• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

V90, 965 strut and shock question

The manufacturer made point that this type of bushing is usually ordered by drivers with AirRide or other suspension modifications who demanded harder material, and they were pretty happy with the product. It's been on the market for over a year now. Personally i don't have too many questions about other items in the line 'cause they look to be very well made indeed.

In my situation with the stock ride height this puck bushing might not work in full travel range, just as Ben mentioned. If it had exact same design as the OEM one but only implemented in PU, i would have no hesitation 'cause Poly is just better material, besides it has all the required flexibility for the application, so no worries about premature failure here. At least not for my part )

Another point i agree on is that PU would not be the best choice for the spherical bushing introduced earlier, for it might well be too soft. PTFE would likely be a better bet, but then it's hard to say how the car would feel with it, thou i see this type is not uncommon with other brands:

bmw_bushing.png


This setup is popular with offroad drivers too.



If poly is just 'better material' then why does 0 OEM or professional race team use it, anywhere? Poly is cheaper to mold, and is harder. Thats it. Higher durometer rubber takes actual R&D money, and is cost prohibitive for most of the aftermarket. Thats why Groupe N rubber pieces are typically very expensive - economies of scale for low volume production parts that were run in actual racecars. There is nothing 'better' about polyurethane in a large majority of automotive applications. Science & physics disagree with you.
 
If poly is just 'better material' then why does 0 OEM or professional race team use it, anywhere? Poly is cheaper to mold, and is harder. Thats it. Higher durometer rubber takes actual R&D money, and is cost prohibitive for most of the aftermarket. Thats why Groupe N rubber pieces are typically very expensive - economies of scale for low volume production parts that were run in actual racecars. There is nothing 'better' about polyurethane in a large majority of automotive applications. Science & physics disagree with you.
And what on Earth is that supposed to mean -- the aftermarket is a downgrade to OEM? What aftermarket are you talking about -- URO, ScanTech, Optimal?

You also must have a 'Science' tattoo. And 'Physics' somewhere on the other side. Just kidding, but i like to speak for myself only )

PU:
- has superior wear resistance
- chemically more inert and so less susceptible to road grime and other contaminants that often include oil
- has better abrasion, impact and tear resistance
- elastomeric memory is better, means car stays aligned longer
- have very close flexibility to rubber, which in moving range of this application is fairly enough
- why, many performance parts are made of Poly, dunno where 0 number comes from..
 
In my situation with the stock ride height this puck bushing might not work in full travel range, just as Ben mentioned. If it had exact same design as the OEM one but only implemented in PU, i would have no hesitation 'cause Poly is just better material, besides it has all the required flexibility for the application, so no worries about premature failure here. At least not for my part )


This is so wrong on so many levels. Copying the factory design in poly is just ignorance at its finest. Its not a better material. Its a different material. Its popular in the aftermarket because its cheap to pour and make molds with but its not a super material.
 
Well, rubber bushing failing every 10k called a super material?

That has more to do with the design of the bushing, instead of the material. What I imagine would work fine is just that bushing but solid rubber (normal hardness, nothing too crazy). Shouldn't be too hard to make. Would there be a market for something like that?
 
Design is awful, and that's the reason i wish it were implemented in PU. Take a look at the Material Properties Chart. It's independent, it is unbiased, it is in fact a Science Rep, not only claimed. And tell why you would want rubber in that Bush.
 
Here is the summary table of properties in more human language
smile.png


properties_ed.jpg


The only time one rubber comes close is at very low temps, like -20 C and lower. So if it's a harsh winter vehicle only, then i would say nothing wrong to stay with rubber. In all other cases -- gimme that Poly! :oogle:
 
imma just swoop in here real quick--it's not that it's polyurethane, it's that it's stiffer. If it were a rubber bushing that was stiffer, it would also be bad.

that bushing is bad. I mean people will buy them, install them, and say they are a great upgrade. In all likelihood, the cars are so old they'll be off the road or crashed before the cyclic fatigue cracks a control arm or body mount. but, ?\_(ツ)_/?
 
