Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 8161718
Results 171 to 178 of 178

Thread: TheBenior's GTI and Ducati Monster 696. Da Bears, dabears, dabears, dabears.

  1. #171

  2. #172
    Car Lawyer dodint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    'Trep
    Posts
    4,329
    Jealous, I'd love to be able to get out and ride a bit and clear my head.

  3. #173
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,362
    That Ducati pic is on brand.

  4. #174
    Spiny beast TheBenior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,393
    I've done a bit over 100 miles on the Pilot Sport 4S tires, and I'm impressed so far. Plenty of grip in the wet and dry combined with a smooth and quiet ride. The car takes quick turns, transitions, and on/off ramps with almost boring competence.

    I'm guessing that they're not 50% better than the Pirelli PZ4 (at Tirerack pricing the last time I checked), but if you can find a deal on the PS4S like I did, they won't disappoint.

  5. #175
    Spiny beast TheBenior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,393
    Sales got me to click buy on some sway bars and front control arms for the GTI.

    Hotchkiss was blowing out sway bars on eBay. I didn't find out in time to get the front and rear set for $156, but I did get a front for $90. Normally, they're ~$260 each. The front is an adjustable 28.6mm tubular bar with claimed 95/125% increase in stiffness. Whether that's based off of a regular Golf, GTI, or Performance Pack GTI, who knows.

    Tirerack had Eibach products on sale, so I ordered an Eibach rear sway bar that was a good $90 less than the next cheapest option. The Eibach is a 25mm non-adjustable tubular bar.

    Figuring I'd have to screw around with lowering the front subframe to install the front bar, I decided, "Why not get some aluminum front control arms with poly bushings and save a reported 4 lbs per side?" Turns out Whiteline makes a set for a lot less than SuperPro that can be found for a bit over $300. They add a claimed 1.5-2.0 deg of positive caster and 0.25-0.5 deg of negative camber.

    Of course, further research suggests that I may not actually need to lower/remove the front subframe since I have a manual transmission and not a DSG automatic.

    I'm also debating just buying new rear end links or to chance wrecking the stock ones attempting to remove them. Nothing fancy, just Moog OE replacement.

  6. #176
    Car Lawyer dodint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    'Trep
    Posts
    4,329
    As someone that paid full price for my Hotchkis sway bar set a few weeks ago, congrats to you.

    Most of the suspension bits I bought for the SRT-4 are Moog.

  7. #177
    Spiny beast TheBenior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,393
    IMG_20200422_114945.jpgIMG_20200422_105853.jpgIMG_20200421_122452.jpg

    Yesterday I decided to give installing the Eibach rear sway bar a go, reusing the stock end links since they don't have many miles on them and my Moogs hadn't come in yet. What the hey, they're good enough for Audi S3s in spite of being plastic. FWIU, it's better to do a rear sway bar with the suspension under some sort of load to avoid clunking, so I used my wheel ramps under the rear wheels as jack stands. Eibach's installation instructions say to remove the exhaust to make it easier to remove the sway bar. I didn't do this, because eff pulling the whole cat back and prying it loose from the exhaust hangers. Other companies say to just support the muffler and remove the hangar brackets to drop it down a few inches, so I did that and was able to finagle the stock 22mm hollow bar out without much difficulty.

    I finished up right as it started raining, then went inside, dried off and took a short test drive. I got a clunk from the rear end of the car after driving in to a parking lot with a number of elevation changes; it was quiet on the street.

    Today, I decided to try leveling the car with the front on jack stands and the rear on ramps. I adjusted the bar placement (it was slightly further to one side, judging by the collar stops), loosened all the fasteners, then tightened them to spec. Eibach's instructions helpfully don't include any torque specifications, but I found them in another company's instructions and on the Golf MK7 forum.

    Afterwards, I took a 20 mile drive, aiming for uneven road depressions and small potholes to evenly and unevenly load the rear wheels. I also drove over repeated railroad crossings, steep driveways, and parking lot speed bumps. The rear end clunk seems to have been solved for now.

    The car's handling feels a lot more neutral now. I'm now a bit worried that I'll want a bigger rear bar once I have my front bar in.
    Last edited by TheBenior; April 24th, 2020 at 06:08 PM.

  8. #178
    Spiny beast TheBenior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,393
    NHTSA report on the stalling issue is out:

    NHTSA Action Number: DP19003

    Components ENGINE, POWER TRAIN

    Opened From: September 3, 2019–June 30, 2020
    Summary

    The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has completed its review of a defect petition received on 14 August 2019 requesting an investigation of an alleged defect of the manual transmissions in Model Year (MY) 2019 Volkswagen (VW) GTI, Golf GTI and Jetta GLI vehicles. The stalling incidents cited occurred without warning as the vehicle slows to a stop or prepares to make a turn across traffic with the clutch pressed in and the vehicle in neutral.

    The hazard posed by a vehicle stalling event is manifested in the inability of the vehicle to move with the flow of surrounding traffic. Two factors have a major impact on the potential hazard to the vehicle, its occupants and surrounding vehicles: the surrounding traffic speed and the subject vehicle's restart ability. In the case of the vehicles that are the subject of this petition, restart is immediate and the stalls occur when the vehicle is slowing to stop for a traffic signal, making a turn, or is completely stopped. These circumstances substantially reduce the risk of harm to the vehicle, its occupants and surrounding vehicles.

    As of March 2, 2020, out of the population of 11,333 subject vehicles, NHTSA has identified 214 consumer complaints in its database, with unique Vehicle Identification Numbers (VIN), citing engine stalling as vehicles are being brought to a stop and/or preparing to make a cross traffic turn. When combined with the warranty, field report and customer complaint data received from VW in response to the Information Request letter sent, NHTSA identified 413 unique VINs alleging low speed engine stalling.

    Volkswagen determined that the low speed / idle engine stall was the result of unwanted gases remaining in the cylinder caused by the intake valve camshaft not being in the correct position at idle. The intake camshaft is in an advanced position. This advanced position results in too much overlap with the position of the exhaust valve camshaft, allowing both the intake and exhaust valves to be open at the same time. The erroneous advanced position of the intake camshaft is a result of low oil pressure at idle and high oil temperatures, greater than or equal to 110°C/230°F combined with engine control algorithms in the Engine Control Module (ECM) that position the intake camshaft. Based on examination of returned engines, only engines manufactured at the Silao Mexico plant were affected due to a tolerance stack-up issue with the oil system of the engines.

    In December of 2019, VW initiated a Service Action (24FD) to remedy the stalling issue in the affected vehicles. The warranty for the affected vehicles was extended to December 31, 2025. The software in the Engine Control Module (ECM) will be updated with a new calibration value for the adaptation nodes of the regulation valve. This is a directed action with letters being sent to vehicle owners asking them to bring their vehicles to their dealership to have the software update installed in their vehicle. The letters were sent in December 2019.

    After thoroughly assessing the material submitted by the petitioner, information already in NHTSA's possession, information submitted by Volkswagen in response to an information request and the potential risks to safety implicated by the petitioner's allegation, NHTSA does not believe that the stalling condition as alleged by the petitioner indicates the likelihood of a safety related defect that would warrant a formal investigation, therefore the petition is denied. Further specifics can be found in the Federal Register Notice.

Posting Permissions

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