsion bar is inserted and tightened up? Surely?

I'd love a look myself, but don't have time to even clean mine!
_________________
A Little Knowledge is Dangerous and expensive! especially if your me Mending anything!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 21:23    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks. I do appreciate the input.
There hasn’t been anything much done to the suspension until the mechanic suggested the upper wishbone needed replacement. At least one track rod end has been replaced and the drop links have been replaced at least twice since I’ve owned it. The cv boots have been changed. I replaced the shocks a couple of weeks ago, the right side clearance is okay so it’s not shock length.

The wheel arch ride height on the good side is about 84cm, it’s about 83cm on the bad side.
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
Green Grouch
Lifetime member
Lifetime member


Joined: 14 Feb 2012
Posts: 1264
Location: Dorset

PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 21:45    Post subject: Reply with quote

It just must be that, that torsion bar spline has been misaligned in the upper arm. ?

I remember you mentioning that the stud anchor that adjusts the torsion bar was not located properly?

I reckon things have gone on here that were not remembered by the mechanic with relation to fitting the upper arm, if that's when it's all gone squeaky. 🤔

There is a post somewhere on here from le fleured doing a you tube video on it.


Start a fresh with adjusting both, and try again. 😔
_________________
A Little Knowledge is Dangerous and expensive! especially if your me Mending anything!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 23:45    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, the torsion bar anchor was displaced, this had the effect of the top of the wheel leaning inwards/bottom outwards. This was subsequently correctly repositioned, improving the camber a little. The main problem predated the torsion bar being disconnected though.

I had a look at the old wishbone today, there is about 4mm depth of metal worn off the inner seam where the wishbone halves are joined during manufacture. The area is fresh shiny metal in contrast to the dirty oxidised surrounding metal, it’s pretty obvious where it’s been rubbing and has worn away. With a new wishbone the wear process has started again and is no doubt more noticeable than with the old, gradually worn wishbone.

I’m struggling to accept that ride height adjustment alone could be responsible for components coming into contact with each other. Surely this would be a major design flaw?
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 11:24    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've given this a little more thought. I don't think it can be the top wishbone or the torsion bar setting. The issue can only be caused by the top wishbone being too far 'in' or the bottom wishbone being too far 'out' OR the shock absorber bracket or chassis being deformed (I'm ruling these out for now). There's no in/out adjustment on the top wishbone but obviously there's camber adjustment on the lower, enough adjustment here *may* make the difference, to be confirmed. Disintegrated lower wishbone main bushes would also allow the wrong angle, I don't know how to check this without removing and I don't want to do this unless replacing with new. Disintegrated bushes should have been picked up on previous MOTs.

Raising the ride height to the correct level won't stop the wishbone and shock bracket from making contact under certain conditions, the wishbone still moves in the same plane and the bracket doesn't move. This is unless, unbeknown to me, there are other, more subtle, geometrical forces at work.
Cheers
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
andyman



Joined: 08 Dec 2012
Posts: 5601
Location: Penrith

PostPosted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 19:14    Post subject: Reply with quote

Three thoughts occur to me.
1) The fact that the previous (original?) wishbone was rubbing on the shock absorber suggests that the top shock mounting is wrongly positioned. Is it possible to measure this in comparison to the other side?
2) Is all the chassis here original? L400s are renowned for rusting in this area - any repair may have moved (a) the top wishbone pivot or (b) the shocker top mounting
3) Were the previous shockers original? I recently replaced the original rear oil-filled shockers with some gas-filled from Milners on my L300. The new ones are fatter, and reduce clearance from the axle by around 3mm - it's probably less with the suspension compressed. This would not explain the difference in clearance on yours between left and right side, but narrower shockers might give you clearance on the offending wishbone.
_________________
Andy C L300 Super Exceed - over 100 smiles per gallon!
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Thu Nov 18, 2021 16:11    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Andyman. Thanks for your input. As follows:
1. The top arm is rubbing on the outer part of the shock bracket. I agree that the bracket/mount being incorrectly positioned could be the cause. I did make a rough comparison but came to the conclusion I had no way of knowing whether left and right should be identical. Would need to check against a 'known good' identical model.
2. I'm reasonably confident it's unmolested. I didn't have this problem for the first few years I owned the vehicle and haven't had any fabrication work done.
3. As far as I know they were original shocks, they looked old enough. It's not the shocks that lack clearance, it's the shock bracket interfering with the inner lip of the top wishbone, the shock is clear. The bracket surrounds the upper front side of the shock absorber. I replaced with gas shocks as it's all I could readily find at a reasonable price at the time, not much difference in size to the originals/previous shocks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 21:01    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've just updated a parallel post I'd made in the 'steering and suspension' forum, apologies for the partial duplication, details of note are as follows:

1. I've replaced the bottom wishbone today
2. I now have a clearer understanding of the suspension system and can see that the lower wishbone is unlikely to have an effect on the upper wishbone to shock absorber bracket clearance.
3. Russek manual identifies an 'adjusting shim' that fits somewhere around the problem area, I don't have this and it's not clear where it fits. If fits behind the upper wishbone shackle then it would resolve my clearance problem. If it fits behind the shock bracket then it will make things worse.
4. I can't find any reference to the shim in the epc data parts list. I don't appear to have a shim on either side, clearance on the RHS is fine.
5. I'm not 100% convinced my stabiliser bar has been installed at the correct angle. Both Russek and the parts list show a different design to what I have.

