I noticed that the hub carriers for the STRs with Brembo caliper and parking brake have a longer "Toe Arm". The "Toe-arms" on the Gen 1 hub carrier is 20 to 25mm shorter. I also noticed that the mounts for the toe-rods are welded at an angle on the gen 1 sub frame and straight on a gen 2 sub frame.

Does anyone know why they changed the toe arm/toe link geometry?
Did they go back to the original hub carrier on the later year S-types, or change the original ones to have a longer toe-arm?

I would assume that with the soft flexible rubber joints between the hub carrier and the toe link there would be a lot of flex leading to changes in the suspension geometry during acceleration and braking. Sure seems like this could lead to faster tire wear and poorer handling.

Has anyone put in poly bushing?
If so, any good results?

I saw the write-up from a year ago about changing the toe-links, but there was nothing mentioned about how good the geometry is...

 

No input?

Here is the link to the LVC forum about there endeavors to replace the LS Toe links.

Rear Toe Link / Tie Rod / Lateral Bar, options other then ford? - Lincoln vs Cadillac

I'd still like to know if anyone has seen/experienced what affect stiffer toe links have on the handling of the car. Seems like the hub carrier toe link joints rot and fall apart pretty quickly, and cost too much for the replacement parts.

 

The new ones are alot bigger than the old ones. And no i dont know why there are 2 differant lengths. And just because the boots rot off doesnt meen teh joint is bad. Ive seen those gone for years on cars and never have they delveloped any play. Doesnt meen i dont occassionally recommend they get replaced

 

My 2004 STR versus my 2000 S-type appear to be exactly the same, both have 13mm rods, same adjustment nuts and threads. My 2000 does have the sports package. Perhaps that is why they appear to be the same.