Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

How-to's and repair secrets for your 4WD can be found here. Have a question? Ask it in here!
Post Reply
User avatar
Dumindu
Top Notch Member
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 12:34 pm
My tercel:: 1987 Toyota tercle 4wd DX Wagon 1452CC
Location: Sri Lanka
Contact:

Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

Post by Dumindu »

My car is a 1987 Toyota Tercel DX Wagon RHD 1452cc manual driven car.

I have a doubt which should be the direction of the lower control arm. Problem aroused when I replacing the bush. A mechanic had put the rubber collar of the bush towards the front. But my car is not comfortable when driving.

Doubt aroused because this collar should absorb the forward pushing power of the rear wheels. So It should be directed towards back.

Whether rubber collar of the bushing directed towards front or back?
Untitled-1.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
ALiveSR5
Top Notch Member
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:58 pm
My tercel:: Was a stock 1985, SR5, 4WD, 6-speed manual, Wagon.
Location: Pennsylvania USA

Re: Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

Post by ALiveSR5 »

Dumindu wrote: Thu Feb 04, 2021 10:20 am Whether rubber collar of the bushing directed towards front or back?
These photos are for a 1985 4WD SR5 Wagon but they may help answer your question:
~
Lower_Arm_Left.jpg
Left control arm - back view
~
Lower_Arm_Left_Bushing_1.jpg
Left arm bushing close-up back view
~
Lower_Arm_Left_Bushing_2.jpg
Left arm bushing close-up front view
~
Lower_Arm_Right.jpg
Right control arm - back view
~
Lower_Arm_Right_Bushing_1.jpg
Right arm bushing close-up back view
~
Lower_Arm_Right_Bushing_2.jpg
Right arm bushing close-up front view
~
Hopefully, looking at the arms then comparing the bushing close-ups, you will be able to confirm proper direction.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
No other vehicle that I have ever owned had a heart and soul like my 1985 Tercel SR5 4WD Wagon. :D
~
Great minds may think alike but it is the doers who see their visions become reality. :?
User avatar
Dumindu
Top Notch Member
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2017 12:34 pm
My tercel:: 1987 Toyota tercle 4wd DX Wagon 1452CC
Location: Sri Lanka
Contact:

Re: Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

Post by Dumindu »

Thank you for your advice.

But according to the Service Manual diagrams it should be directed to opposite side?
a1.jpg
2422fb7168e4c27d679eb41b81c4b74a.png
22ed5718ca8b9f39f6ad708d8607e6d1.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Petros
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 11930
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:31 pm
My tercel:: '84 Tercel4wd w/extensive mods
Location: Arlington WA USA

Re: Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

Post by Petros »

I do not think it matters much, it is completely captured in the mount.

I do not even see the reason for it having the extra external rubber, the "teeth" on the metal sleeve are supposed to bight the mount on the frame of the car so it does not rotate, so the movement is all with the rubber part of the bushing. I can not see how having the flange on the bushing forward or aft will make any difference in operation.
'87 Tercel 4wd SR5 (current engine swap project)
'84 Tercel 4wd (daily driver, with on going mods)
'92 Mazda MPV 4wd (wife's daily driver)
'85 Tercel 4wd DLX auto(daughter's daily driver)
'01 Honda Civic (other daughter's daily driver)
The Professor
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:38 pm
My tercel:: 1987 Tercel SR5 4WD wagon
Location: Western Washington
Contact:

Re: Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

Post by The Professor »

There are two possibilities:

1) The Toyota engineers used an off-the-shelf bushing for the lower control arm location.
2) This bushing was specifically designed for this location on this application.

In either case, I believe the rubber collar was oriented that way for a reason (though we may not know what that reason was). If it had no purpose, it would have been cheaper (in case #2) to specify a bushing without a collar. This would reduce tooling complexity, component weight, and reduce the overall vehicle cost, which is a big consideration manufacturers take into account that the general public isn't privy to.

If it was an off-the-shelf bushing chosen to reduce cost (in case #1), it probably was originally designed as a rotating suspension bushing, and for the same reasoning above, I would expect the design engineers wouldn't include unnecessary tooling cost and part complexity without some justification. Unless the Tercel design engineers were ultra lazy (they don't appear to have been!) and spec'ed this for no reason other than it fit the ID, OD, and width of the control arm. They essentially chose to assemble the entire car using aircraft bolts, which is not a lazy, or price-adverse design decision.

I'd say orient the bushings as shown in the FSM diagrams.
1975 Subaru SuperStar wagon
1984 Subaru Turbo-Traction wagon & hardtop
1987 Subaru RX 3-door
1987 Subaru RX Type-RA 3-door
1987 Toyota Tercel SR5 wagon
1999 Subaru Forester S
2002 Subaru WRX sedan
2019 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited
User avatar
Petros
Highest Ranking Member
Posts: 11930
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:31 pm
My tercel:: '84 Tercel4wd w/extensive mods
Location: Arlington WA USA

Re: Orientation of the lower control arm bushing?

Post by Petros »

The Professor wrote: Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:13 am There are two possibilities:

1) The Toyota engineers used an off-the-shelf bushing for the lower control arm location.
2) This bushing was specifically designed for this location on this application.
this bushing is used elsewhere, on the rear suspension in fact (panhard rod, perhaps also on the upper rear axle links),and in other models. so I tend to think it was a standard bushing in their inventory. They tend to use bushings and other small parts across the product line, sometimes in odd places (front suspension parts in the rear in other models, and visa-versa). though I would agree that I would not second guess what the original design intent was, it is best to get it as the factory installed it.

but OTOH, having worked in the industry, sometimes the factory has reasons irrelevant to the home wrencher (like faster automated assembly), or sometimes a decisions is made at random because it makes no difference. the first gen MR2 rear brake rotor is the same part as the front 2nd gen Tercel brake rotor. the front and rear ball joints on the first gen MR2 is the same on the 2nd gen front Tercel, and likely the same year corolla and almost certainly other models.
'87 Tercel 4wd SR5 (current engine swap project)
'84 Tercel 4wd (daily driver, with on going mods)
'92 Mazda MPV 4wd (wife's daily driver)
'85 Tercel 4wd DLX auto(daughter's daily driver)
'01 Honda Civic (other daughter's daily driver)
Post Reply