 |
|
|
1999-2009 [Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup
The rear alignment looks pretty good on my car (03 Aero SW) finally. I hope this fix actually works. It took Saab a while, but the northeast region field service engineer instructed my dealer to change the rear axle and bushings. (PN 5059258, 5059266, and 9227696 - the first two parts are bushings and 2 are needed of each part number. The last part number is for the rear axle.) My EPC says that the bushings (PN 5059258 and 5059266) are for 1999-2001, but is not up to date enough to check the rear axel part number. I double checked the part numbers with a dealer. There is one rear axle PN 9227696 for 2000-2004 and different bushings PN 5236260 and 5236260 for 2002+ cars. That rear axle PN is a superseded number from the older one shown in my EPC. My dealer thought the new part was identical so I have no way of knowing if the new part will fail in the same manner or not.
Will the older bushings my dealer installed cause any problems? As a technical person I think the EPC sucks because it is an idiot’s catalog that gives no technical information. No one can actually know what can be used in a pinch or when an error is made. My dealer’s part guys can’t seem to get the right parts for my car (so far wrong brake pad, rear shock, and bushing part numbers have been installed). Do I make them redo this job to put the correct bushings in?
The rear axle might better be described as a subframe. Apparently the thinking is that the subframe deforms. The old part is not visibly damaged. Accurate measurement probably would show the problem areas. My take on this is that the part is simply underdesigned for the loads that some vehicles put on the part. An empty car on a smooth road is not the same as a loaded car on a rough road.
My front camber is still at the extreme negative end of its range and the front caster is at the extreme positive. Does this matter? My steering feels less precise than it once was, but this is very subjective.
My ride height still measures somewhat lower the WIS says it should be. Maybe the WIS is wrong. More likely I am not measuring it entirely correctly since the procedure is so vague. New rear springs and shocks did improve the ride height significantly (by about 20mm).
Bottom line is that Saab could have been forthcoming months ago and saved the dealer and I a lot of grief.
I still maintain this is an engineering design defect. This subframe was deformed by about 35K when I had a blowout. I’ve read that the 9-5 was engineered for 250K. If that is true, I either got unlucky with a poorly stamped or cast part (still a manufacturing and/or an engineering defect) or there is more to this story like a poorly designed part. The field engineer said Saab has changed a number of these rear axle subframes under warranty. That doesn’t sound the least bit reasonable to me or like I am using my car in some very unusual way.
Good luck to all who have this problem. At least you now know what to demand of Saab.
The ultimate kicker is I finally I get to put my smooth WR winter tires on and get the cupped, virtually stripped of their inner edge tires off the car.
posted by 69.113.12...
, Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:20:50, Sat, 11 Mar 2006 16:34:02
, Sun, 12 Mar 2006 01:54:34
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
