When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
So I noticed the other day when walking toward the excursion that the top of the front tires were leaning in toward the vehicle pretty bad. So I got my digital level out after I got home and pulled into the garage and they were now leaning out and were 0.4° and 0.6°. I scratched my head and thought that is strange I could have swore they were leaning the other way. The next day it dawned on me that I backed into the parking spot so I backed the excursion up and measured them again. sure enough this time they are leaning in toward the vehicle. This time -0.5° and -0.6°. So I check measurements with one turn of the steering wheel one way and one turn the other way. Passenger side was -1.2° to 2.5° and driver side was -.7° to 2.3°.
I just replaced ball joints, wheel bearings and tie rods about 9 months ago. What do you think of these numbers and what should I look at if these are not good?
I could pretend like I know what you are talking about, but I'm too old for that now. I just had my alignment done and here is what it is for a 2wd, if this helps, fine, if not ignore
I went with the Moog K-80109 caster/camber adjustable dual cam bushings. The trick is to find a technician who knows what they are doing with it.
The bushing states you will be able to adjust the caster 4 degrees, but I have been able to get 5 +, which is a good thing.
I’ve read where to get the most caster out of this bushing is to place the thick portion of the bushing to the rear and then set you camber from there. You may have to sacrifice some if that caster to get your camber right on, but you will still be 5+.
Amazon has them for about $36.
Photo:
The geometry of the RWD suspension goes through camber changes as the suspension cycles, your front springs are likely sagged causing your front ride height to be slightly lower which creates negative camber.
restore the factory ride height and get it aligned.
The geometry of the RWD suspension goes through camber changes as the suspension cycles, your front springs are likely sagged causing your front ride height to be slightly lower which creates negative camber.
restore the factory ride height and get it aligned.
Good point. I went with Motorcraft Z Code springs in the front and 2 WD Bilstein 4600 shocks. It raised the front end by an inch and a quarter.
If you want to compliment the fronts with a good rear package, I went with ATS “B Codes” and 4WD Bilstein 4600 shocks. The 4WD shocks allow an additional inch of travel. My rear end wound up being about two inches higher than before, so the longer shocks fit perfectly.
The transformation is night and day. The Ex is app. 1,400 lbs heavier than a similarly equipped F-350 for the year 2000. The Ex OEM springs are rated somewhere between an F-250 and an F-150, so they are inadequate to begin with.
Hope this helps.
Good point. I went with Motorcraft Z Code springs in the front and 2 WD Bilstein 4600 shocks. It raised the front end by an inch and a quarter.
If you want to compliment the fronts with a good rear package, I went with ATS “B Codes” and 4WD Bilstein 4600 shocks. The 4WD shocks allow an additional inch of travel. My rear end wound up being about two inches higher than before, so the longer shocks fit perfectly.
The transformation is night and day. The Ex is app. 1,400 lbs heavier than a similarly equipped F-350 for the year 2000. The Ex OEM springs are rated somewhere between an F-250 and an F-150, so they are inadequate to begin with.
Hope this helps.
i think you are misunderstanding how springs are rated.
the rating is travel x spring rate.
the Ex runs a higher spring rate but has a shorter travel than a F-truck
also the F-truck uses a dual or triple rate rear spring because of the nature of the way trucks payloads are used. The primary spring rate of the F-trucks is actually lower than the Excursion because the rear of the vehicle is lighter than the Ex.
all springs sag over time and there is nothing wrong or “inadequate” about the Excursions spring rate or rating.
if anything I’d say the B code is a poor match for the Excursion as the weight of the Ex collapses the primary down onto and engages the secondary creating a far to high spring rate. Further more 2” of rear height gives a front weight bias which changes the handling negatively. Your goal should be as close to 50/50 as feasible.
i am not saying your setup is wrong, just saying it could be better.
Should I be concerned about the change in camber when driving forward vs backing up? When driving forward the camber looks to be about what it should be at based on this.
Should I be concerned about the change in camber when driving forward vs backing up? When driving forward the camber looks to be about what it should be at based on this.
an inherent quirk of the twin I beam suspension is the camber change when backing up.
because you have toe in when you back up the front wheels drag causing the suspension to jack up and as the suspension drops out the camber goes positive. Totally normal,
ok maybe not “normal” but its a quirky design and what they do.
those specs are correct but a bit misleading. Toe should be + .03* ( toe in )
with +\- .25* But you do not want toe out or the ex will wander.
you are saying your camber is -.5* at static ride height, Spec is +.6 so technically its in spec given the +\- 1*
Negative camber can improve turning but cause tire wear on the inside edge,
the reason ford specs positive .6* is as you turn the outside wheel suspension compresses creating negative camber so if you start with a little positive it goes to zero and zero gives the best tire wear while turning ( when most of the wear happens )
starting with a little negative camber it probably handles great but you will see accelerated wear on the inside edge.
an inherent quirk of the twin I beam suspension is the camber change when backing up.
because you have toe in when you back up the front wheels drag causing the suspension to jack up and as the suspension drops out the camber goes positive. Totally normal,
ok maybe not “normal” but its a quirky design and what they do.
those specs are correct but a bit misleading. Toe should be + .03* ( toe in )
with +\- .25* But you do not want toe out or the ex will wander.
you are saying your camber is -.5* at static ride height, Spec is +.6 so technically its in spec given the +\- 1*
Negative camber can improve turning but cause tire wear on the inside edge,
the reason ford specs positive .6* is as you turn the outside wheel suspension compresses creating negative camber so if you start with a little positive it goes to zero and zero gives the best tire wear while turning ( when most of the wear happens )
starting with a little negative camber it probably handles great but you will see accelerated wear on the inside edge.
Thanks for the great reply.
After pulling forward and checking camber. I am at positive 0.4° and positive 0.6°. Still have some minor inside tread wear but am about 75% small town driving. When I set the toe I set it at 1/8" total toe in.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.
