"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote
>> "Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote
>> Re using the die grinder
>>> If you cut enough off,the nut will split when you try to
>>> turn it.
>>
>> Tegger and Jim: Unfortunately I found the space so tight
>> that I couldn't get vertical cuts with the die grinder.
>
>
>
> No vertical cuts! Just hold the grinder wheel parallel
> with the horizon,
> and grind away up and down until that side of the nut is
> mostly gone.

Oh, I get it now. I was focused on cutoff wheels (for my air
die grinder) and forgot about the grinding wheels I can use
with it as well.

Michael, "school of hard knocks" is my middle name when it
comes to my car's repairs.

Oh well. It's always easier the next time.

 

"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns97C7AFD87EF0tegger@207.14.116.130...
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:sfSag.443$SX5.305@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net:
///snipped for brevity///

>> I am measuring from the ground to the top of the front wheel
>> wells here.
>>
>>
>
>
> To determine ride height, you're supposed to measure fron the wheel well
> to
> the center of the wheel. Measuring ground-up introduces the tire as a
> variable.

Are you sure? Wouldn't measuring from the wheel well to the center of the
wheel also introduce the tire as a variable? The tire would determine, in
part, the height of the center of the wheel, wouldn't it?

>
> You must also be certain that the ground is actually level, and you'd be
> surprised how little pavement is *really and truly* level. When I check, I
> jack up the necessary wheels only enough to shim under the tires with old
> books. I use a line and a spirit level to level the car.
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/


I would think that once you had the car level with the ground as you outline
above, one should measure from the top of the shims to the center of the
wheel. Any difference between the two tires of interest could then be
eliminated by adjusting air pressure until the centers were equal. Then a
measurement from the wheel well to the center of each wheel would disclose
any difference in ride height. Perhaps I didn't grasp the whole of your
procedure....

Dave D

 

"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns97C7AFD87EF0tegger@207.14.116.130...
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:sfSag.443$SX5.305@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net:
///snipped for brevity///

>> I am measuring from the ground to the top of the front wheel
>> wells here.
>>
>>
>
>
> To determine ride height, you're supposed to measure fron the wheel well
> to
> the center of the wheel. Measuring ground-up introduces the tire as a
> variable.

Are you sure? Wouldn't measuring from the wheel well to the center of the
wheel also introduce the tire as a variable? The tire would determine, in
part, the height of the center of the wheel, wouldn't it?

>
> You must also be certain that the ground is actually level, and you'd be
> surprised how little pavement is *really and truly* level. When I check, I
> jack up the necessary wheels only enough to shim under the tires with old
> books. I use a line and a spirit level to level the car.
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/


I would think that once you had the car level with the ground as you outline
above, one should measure from the top of the shims to the center of the
wheel. Any difference between the two tires of interest could then be
eliminated by adjusting air pressure until the centers were equal. Then a
measurement from the wheel well to the center of each wheel would disclose
any difference in ride height. Perhaps I didn't grasp the whole of your
procedure....

Dave D

 

"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns97C7AFD87EF0tegger@207.14.116.130...
> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:sfSag.443$SX5.305@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net:
///snipped for brevity///

>> I am measuring from the ground to the top of the front wheel
>> wells here.
>>
>>
>
>
> To determine ride height, you're supposed to measure fron the wheel well
> to
> the center of the wheel. Measuring ground-up introduces the tire as a
> variable.

Are you sure? Wouldn't measuring from the wheel well to the center of the
wheel also introduce the tire as a variable? The tire would determine, in
part, the height of the center of the wheel, wouldn't it?

>
> You must also be certain that the ground is actually level, and you'd be
> surprised how little pavement is *really and truly* level. When I check, I
> jack up the necessary wheels only enough to shim under the tires with old
> books. I use a line and a spirit level to level the car.
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/


I would think that once you had the car level with the ground as you outline
above, one should measure from the top of the shims to the center of the
wheel. Any difference between the two tires of interest could then be
eliminated by adjusting air pressure until the centers were equal. Then a
measurement from the wheel well to the center of each wheel would disclose
any difference in ride height. Perhaps I didn't grasp the whole of your
procedure....

Dave D

 

"Dave and Trudy" <ddodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
news:446d7b73@news.acsalaska.net:

>
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns97C7AFD87EF0tegger@207.14.116.130...
>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
>> news:sfSag.443$SX5.305@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net:
> ///snipped for brevity///
>
>>> I am measuring from the ground to the top of the front wheel
>>> wells here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> To determine ride height, you're supposed to measure fron the wheel
>> well to
>> the center of the wheel. Measuring ground-up introduces the tire as a
>> variable.

Yes,you could easily have variation in the levelness of the ground under
the car,that you would not be able to see without a long construction level
or other non-eyeball means. 1/2 inch of slope or variation would not be
easily seen.
>
> Are you sure? Wouldn't measuring from the wheel well to the center of
> the wheel also introduce the tire as a variable? The tire would
> determine, in part, the height of the center of the wheel, wouldn't
> it?

No.the spring is going to push the axle out X distance,depending on the
weight on that side of the car.The diameter of the tire will only determine
how far the axle is above the ground,not how far the spring pushes against
the car's weight.

