Four Wheel Alignment Needed?

[bobbob]

One dealer tells me to get it since I am getting 4 new tires,
another dealer tells me if the old ones wore evenly and the
car doesn't pull, not to bother. Opinions? Thank You and a
Happy New Year to all

 

[SLCraig]

Tires wear evenly and no pull = I never do one

However, 4 wheel is barely more expensive than a 2 wheel where I get mine done so I always do four wheel whenever I do get an alignment done. (more frequently on a Saturn with the way their front ends are setup)

 

[Kaie]

Ive heard youll never get the rear buttoned up like factory if you do the rear too.... Many cars like mine cant really be aligned in the rear.

HOWEVER.. i know of some VW guys that pay for a front/rear alignment; so the tech actually aligns the front to the back. Other wise he will just deal with the front.

Ill find the info on it.

EDIT:

Here's the info from one of the VW guys..

Because all 4 sensors are needed to make a proper alignment. In order to have the car track down the road right, it’s important. So, just pay for the 4 wheel.

So basically what i was saying before. Just with more info why..

Now obviously VW is a different beast than most autos. But ive still heard of issues after loosening the rear stuff in order to do a rear alignment.

 

[Corvette Owner]

Years ago, a person told me if your tires wear evenly (also car doesn't pull), there is no need for an alignment and once aligned, you never get things as tight as at factory and you will need to get more alignments.

I have followed this guidance and rarely get any alignments on cars I keep 110,000 miles and more, with good tire wear results (often tires last 70,000 or more miles).

Newer cars do need 4 wheel alignment when done.

 

[eljefino]

Tire shops love selling alignments as part of a Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt strategy regarding the warranty on your new tires. Also an alignment is 100% labor and profit.

The most important part of the alignment is the initial inspection of ball joints, rod ends, etc. Most people who out of the blue decide they need an alignment because they're all over the highway also have shot front end parts.

May be worth seeing if you can get a free/reduced price "alignment check" where they put your car on the rack but don't make any adjustments.

Coworker's vibe's rear can only be aligned with shims, a job nobody wants to do. If you have rear struts you can probably fix camber with a cam-bolt kit or grinding out their holes a little. My W-body Century has adjustable rear toe. How often one needs to fix the rear, from bending stuff, is anyone's guess though. Aside from bushing wear or curb damage the rear end should track pretty straight for the life of the car.

 

[Craig in Canada]

As someone said - if there isn't an adjustment there's nothing to change as part of the alignment process other than making sure that the car tracks straight and nothing is worn out or broken. If you need shims to set an alignment, it may be worth going through the hassle and expense once but it shouldn't need ongoing adjustment unless something breaks or wears out.

On the other hand if something IS adjustable, depending on how it is adjusted it can slip as a matter of routine. There is no "tight as the factory" - there's a specified torque for all of the fasteners regardless of who tightens them.

Examples: My BMW is front toe adjustable and rear camber/toe adjustable. Front camber and caster are "the way they are" and require grinding, kits, or change in ride height to make changes. The front toe is adjusted by threading the tie rod ends in and out and tightening them down. There really isn't much of a way to "slip" this mechanism between alignments. If a bushing, balljoint or suspension arm is replaced which can slightly alter the wheel's position in the well, then it needs to be redone because toe could change.

On the rear, camber and toe are adjustable via eccentrics. These CAN slip from miles of jostling and changing load. In my case, the rear is also the first place where "abnormal" wear occurs and the factory alignment specs are already aggressive (including -2* camber on the rear) so when things go a little wrong in the rear you get (even more) accelerated tire wear.

There's also the matter of tracking. You want to be sure to be tracking straight down the highway and predictably through turns. Toe directly affects the stability of a vehicle at speed (toe in) and the responsiveness and agility (toe out). If you're toed in too much your vehicle will feel "dead" driving down the road. If you're toed out too much it will respond well to steering input but may also dart around - especially under hard braking where the forces pull the front wheels rearward.

If your car is a transportation appliance you may only care about even tire wear and that's it assuming that the toe settings are close enough to at least be safe. If you enjoy driving, you can feel when things are even a little off if you are paying attention.

I seem to average 18-24 months between each alignment.

 

[ahoier]

Possible dumb question, and I "think" I may know the answer already but figured I'd ask anyhow.

Some people say to have tires balanced and rotated BEFORE an alignment.

I had a tire technician tell me to have my alignment done THEN come back for my tire balancing/rotation.

Aren't they "aligning" the suspension of the "vehicle" itself? They don't "touch" the tires at all, do they? Or does the machine actually "align" the vehicle to the tires?

So why would it matter which I do first?

One of my old Kia's had an apparant alignment problem and caused my P.F. tire to blow out, apparantly it was wearing out on the inside edge (driving on the thin rubber, instead of the tread basically). So the Kia dealer had me get my tires balanced before the alignment was done on the "new" tires.




