Front bushes - Solid Rubber vs Polyureathane

[kaanage]

What brand are your Golfs' polyureathane bushes, rouge71?
And welcome!

[rouge71]

What brand are your Golfs' polyureathane bushes, rouge71?
And welcome!

Super Pro. They seem to very well made and have none of the drawbacks of the European polyurethane. Australia made as well, it seems.

[kaanage]

Did you consider their anti-lift kit (SuperPro's, that is)?

[rouge71]

I wasn't aware that they did such a thing. I bought their off-set bushes and fitted them to get as much caster as possible.
This made the steering have more 'feel' and as well as having more grip, the ESP is not cutting in all the time anymore.

If I wanted to reduce the anti-geometry, I would fit spacers between the alloy bush housing and the subframe, to move the back of the control arm down, essentially what an anti lift kit does.

Personally, I prefer to keep the anti-geometry as standard. I drive in Germany during the week and find the car more stable under hard braking from over 200 km/h to 50 km/h. Personal preference though.

[kaanage]

I didn't know that they did an ALK either until I looked at their Golf MkV and VI products after you said your car had their offset bushes. I agree with your comment about the "anti-lift" definition - I guess "pro-dive/squat" wouldn't wash over so well with the masses who think increasing stiffness automatically => improved handling/grip

I'm guessing that the advantage of an ALK over spacers is that the part is certified?

So did you have the offset bushes installed to push out the rear of the control arm as much as possible?

BTW Stable braking is what I'm looking for!!

[rouge71]

Still need compliance to get decent grip

I would hazard a guess that the improvement most people feel after fitting an anti lift kit comes from the added caster and the reduced reduction in caster under load.
Personally, I find that reducing anti geometry reduces feedback through the steering wheel.

Luckily, the TUV has no specifications for bushes, so no TUV approval is needed. In my previous car I played around with spacers to alter the anti-geometry and went through the TUV when it was 3 years old with 1.2 cm spacers. The examiner didn't say anthing about it.

[kaanage]

Thanks for all your feedback. Do you feel that the reduction in anti-geometry reduced steering feedback due to the greater amount of suspension compression at turn in?

From memory, Whiteline market their ALK in conjunction with stiffer front anti-roll bars as the increase front compliance under braking can be used to allow for more roll stiffness at this point without losing grip. This is one of the reasons that I am considering polyureathane bushes (the added caster is the other reason).

[rouge71]

Thanks for all your feedback. Do you feel that the reduction in anti-geometry reduced steering feedback due to the greater amount of suspension compression at turn in?

From memory, Whiteline market their ALK in conjunction with stiffer front anti-roll bars as the increase front compliance under braking can be used to allow for more roll stiffness at this point without losing grip. This is one of the reasons that I am considering polyureathane bushes (the added caster is the other reason).

I think that the reduced feel is because the dampers do not have enough low speed rebound damping to combat the increased energy. I didn't like the idea to fit a bigger front swaybar to mask this, as this reduces traction. So making the camber curve worse on the outside front wheel by reducing anti geometry and suffering reduced traction by fitting a bigger front swaybar, trying to fix it

Having tried a few different amounts of anti geometry, I think on most cars, anti geometry reduction has more negatives than positives.

I think that what people perceive to be a great improvement with an 'ALK', comes from the increase in caster and stiffer bushing, and not from the reduction in anti geometry.