Now I'm gonna go out and measure my Integra..... 8-)

>
>>
>> You must also be certain that the ground is actually level, and you'd
>> be surprised how little pavement is *really and truly* level. When I
>> check, I jack up the necessary wheels only enough to shim under the
>> tires with old books. I use a line and a spirit level to level the
>> car.
>>
>> --
>> TeGGeR®
>>
>> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
>> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
>
>
> I would think that once you had the car level with the ground as you
> outline above, one should measure from the top of the shims to the
> center of the wheel. Any difference between the two tires of interest
> could then be eliminated by adjusting air pressure until the centers
> were equal. Then a measurement from the wheel well to the center of
> each wheel would disclose any difference in ride height. Perhaps I
> didn't grasp the whole of your procedure....
>
> Dave D
>
>
>
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"Dave and Trudy" <ddodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
news:446d7b73@news.acsalaska.net:

>
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns97C7AFD87EF0tegger@207.14.116.130...
>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
>> news:sfSag.443$SX5.305@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net:
> ///snipped for brevity///
>
>>> I am measuring from the ground to the top of the front wheel
>>> wells here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> To determine ride height, you're supposed to measure fron the wheel
>> well to
>> the center of the wheel. Measuring ground-up introduces the tire as a
>> variable.

Yes,you could easily have variation in the levelness of the ground under
the car,that you would not be able to see without a long construction level
or other non-eyeball means. 1/2 inch of slope or variation would not be
easily seen.
>
> Are you sure? Wouldn't measuring from the wheel well to the center of
> the wheel also introduce the tire as a variable? The tire would
> determine, in part, the height of the center of the wheel, wouldn't
> it?

No.the spring is going to push the axle out X distance,depending on the
weight on that side of the car.The diameter of the tire will only determine
how far the axle is above the ground,not how far the spring pushes against
the car's weight.

Now I'm gonna go out and measure my Integra..... 8-)

>
>>
>> You must also be certain that the ground is actually level, and you'd
>> be surprised how little pavement is *really and truly* level. When I
>> check, I jack up the necessary wheels only enough to shim under the
>> tires with old books. I use a line and a spirit level to level the
>> car.
>>
>> --
>> TeGGeR®
>>
>> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
>> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
>
>
> I would think that once you had the car level with the ground as you
> outline above, one should measure from the top of the shims to the
> center of the wheel. Any difference between the two tires of interest
> could then be eliminated by adjusting air pressure until the centers
> were equal. Then a measurement from the wheel well to the center of
> each wheel would disclose any difference in ride height. Perhaps I
> didn't grasp the whole of your procedure....
>
> Dave D
>
>
>
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"Dave and Trudy" <ddodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
news:446d7b73@news.acsalaska.net:

>
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns97C7AFD87EF0tegger@207.14.116.130...
>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
>> news:sfSag.443$SX5.305@newsread1.news.pas.earthlin k.net:
> ///snipped for brevity///
>
>>> I am measuring from the ground to the top of the front wheel
>>> wells here.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> To determine ride height, you're supposed to measure fron the wheel
>> well to
>> the center of the wheel. Measuring ground-up introduces the tire as a
>> variable.

Yes,you could easily have variation in the levelness of the ground under
the car,that you would not be able to see without a long construction level
or other non-eyeball means. 1/2 inch of slope or variation would not be
easily seen.
>
> Are you sure? Wouldn't measuring from the wheel well to the center of
> the wheel also introduce the tire as a variable? The tire would
> determine, in part, the height of the center of the wheel, wouldn't
> it?

No.the spring is going to push the axle out X distance,depending on the
weight on that side of the car.The diameter of the tire will only determine
how far the axle is above the ground,not how far the spring pushes against
the car's weight.

Now I'm gonna go out and measure my Integra..... 8-)

>
>>
>> You must also be certain that the ground is actually level, and you'd
>> be surprised how little pavement is *really and truly* level. When I
>> check, I jack up the necessary wheels only enough to shim under the
>> tires with old books. I use a line and a spirit level to level the
>> car.
>>
>> --
>> TeGGeR®
>>
>> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
>> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
>
>
> I would think that once you had the car level with the ground as you
> outline above, one should measure from the top of the shims to the
> center of the wheel. Any difference between the two tires of interest
> could then be eliminated by adjusting air pressure until the centers
> were equal. Then a measurement from the wheel well to the center of
> each wheel would disclose any difference in ride height. Perhaps I
> didn't grasp the whole of your procedure....
>
> Dave D
>
>
>
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

Yes there is, I did it on my 98 civic. You have to be really careful when
pressing the BJ in, as the control arm is made of fairly thin steel.

I bought the BJ from NAPA. Nobody else offered it.

t

Jim Yanik wrote:
>> Thanks. I will try this Thursday when I resume work on my
>> car.
>[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>>>
>>> Stewart DIBBS
>
>According to the Haynes manual,the upper BJ is not replaceable,and the
>entire control arm is supposed to be replaced;is there any method of
>replacing the BJ in the original control arm?
>

--
Message posted via http://www.carkb.com

 

Yes there is, I did it on my 98 civic. You have to be really careful when
pressing the BJ in, as the control arm is made of fairly thin steel.

