Toyota Tundra Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
today i took my 06 dc 2wd in to the toyota dealership for an alignment. the service mangager approached me about 1/2 hour later and showed me the alignment numbers that i drove in with and that they were within toyotas specs as follows:

LEFT FRONT:
camber 0.1
caster 3.4
toe -0.02

RIGHT FRONT:
camber -0.2
caster 2.8
toe 0.01

TOTAL TOE:
-0.01


LEFT REAR:
camber -0.2
toe 0.14

RIGHT REAR:
camber -0.1
toe 0.11

he then said to realign to dj's specs would be $159.00 (regular alignment price was $79.00) blah blah blah. i said no thanks.

now here's the kicker... before i took the truck in for the alignment i performed the following proceures:

1) installed new poly bushings in steering rack
2) installed new icon coilovers
3) installed new hellwig front sway bar

the service manager said they had replaced steering rack bushings before many times with no need for alignment. he mentioned another part of the front steering system on the earlier model gen 1"s (that part alludes me now) that toyota replaced under recall with no need for realignment most of the time-even though it was specified for alignment after this procedure had been done. he went on to say that they just don't have to do many realignments on gen 1 tundra's and that it has been his experience that they just stay aligned pretty dog gone good.

this has been an interesting day filled with new knowledge.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Toyota Tundra DC SR5 5.7L
Joined
·
8,534 Posts
today i took my 06 dc 2wd in to the toyota dealership for an alignment. the service mangager approached me about 1/2 hour later and showed me the alignment numbers that i drove in with and that they were within toyotas specs as follows:

LEFT FRONT:
camber 0.1
caster 3.4
toe -0.02

RIGHT FRONT:
camber -0.2
caster 2.8
toe 0.01

TOTAL TOE:
-0.01


LEFT REAR:
camber -0.2
toe 0.14

RIGHT REAR:
camber -0.1
toe 0.11

he then said to realign to dj's specs would be $159.00 (regular alignment price was $79.00) blah blah blah. i said no thanks.

now here's the kicker... before i took the truck in for the alignment i performed the following proceures:

1) installed new poly bushings in steering rack
2) installed new icon coilovers
3) installed new hellwig front sway bar

the service manager said they had replaced steering rack bushings before many times with no need for alignment. he mentioned another part of the front steering system on the earlier model gen 1"s (that part alludes me now) that toyota replaced under recall with no need for realignment most of the time-even though it was specified for alignment after this procedure had been done. he went on to say that they just don't have to do many realignments on gen 1 tundra's and that it has been his experience that they just stay aligned pretty dog gone good.

this has been an interesting day filled with new knowledge.
Even though it seems like you did a lot of front end work, if you kept the icons at the same lift as the previous components, the suspension geometry would be essentially the same, and an alignment might not be indicated simply based on measurement. The bushings replacement nor the sway bar (which is a swap) should affect the alignment either.

Hopefully DJ will chime in on this, but the only thing that would bother me is the 0.6 degrees variance in caster. I wouldn't be comfortable with that amount of difference.

And any service writer that makes sweeping generalizations like that about alignments is an idiot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
The difference in caster is actually what you want to see. About half a degree is perfect. The truck will pull to the side with more positive caster. In your case, the left front is .6 more positive than the right front. This compensates for the road crown and makes the truck drive straight. If you have even caster side to side, it will pull right towards the ditch, because of the slope in the road surface for water drainage. Caster has no effect on tire wear either way though, so no need to worry as long as your truck drives straight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
819 Posts
I'll say, I had my ball joint's replaced at around 45,000 miles or so, and before that, after that, and even now at 100,000 miles, my alignment is still spot-on PERFECT!

No pulling, wheel is straight and tires have been wearing as even as Steven.

I'll agree with the dealer in that the alignment on our trucks stays pretty darned good. 7 years and 100,000 miles and not a single issue. Impressive for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Even though it seems like you did a lot of front end work, if you kept the icons at the same lift as the previous components, the suspension geometry would be essentially the same, and an alignment might not be indicated simply based on measurement. The bushings replacement nor the sway bar (which is a swap) should affect the alignment either.

Hopefully DJ will chime in on this, but the only thing that would bother me is the 0.6 degrees variance in caster. I wouldn't be comfortable with that amount of difference.

And any service writer that makes sweeping generalizations like that about alignments is an idiot.
makes sense on the bushings and the sway bar swap not really having an effect on the alignment. and as far as the ride height with the icons go, some days when i measure ride height, i get 3/4" LOWER than factory ride height and other days i get 1" LOWER than factory ride height.

have to disagree with you on that guy being an idiot. while i didn't care for the guidelines in which he had to work within, he was a very humble man. i left there feeling like he was shootin' straight arrows. he didn't charge me to inform me that it was aligned within toyota specs either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
The difference in caster is actually what you want to see. About half a degree is perfect. The truck will pull to the side with more positive caster. In your case, the left front is .6 more positive than the right front. This compensates for the road crown and makes the truck drive straight. If you have even caster side to side, it will pull right towards the ditch, because of the slope in the road surface for water drainage. Caster has no effect on tire wear either way though, so no need to worry as long as your truck drives straight.

this is what the tech that checked the results on the alignment said as well. he was very adamant about it too.

maybe dj will chime in here if he gets a chance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I'll say, I had my ball joint's replaced at around 45,000 miles or so, and before that, after that, and even now at 100,000 miles, my alignment is still spot-on PERFECT!