I've got to adjust the torsion bars and get the steering aligned but at the moment the best I can come up with to resolve the immediate issue is to trim a couple of mm off the shock bracket where it's rubbing. It's not a load bearing area, looks like it's just there to protect the shock from the elements tbh.
Cheers
H
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
skodarapid



Joined: 10 Jul 2018
Posts: 49
Location: Northamptonshire

PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 15:07    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find the Russek manual a bit rubbish.  The Front Suspension PDF as found in the link below is much clearer in my opinion.
http://www.MDOCUK.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=38831
See section 33A-11

I haven't had to remove the shock bracket before so this idea might be crap but perhaps it has some play in the bolt holes so you can shift it over a couple mm and do it back up?
If we are talking about the same thing, I wouldn't assume it's "not a load bearing area".  The lower beam that the lower wishbone connects to is weedy (and rust prone) compared to the upper beam, and the shock bracket that connects the two is a substantial gauge steel with large bolts.  This suggests it is carrying load.  I'm not suggesting removing a couple mm is a problem but that's just my experienced guess looking at it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 16:22    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi. Thanks for the link, I'm awaiting confirmation of access from Google drive...

I've just been to my local 4 wheel steering alignment place. Their take on it is that the top arm is too short or needs to be moved outwards, the same logic I'd already come to. I was just hoping there was enough adjustment to make it usable. The clearance between shock bracket and inside curve of the wishbone is non existent. The only way to get this back is to move the wishbone out or the shock bracket in. As the camber is beyond serviceable adjustment (negative camber) the logical assumption is now that the wishbone is too short or needs to be shimmed out, further away from the chassis. I'm reasonably confident that the wishbone is only available as 'one size fits all' (unlike some makes, BMW, Merc etc) and the wishbone I've replaced had the same issue so it needs to be shimmed out somehow.

How this can have happened I don't know. I've not had any accidents, I can only assume some distortion of the chassis has led to the wishbone moving inwards over time.

The bit I was thinking of trimming off the shock bracket is a 'loose' edge, the part that's making contact doesn't go anywhere, I can't really explain in words but suffice to say I'm not going to be trimming it anyway, this wouldn't correct my camber issue.

Cheers
H
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
Deker



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 3833
Location: Borehamwood

PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2021 22:09    Post subject: Reply with quote

RobH wrote:
5. I'm not 100% convinced my stabiliser bar has been installed at the correct angle. Both Russek and the parts list show a different design to what I have. Cheers  H

By "Stabiliser bar" You mean Anti Roll Bar ?  In the past, I have seen these installed "Upside Down"
You need to look at another Delica.

A member close to me had defective Drop Links that were pulling the ARB over to one side. New DP's cured that.

HTH

Mr D
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 10:34    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Mr.D. On consideration I think the stabiliser bar/anti roll bar is probably as Mitsi intended.

My problem has now been narrowed to the clearance between wishbone and shock bracket and, more importantly, the excessive negative camber. Both of these issues would be resolved if the top wishbone pivot arms were 1cm longer. But they're not. This feels like an impossible situation. Are the shock bracket and wishbone bolted to the same part of the chassis? If they are then even a bent chassis wouldn't account for the lack of clearance between wishbone and shock bracket.

IF the shock bracket and wishbone shackle are bolted to different chassis parts then I guess there must have been some movement of the top wishbone mount. Can this be corrected?

As a last resort workaround I've sourced a piece of 6mm flat steel bar to fashion into a shim to place behind the wishbone shackle mount, this should give enough extra length to correct the camber and prevent contact with the shock bracket. However, I'd prefer to get to the bottom of it and correct the cause rather than the symptom.

Does anybody have a diagram or photo of the main chassis components in the front left wheel area please? I have the epc data and the (useless) Russek manual but neither show what I'm looking for.
Thanks
H
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 15:28    Post subject: Reply with quote

Update: I've found several references to the same problem on the Aus ~ forum. It's due to chassis components peeling apart and/or cracking. This feels pretty unfair, I've not modified, abused, off roaded or over used my Delica and this is the thanks it gives me!

I'm keeping fingers crossed it's not terminal and a good welder could sort it out for me. All of the suspension components that have been replaced will need to come off again to allow the access needed.

The common theme is that affected vehicles seem to exclusively be V6 Petrol from 2002 or 2003. It's the passenger side that's affected. If you have this model it would be wise to check before any damage progresses too far. If you're thinking of buying this model, think again. A good yardstick would seem to be measuring the distance between the inner lip of the top wishbone and the leading edge of the shock mounting bracket whilst the vehicle weight is on the wheels, if it's much less than 1cm then you've got problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
andyman



Joined: 08 Dec 2012
Posts: 5601
Location: Penrith

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 19:49    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a new one on me, but then I don't own a L400. From the rusting point of view, the L400's reliance on laminating thinner gauge steel to reinforce mounting points appears to have built in the speedy demise of these areas due to moisture sitting between the bare metal laminations. I can't think why the specific period of V6 models should be worse, unless they also reduced the number of spot welds, or bought in a batch of less resilient steel sheets.
_________________
Andy C L300 Super Exceed - over 100 smiles per gallon!
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
RobH



Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 247
Location: Chester

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2021 20:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wonder if the v6 lump is heavier or weight distribution is not so good. I expect there’s more power and speed potential. Perhaps the quality of materials suffered in 2002. Who knows?!
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
skodarapid



Joined: 10 Jul 2018
Posts: 49
Location: Northamptonshire

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:24    Post subject: Reply with quote

Have you a link to the Australian discussions?
Back to top
View user's profile Send personal message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Mitsubishi Delica Owners Club UK™ Forum Index -> Wheels, tyres, suspension, brakes and steering All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


All contents © Hobson's Choice IT Solutions Ltd 1997 on
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group