Got the arms. They're going to be pretty much all the way down to the bolt at the top of the arm (like Thermo's arms from the original post), so you don't need the second bolt.


Realistically, all the second bolt would do is provide a little more structural stability to the eyebolt if it was screwed out quite a ways...it won't keep the eyebolt from "backing out", once the eybolt is bolted to the rear, it CAN'T back out! (Again, my new ones have the ½" bolt welded to the front of the socket, unlike the ones that only have the single bolt or the two loose bolts.


Now, I'm wondering if I should do the lower fronts while I have it apart...seems that another $50 or so is a small investement since I'll be there anyway...

 

Decided to do the rear front lowers at the same time...having a devil of a time getting them.

Ordered and paid for a pair from a site sponsor, never shipped, looks like out of stock, but refunded immediately...lift time shot for that go around.

Went to another major Jag parts supplier, ordered and paid for a pair. One showed up, invoiced at the pair price.


I guess I should have quit while I was ahead.

 

get onto them. ...pester them
​​​​​​​..don't be beaten

 

They sorted me right our...another two days and all was right!

 

kccode1, auto makers only care about make money, lucky if they care for quality, much less about cost of repair to the car owners, that's how the dealers and mechanics make money; I just feel sorry for those little old ladies when they bring their car to the dealer for repair.

 

I did this replacement a year ago and still unsure if it was the right way to go.

The Volo arm is beefier than the stock Jag arm but other than that have seen little benefit. Removing the outer nut is a must as leaving it results in a top out approx 3/8". Taking that nut off, cranking everything else tight and reassembling gets you back to a visual vertical. Odds are that you're alignment guy will say that it's still not adjustable. Grinding the adjustment nut down 3/16th might give the alignment guy some wiggle-room but hard to say.

Seems that sadly, and for the most part, the rear of the X is a head scratcher in the alignment dept. Rotate often....

 

Have to say, I've had no problems with rear camber since getting the volvo arms fitted. The first thing I did after they were installed was get a full-on 4 wheel alignment. (my local alignment shop use a system very similar to the hunter hawkeye) Had no issues since & my car passed the UK MOT test with the new arms in place. My arms came from Partsforvolvos.co.uk - very happy my rear tyres no longer get chewed up, have not needed to rotate my tyres since.

 

Finally got around to mine...good thing I got the lowers. I pushed a bising out of one with my finger, the other fell out by itself!


I also must have been suddenly stricken blonde...somehow, I mounted the uppers backwards! Looked like a late 70s boy raced with the *** end jacked up in the air!


Doesn't matter how much experience you've had, everybody screws up once in a while, I guess!


Incidentally, the adjustment nuts can be found in 3/16" depth, so no need to cut them, I just replaced the end nut with the shorter one. Lined right up to factory spec, and feels much better with a little more rubber on the road!

 

Hey there, just popping by this thread as in I don't know much about the benefits of replacing the control arms but I do have questions.

Are you giving up some handling prowess by having the wheels straight vertical instead of negative cambered?

Are you giving up the squatted look of the X as seen from behind or front?

 

Patterson, yes, you are probably giving up a little bit of cornering ability due to having the tires more straight up and down (ie, within 0.5 degrees of straight up and down) vice being angled in on the top say 3-4 degrees. But, the benefit is that you are also extending the life of your rear tires by a bunch. So, for most people, they will never push their tires to the point that they need that little bit extra traction of having the tires leaning in slightly, but will much rather see their tires last 2-3 times as long.

The squatted look is having the rear end of the car appear to be sitting lower than the front. Most people base this off of the gap between the tire and the top of the wheel well.

 

Yo Thermo! I just put on a new set of tires last week. The Kumhos I took off the car only ran for 25K miles, steel belts were showing on the inside of the track. Worse on the fronts than the rears. Pep Boys seems to have trouble doing the alignment. I understand there are some special weights that are used to align the wheels correctly, and, PB doesn't have them. I don't look fwd to having to go to the dealer for a proper alignment. The new tires are rated for 50K miles, but, I doubt they'll last that long.

 

Patterson, the "weights" that are supposed to be in the car can be replicated by simply putting 160 pounds of play sand in the footwell area. So, if you want a "good" alignment done on the car, put 2-3 bags of play sand in the footwell of the driver's side rear passenger seat. Drive the car to the alignment shop and have them align it then. The purpose of the sand is to simulate the driver being in the car. The sand will cost you like $10. The weights are nothing special.

 

I had no idea that the weight simulates the driver being in the car. I don't think Pep Boys knows this either! They could easily have a technician sit in the car and accomplish the same thing and save $10 on sand.

Is this common when performing a 4 wheel alignment on other cars?

 

Patterson, this is not a normal thing. Most manufacturers figure that the difference between a "loaded" car and an empty car is minimal and therefore, why waste the time loading the vehicle. From what I have heard, this is more of a Jaguar"ism" than anything. Hence why no one really knows about it.

 

Let me tell you when you go 21 stone it makes a difference!

 

It would be interesting if someone has a friend with an alignment machine and could put their car on the machine and then have the readings taken on the car (no one in it) and then get in the car (noting their ballpark weight) and get a second set of readings just to see how much and what changes with the addition of a person in the car. No adjustments done to the car, but get some raw numbers just to see how far things may/may not move.

 

Reminds me of 'Road Force' balancing for tires.

 

Hobbs, FYI I purchased a set of these too, and have discovered the rolling end on one of the arms has disintegrated. Further causing the ARB link to snap (or perhaps the other way around). Not sure of the cause... maybe faulty part?

BTW Found this replacement set for $48.00 and free shipping, on eBay. http://www.ebay.com/itm/391898260542

 

These are the ones I had fitted:

S40/V50 04-12, C30 07-13 PFS Adjustable Upper Rear Suspension Arm-Pair

Been on for 18 months (have since retired the car for other reasons) never had a moments trouble with them, solid as a rock. We set them with a spirit level initially, had them checked by an alignment guy - they never needed touching again!

 

Agree, I almost bought those but US shipping is up there. Money is not so much the issue but I did find these which, on paper, seem as good or better, here in the US.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0010DLIKW/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1