SPL Rear Toe Links issues
 

I just had SPL real toe links installed to go along with their front and rear LCAs, rear traction bar and front bump steer links.

After about 40 minutes of track time one of the links moved to a new random and not so fun rear toe angle!

After inspection and contacting SPL it turns out that sometimes the titanium bolts on the clamps cannot be torqued enough so they recommended replacing them with steel. That was a shock given they make such a big deal of using titanium and now had us replace those with steel! WTF?!

I'm not even on slicks yet; on 245 AD08Rs. The whole point of switching from stock to SPL was to move to slicks!

I've had their rear LCA for several years with no issues.

Now I'm not sure I trust all those "precious" titanium clamp bolts on the other SPL parts, like the new front LCA...

Anyone else have issues with SPL parts?

That's real shitty of them not to stand behind their product and make it right by sending you the recommend piece to fix the issue. I bought a discontinued Raceseng pulley kit and noticed that they updated it at some point which was why it was discontinued and they sent me all new pulleys free of charge with free next day shipping. I would stop using SPL parts over this once I had the budget to get something else.

This might seem like a stupid question but did these come with eccentric lockouts?

Yeah something like that wound be ideal, and pretty simple to do.

Cusco for example provides little washers with tabs that fit in the stock elongated holes in the crossmember so that the bolt can't slip, and Whiteline has toe lock kits to go with a lot of their adjustable links.

Hmmm...I’m anxious to see additional replies, because I run them, too. Hey, Mike @CSG Mike, have you heard of this issue before and, if so, should I be worried?

If I understand SPL's design correctly an eccentric lockout won't do anything to prevent the slippage of the titanium clamp hypothesized to be OP's issue.

And they do come with square plates designed to prevent slippage of the eccentric end of the arm.

Stretching Titanium? The tensile strength of Ti is pretty darn high.

What exactly was the failure and which part? Is it possible it's installer error?

I've never heard of such a failure with SPL parts, and that doesn't sound like a very SPL answer to me; they stand behind their products 100% and I've seen them send full replacements when unusual failures happen.

For this to be an issue with the clamps, both of them on one arm would have to have come loose. If only one came loose the barrel wouldn't have been able to rotate and adjust the toe.



My gut says you're not running the eccentric lockout plate and that slipped? If it was actually both clamps on one arm, I'd bet a lot that they weren't tightened properly after the alignment.

I didn't completely read the OPs post, didn't realize it was the little clamp thats loosening up. My only thought is that on the rear lower control arm they offer, there are essentially 2 clamps: the obvious small silver one, and the actual control arm itself where its split and can be tightened. This picture shows it pretty well:
http://cdn3.bigcommerce.com/s-xn4bgh...0.1280.jpg?c=2

The toe arm only has one clamp and the arm itself is solid with no splits on the ends that can be tightened. Compare that to another manufacturers toe arm like partsshopmax that has the same clamping style as spl's rear lowers:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/ultracart/i...JKQ1CR49FLs%3D

Still think it might be an issue with the eccentric lockouts though, even if the clamps were loose, the toe shouldn't be able to change easily because the barrel needs to be turned somehow to lengthen/shorten the arms.

It was the clamp(s) and am running the lockout version.

SPL has seen this happen a few times and didn't really have an explanation. They said to switch from the Ti to steel bolts which we did. I'll be testing it with 245 Z214s on thursday.

There is no hypothesizing, it was the clamp held by the Ti bolts. SPL had us replace them with steel bolts and torque to 250 instead of 150.

Was the bolt for the clamp still tight and the clamp itself slipping, or had everything seemed to loosen up?

I don't think you're looking at the right part:

https://counterspacegarage.r.worldss.../r/frs_rta.jpg

I was just trying to make the point that the rear lower control arm, which I posted a picture of, doesn't have issues with loosening up like the toe arms because it essentially has two clamps vs the toe arm which only has one.

Having two places where a joint can slip is generally considered less secure than one. Theoretically with the toe arm design with a locking feature on each end you only really need one to be secure to prevent the rod from turning on the threads so in OPs case both ends failed to secure the arms adjustment.

The toe arm has two clamps as well... if you compare it to the LCA, the black barrel of the toe arm is the same part as the threaded rod with the nut on it between the arm and the rod end. Instead of clamping into the arm, it clamps to the other rod end. Same effect though, and like someone else mentioned, for the toe to change both clamps have to be loose enough for the barrel to rotate, in theory you only have to stop one end from rotating to stop coarse adjustments from happening. They run two so that the movement of the rod end at the other end can't cause a tiny change in toe.

Only one clamp was loose and the amount the end can turn on its own is more than enough to get some good toe "adjustment".

Update:

Only got one session before something in the drivetrain gave up the ghost! But, the steel bolts held the toe link clamps, yay :)

Also got a msg from SPL saying they'll replace the links with pretested links if the problem re-occurs. Nice.

Next test will be on Z214 slicks (and fixed drive train).

Good news, and bad news :(

What part failed?

Left axle. Not bad for 4+ years of tracking the car hard with an SC. Should I upgrade or stick with stock?

Upgrade. Sticky tires will destroy axles. I've already broken one.