[urq] Early Rear Tie-Rods

[Todd Phenneger]

I don't think I inversed them.  I checked like 3-vehicles.
Both of my 83's have a Straight style Tie-Rod that has a simple end on that
is as you say, M16x1.5.

My 84' 4kq has a weird shaped bent tie-rod where the end is very long and
bent.  Its M14.

OK...WAIT.  I just went to Blau on someones suggestion.  They do have them
and come to think of it this is the way ONE of my 83's looked.
http://www.blauparts.com/proddetail.asp?prod=ME12051
BUT...if you look at the END, the END is straight.  Oddly enough, my other
83 rear has the same end, but the rod is straight on it.  Still M16 but its
not bent.  Maybe a difference in 83's although mine are #173 & #176 if
memory serves so they aren't that far apart.

Well, I'll try to find the Suzuki part.  If not, I may be stuck with a Blau
unit until I can figure something out.

Thanks


> From: Louis-Alain Richard <larichard at plguide.com>
> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 14:06:26 -0400
> To: 'Todd Phenneger' <tquattroguy at yahoo.com>, 'urq list' <urq at audifans.com>
> Subject: RE: [urq] Early Rear Tie-Rods
> 
> Todd,
> 
> If you tie-rod ends are worn, but the inner rubber bushes are fine, you can
> install Suzuki Sidekick outer ends on the urQ, BTDT last year. See this post
> for some numbers:
> http://www.audifans.com/pipermail/urq/2006-April/008802.html
> 
> BTW, I think you inversed the style:
> The bent one is for the early 1981-1983 urQ (NLA anywhere)
> The straight ones are 1984 and up, urQ and 4000Q. (available everywhere)
> 
> Louis-Alain
> PS: I think Brady and Martin Pajak both have installed the Suzuki parts,
> they might confirm my find.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Message d'origine-----
> 
>> 
>> I did a brief search of the Archives but didn't find anything.
>> 
>> I need new rear tie-rods for an EARLY Style ur-q suspension.
>> IE...1983. It
>> seems most parts sources only list ONE tie-rod now that appears to be
>> the
>> same as the later tie-rods.  The early tie rods attached in the middle
>> of
>> the subframe instead of toward the back where the sway bar is located
>> on
>> early models.  Problem is, this tie rod seems to be LONGER than the
>> later
>> style.
>> 
>> I took out both and compared them and they seem to be similar in
>> overall
>> dimensions except length.  The early ur-q unit is longer and does have
>> a
>> thicker main shaft but the ends are the same.  Because of the length
>> issue
>> however it doesn't appear they are swapable.
>> 
>> Does anyone know where to find an early style or an early style END
>> that
>> would be compatible.  The early arms don't have the funky Dogleg end
>> like
>> the later style does.  Any END with the right conical angle and size,
>> and
>> thread should work.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Todd
>> 
>