Another scenario, on my 88 Dodge Aries I just got front struts done, and obviously, they put it on the rack and got an alignment too (they didn't notate if it was 4 wheel or 2 wheel alignment though.......) - 2 days ago I had my tires rotated, and the car seems like its going all over the road.

I've since then changed the position of the tires since they performed the alignment, they are now at the rear.

Doesn't make sense to need an alingment everytime tires get rotated?! lol. Nor have I ever heard of that

 

[Bottom_Feeder]

An out-of-spec alignment can wear the tires funny, so when you put them on different corners of the car, it can make the car behave strangely.

An example. My wife hit a pothole and blew out a tire on the front of her Corolla. The front tires and alignment were done in the six months previous, so Tires Plus replaced the tire for free but I didn't get the alignment checked. Bad idea. While the car felt okay after that, it was slightly more 'wandery'. A few months later I decided to get a matching pair of tires for the rear and have it aligned again. It still felt 'wandery' afterwards, but better. But after the first rotation, the car felt terrible.

Basically, driving with the alignment tweaked ruined that new replacement tire, and no matter what corner of the car it was on, it would cause handling issues regardless of the fact that the alignment was now correct. I got tired of how nervous the car felt at speed and eventually replaced all four tires, and *poof* the problem went away.

I wasn't too crazy about shelling out another $400 for tires after getting barely two years out of the previous set, but those Firestones were terrible anyway.

 

[Old Mustang Guy]

Craig, good explanation. Would the replacement of shocks and struts normally require an alignment. I'm assuming yes but would like your opinion.

 

[CapriRacer]

4 thoughts:

1) The alignment on EVERY vehicle is adjustable - whether it has a built in provision for it or not. If there isn't a provision, then a plate or an eccentric bolt may be needed. In worst cases, the mounting holes may need to be slotted. The fact that the factory did not provide adjustability doesn't mean the alignment should be left out of spec.

EVERY vehicle should leave the alignment shop properly aligned!

2) My experience says that the published alignment tolerances are too wide by half. Put another way, the alignment should be within the inner half of the allowable range.

3) Some vehicle have alignment specs that aren't good for tire wear. It is common for high performance cars to have specify larges amounts of camber - and while that improves the handling, camber tends to wear the tires irregularly. Anything over a degree is suspect.

4) There is always a risk with not doing an alignment when changing tires. The risk is that the alignment is out and the new tires will not wear properly. If the vehicle doesn't pull, or the tires coming off do not have uneven wear, then it is LIKELY that the alignment is OK - but it is not an absolutely sure thing! If you chose not to get an anlignment, then you are accepting the risk that there is some undetected problem.

 

[SteveSRT8]

and PLEASE be careful hogging out factory holes and such to create adjustability where there was none from the factory!

I've seen two cars with broken frames/subframes from this, although it is rare it is extremely dangerous.

I also am cautious when we pull a wrecked car back into alignment. Too much bending, heating, or drilling can cause serious issue.

 

[Ken2]

Three types of alignment:
--Two wheel. Cheap, not the best.
--Four wheel. For vehicles with adjustable rear. Necessary.
--Thrust alignment. For rear wheel drive where the rear alignment (direction of thrust) is measured and the fronts are aligned to match. Highly recommended.
Also make sure they carefully look for worn parts.

Quote:
2) My experience says that the published alignment tolerances are too wide by half. Put another way, the alignment should be within the inner half of the allowable range.

3) Some vehicle have alignment specs that aren't good for tire wear. It is common for high performance cars to have specify larges amounts of camber - and while that improves the handling, camber tends to wear the tires irregularly. Anything over a degree is suspect.

Very important points. The alignment tech can hit the center points of the allowable range if he tries (due to your insistence) unless something is bent; in that case the bent part needs to be replaced. A car aligned at the max limit on one side and the minimum limit on the other side is within spec and has a terrible alignment. My Tundra is best with the toe and camber at the mid point and the caster at the maximum allowable--no complaints accepted from the tech, 'cuz it is within the spec, just at the max. My Volvo with aftermarket camber adjusters gets improved tire wear with -0.5° camber (tipped in at the top).

 

[Craig in Canada]

Originally Posted By: Old Mustang Guy
Craig, good explanation. Would the replacement of shocks and struts normally require an alignment. I'm assuming yes but would like your opinion.


It would depend on the car, but assume "yes".

Some vehicles are build that the shocks can be replaced without affecting the alignment in any way, others aren't. On my vehicle it is a definite "yes".

 

[ProfPS]

Are you getting a break on the alignment cost for buying the tires? In either case, I would consider waiting until after the winter and spring due to pot holes if I were in your area of the country.

Keep in mind that alignment machines require calibration and you may end up adjusting your car slightly out of alignment. If the tires are wearing evenly and your gas mileage is acceptable, I would probably pass on the alignment and see how the new tires wear.