I bought the BJ from NAPA. Nobody else offered it.

t

Jim Yanik wrote:
>> Thanks. I will try this Thursday when I resume work on my
>> car.
>[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>>>
>>> Stewart DIBBS
>
>According to the Haynes manual,the upper BJ is not replaceable,and the
>entire control arm is supposed to be replaced;is there any method of
>replacing the BJ in the original control arm?
>

--
Message posted via http://www.carkb.com

 

Yes there is, I did it on my 98 civic. You have to be really careful when
pressing the BJ in, as the control arm is made of fairly thin steel.

I bought the BJ from NAPA. Nobody else offered it.

t

Jim Yanik wrote:
>> Thanks. I will try this Thursday when I resume work on my
>> car.
>[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>>>
>>> Stewart DIBBS
>
>According to the Haynes manual,the upper BJ is not replaceable,and the
>entire control arm is supposed to be replaced;is there any method of
>replacing the BJ in the original control arm?
>

--
Message posted via http://www.carkb.com

 

Happily, either the effects of PB Blaster or driving a
little with the car (carefully) took their toll. The remains
of the castle nut came off within ten minutes with just a
little tapping with my new chisel. The threads seemed to be
in good repair, but I chased them with a new die (only $4
for the 12 mm, 1.25 mm pitch one at NAPA) to be safe.

The ball joint separated so easily probably a good blow with
a small ball peen hammer would have been sufficient. I
suppose the taper was really lubed up, or else the driving
around loosened everything in, I confess, a seriously risky
way.

The boot was a bit dried out and beat up from the brake
cleaner. I applied PB Blaster, for now, since it's said to
restore rubber. Probably have to replace it soon after the
rough treatment it saw in the last couple of days.

I note I also priced new lower ball joints at NAPA today.
These were part of my backup plan.They had two types, one
with a lifetime warranty, one without. One $27, one $52,
IIRC.

Forward to full control arm removal, then bushing
replacement. More update on this in another thread.

 

Happily, either the effects of PB Blaster or driving a
little with the car (carefully) took their toll. The remains
of the castle nut came off within ten minutes with just a
little tapping with my new chisel. The threads seemed to be
in good repair, but I chased them with a new die (only $4
for the 12 mm, 1.25 mm pitch one at NAPA) to be safe.

The ball joint separated so easily probably a good blow with
a small ball peen hammer would have been sufficient. I
suppose the taper was really lubed up, or else the driving
around loosened everything in, I confess, a seriously risky
way.

The boot was a bit dried out and beat up from the brake
cleaner. I applied PB Blaster, for now, since it's said to
restore rubber. Probably have to replace it soon after the
rough treatment it saw in the last couple of days.

I note I also priced new lower ball joints at NAPA today.
These were part of my backup plan.They had two types, one
with a lifetime warranty, one without. One $27, one $52,
IIRC.

Forward to full control arm removal, then bushing
replacement. More update on this in another thread.

 

Happily, either the effects of PB Blaster or driving a
little with the car (carefully) took their toll. The remains
of the castle nut came off within ten minutes with just a
little tapping with my new chisel. The threads seemed to be
in good repair, but I chased them with a new die (only $4
for the 12 mm, 1.25 mm pitch one at NAPA) to be safe.

The ball joint separated so easily probably a good blow with
a small ball peen hammer would have been sufficient. I
suppose the taper was really lubed up, or else the driving
around loosened everything in, I confess, a seriously risky
way.

The boot was a bit dried out and beat up from the brake
cleaner. I applied PB Blaster, for now, since it's said to
restore rubber. Probably have to replace it soon after the
rough treatment it saw in the last couple of days.

I note I also priced new lower ball joints at NAPA today.
These were part of my backup plan.They had two types, one
with a lifetime warranty, one without. One $27, one $52,
IIRC.

Forward to full control arm removal, then bushing
replacement. More update on this in another thread.

 

"loewent via CarKB.com" <u10197@uwe> wrote in news:607e2b1e61e46@uwe:

> Yes there is, I did it on my 98 civic. You have to be really careful
> when pressing the BJ in, as the control arm is made of fairly thin
> steel.
>
> I bought the BJ from NAPA. Nobody else offered it.
>
> t
>
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>>
>>According to the Haynes manual,the upper BJ is not replaceable,and the
>>entire control arm is supposed to be replaced;is there any method of
>>replacing the BJ in the original control arm?
>>
>

THANKS !!

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"loewent via CarKB.com" <u10197@uwe> wrote in news:607e2b1e61e46@uwe:

> Yes there is, I did it on my 98 civic. You have to be really careful
> when pressing the BJ in, as the control arm is made of fairly thin
> steel.
>
> I bought the BJ from NAPA. Nobody else offered it.
>
> t
>
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>>
>>According to the Haynes manual,the upper BJ is not replaceable,and the
>>entire control arm is supposed to be replaced;is there any method of
>>replacing the BJ in the original control arm?
>>
>

THANKS !!

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net