And what on Earth is that supposed to mean -- the aftermarket is a downgrade to OEM? What aftermarket are you talking about -- URO, ScanTech, Optimal?

You also must have a 'Science' tattoo. And 'Physics' somewhere on the other side. Just kidding, but i like to speak for myself only )

PU:
- has superior wear resistance
- chemically more inert and so less susceptible to road grime and other contaminants that often include oil
- has better abrasion, impact and tear resistance
- elastomeric memory is better, means car stays aligned longer
- have very close flexibility to rubber, which in moving range of this application is fairly enough
- why, many performance parts are made of Poly, dunno where 0 number comes from..


You ignored nearly everything I said and started making things up - some of it the complete opposite of truth. Not saying you're lying. Just saying maybe you've taken your first materials properties class in school and are pleased with the amazing things you've learned, and need to take more to understand how things actually work? Have fun with your bushing. In an otherwise stock suspension, that poly bushing will most likely fail in a similar timeframe to the rubber bushing, but with a different failure mode. Can you tell me what that mode will be? (HINT: you probably can't).
 
imma just swoop in here real quick--it's not that it's polyurethane, it's that it's stiffer. If it were a rubber bushing that was stiffer, it would also be bad.
Hardness of UT starts only at 3 ShA higher than natural rubber, and the bushing is not made of softest grade, i.e. one can still make PU version as soft.

Can you tell me what that mode will be? (HINT: you probably can't).
Can you?
--
Chill out, guys -- one positive outcome is that true connoisseurs and honored members are back, just as in g'old times. Isn't that nice? ;-)
 
Well carrying on like this is the kind of thing that creates a caustic and corrosive atmosphere leading to people being less likely to participate in the forum. But sure let's get into a pissing match about how others are spending their money
 
Well carrying on like this is the kind of thing that creates a caustic and corrosive atmosphere leading to people being less likely to participate in the forum. But sure let's get into a pissing match about how others are spending their money

Caustic maybe, but its better than having misinformation posted with no one saying anything about it so someone who doesn't know better reads it as being true.

If everyone was nice and just let people roll with things that were wrong all the time we would be stuck in the stone ages. :e-shrug:
 
That's right, with only one addition that everyone will remain of own opinion, until of course convinced otherwise which has not been the case yet.
 
There are voids in these poly bushes to help allow the arm to rotate as it is supposed to.
A steel bearing is going to provided better location and rotation at a cost to NVH, the poly is offering a reasonable compromise. Not perfect but certainly worth considering.
 
Will be interested to hear if this works. Highly skeptical though.

Similar rear control arm bushing designs are found in lots of cars. <a href="http://faculty.ccp.edu/faculty/dreed/Campingart/jettatech/polybushings/Dsc03370.jpg">Factory VW Golf Mk4 is very similar</a>. I installed a poly control arm bushing in my Golf a while back. It lasted on the order of weeks. Total absolute garbage. Poly can't take that amount of deflection. I was annoyed that they even sold them. I put in a <a href="https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0005/7773/2663/products/8N0407181B-2_cc723c21-1fa8-4712-85cb-fc33163cca0c_grande.jpg?v=1540830034">solid rubber Audi TT bushing</a> in its place and that was tight and lasted until I crashed the car (at least another 70k miles). Those poly bushings at least have some area to deflect... but still I bet they fail fast.

I'm thinking about just adapting that solid TT bushing to the Volvo control arm. I believe Volvo 960/V90 bushing is about 80mm OD, VW (as well as later volvo and many many other cars) are 70mm. V90/960 bushing is also offset from center though.
 
Poly can, but apparently manufacturer of that bushing can not. Look at Hockey Goal pegs that go into the ice, they are taking all kind of abuse, often the frame crooks 'em 90? under its weight and slide all around the ice in this position but them able to restore original shape instantly -- guess what those are made of.
 
Back
Top