ARB Drop Link Catching fix required Swiftly!

just remove the arb

I know you know your shizzle but that doesn't ring true to me ? Surely if it's removed completey then it's removed from the equation ?

I did think about removing the ARB although I believe on the 205 it may possibly be a subframe off job :s.

Without a load of spacers it catches the rear of the knuckle joint almost all of the time. It does not affect the steering too much bar feeling/hearing them catch.

On the side I spaced it out on (about 6 generic M10 spacers) it does not catch bar when the car is raised and then it will scrape the head of the damper clamp bolt slightly).

I have no pictures of the issue (I will not until tonight (picked the car up last night)) but when I get to a PC I shall see if I can get some photos of the front setup loaded up.

EDIT: pics of the setup. I cannot load them up since I am typing from a mobile.

s9.photobucket.com/albums/a68/randhawac/Cars/205/

AFAIK, the bodies are on the right way around with the drop link mounts pointing towards the rear.

2.4G - 1g anti-roll bars and linkages missing where one is fitted as standard.

It is a valid reason for rejection if the tester wants to get picky but it can also class as a modification. A lot of vans with air suspension do away with the anti roll bar. At the end of the day the benefit of the doubt should be given to the presenter. That's why I would just pass and advise.

Also, looking at the design of a 205 drop link, it is possible to fit the top balljoint back to front.... this would make it catch the knuckle on the back of the strut. The joint should sit behind the strut with the threaded portion facing forwards.


edit - I just looked at your pics, you do have it the right way round...

I would advise front suspension modified rather than arb missing. If vosa wanted to use that as ammunition against me then they'd be welcome but somehow I can't really see it happening.
Back to the OP, I think there's a possibility you may gave a 309 arb on there.

Whilst I agree on that directive would you have failed a car for catching the strut?

It is always great to see a discussion on RR. Even on small points you learn a fair few things, and I guess that is what it is all about in this game .

Eventually I ended up an MOT.

Anyway how did I get there? I decided to have another stab at it. For argument's sake I thought I would try the new drop links again (after two years of lying around, there was no chance that we could return them, and I saw ECP and others specified the same drop links for the 205), but this time remove the existing drop links completely. In the ARB end, the new item fitted perfectly, not loosely unlike the old items (I guess they were tightened up alot to not show this).

I then took the evasive step to drill the Drop link mounting hole in the strut casing slightly. It seemed silly to do so (after all, the original dampers had the same sized hole), but I thought I would see how I got on.

Anyway, there is no more catching at all! They do run very close I admit to the knuckle joint/damper clamp bolt, but they do not rub in the slightest.

They are a little longer and seem a little tougher (rod that is) than the old items (you can see in the pics where the old items were rubbing on the knuckle joint (rust in the middle of the rod section on both drop links).



It was a silly mistake. The fact that the stock damper did not take the top balljoint as well as the new casing I reckon is what threw me off, and made me think that all was not well. The PO did get the garage to renew them as well not long before I bought the car. Oddly enough, the old ones look alot like the ones on my 106.

Another thing. It is the first time since we have owned the car that the suspension has been creak free when turning... Woops.