No pulling, wheel is straight and tires have been wearing as even as Steven.

I'll agree with the dealer in that the alignment on our trucks stays pretty darned good. 7 years and 100,000 miles and not a single issue. Impressive for sure.
this is good to know and i agree that it is impressive. i can see mine doing as good as yours has done. and along these same lines, i still have a 92 chevy silverado extended cab with 274K miles. i bought the truck with 26K miles and it has never had an alignment. i have never had any trouble with any kind of abnormal tire wear so i never felt the need to have it realigned. new shocks and new michelins about every 60K miles. and kept track of tire pressures too. we have great roads here in tn which is a plus i'd think.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Toyota Tundra DC SR5 5.7L
Joined
·
8,534 Posts
I'll agree with the dealer in that the alignment on our trucks stays pretty darned good. 7 years and 100,000 miles and not a single issue. Impressive for sure.
I'm gonna disagree. The reason is that we all know the Gen-1 Tundra suspension is under-engineered. It just isn't designed for the weight. They essentially dropped a 1/2 ton motor, tranny and truck body on a Tacoma suspension and driveline. If you are driving all highway miles, you're fine. When you start banging the truck around and doing miles on a washboard/rutted road and articulating the stock suspension components, you will slowly eat away at your alignment settings.

As always, my $0.02.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,842 Posts
The difference in caster is actually what you want to see. About half a degree is perfect. The truck will pull to the side with more positive caster.

[...]
No, the truck will pull to the side with less positive caster.

Positive caster on the right wheel tends to steer the right wheel to the left. Positive caster on the left wheel tends to steer the left wheel to the right. More positive caster means more such steering force. The wheel with the more positive caster thus has more steering force and so tends to override the wheel with the less positive caster. So, if the right wheel has more positive caster than the left wheel, then the truck will tend to pull to the left.

In your case, the left front is .6 more positive than the right front. This compensates for the road crown and makes the truck drive straight. If you have even caster side to side, it will pull right towards the ditch, because of the slope in the road surface for water drainage.
My experience has been, with my '00 Tundra and '01 Sequoia, that compensation for road crown and slope is not necessary with either. On mine, caster has always been the same left-and-right, and except when the original BFG tires began failing, neither has demonstrated a pull to the side under any conditiions.

Compensating for road crown by differential caster used to be the norm. When caster is not high enough, the vehicle will tend to wander with changes in the road surface. But when caster is high enough to provide good steering stability, such wander doesn't happen, and so having sufficient caster removes not only the need for, but the effect of, differential caster.

This is one of several reasons why my recommendations for the first generation Tundra has been to set caster right at the upper end of the range allowed by Toyota's alignment specification for a particular vehicle. Such an alignment provides the greatest steering stability possible while not giving either Toyota or the alignment shop any grounds for complaints.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,842 Posts
I'm gonna disagree. The reason is that we all know the Gen-1 Tundra suspension is under-engineered. It just isn't designed for the weight. They essentially dropped a 1/2 ton motor, tranny and truck body on a Tacoma suspension and driveline. If you are driving all highway miles, you're fine. When you start banging the truck around and doing miles on a washboard/rutted road and articulating the stock suspension components, you will slowly eat away at your alignment settings.

As always, my $0.02.
I'm gonna disagree, too, but my disagreement is with your statement.

I purchased my '00 Tundra just before retiring and moving to the mountains of northern New Mexico. I literally lived offroad for 3 1/2 years, in an area where a state highway (HWY 120) is nine miles of one-lane dirt track that Uganda would be proud of.

A few months ago, I was driven off a two-lane country road by a semi that wandered into my lane. The holes I drove over were brutal. I had the alignment checked, using a Hunter 811 aligner with DSP600 sensors, and found camber and caster of both wheels to be spot-on. Total toe was slightly off, due to the potholes, so I had it set correctly. This was the first time the alignment had needed adjustment since I left Hunter in 2001. During that time, it had been checked, but there was no need to adjust it, and I am (for obvious reasons) very particular about alignment. The Tundra is that good.

My truck spends a large percentage of its life on paved roads, but it is a hunting truck; it spends a lot of its life where there are no roads at all. It holds its alignment settings better than any other model of truck I have ever seen, and in my former profession, I saw them all.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,842 Posts
today i took my 06 dc 2wd in to the toyota dealership for an alignment. the service mangager approached me about 1/2 hour later and showed me the alignment numbers that i drove in with and that they were within toyotas specs as follows:

LEFT FRONT:
camber 0.1
caster 3.4
toe -0.02

RIGHT FRONT:
camber -0.2
caster 2.8
toe 0.01

TOTAL TOE:
-0.01

[...]
If this were my truck, I would change the alignment.

At the very least, negative total toe on a first generation Tundra is dead wrong. Total toe being wrong is a severe cause of rapid tire wear. To save the cost of an alignment that is less than one-fourth the cost of a set of tires is backwards thinking. The alignment should last much longer than the tires and it costs much less than the tires.

As always with the first generation Tundra, I would set camber and total toe dead on Toyota's recommended settings for your vehicle, and I would set caster right at the upper end of the range that Toyota's settings for your vehicle allow.

The proof is in the pudding, as it were. My '00 Tundra has Michelin LTX M/S tires with 52,xxx miles on them. At the present wear rate (which I measured when I rotated them last week), they will wear to the wear indicators at about 121,000 miles. Tastes great, less filling.
 

·
Moderator
2015 Toyota Tundra DC SR5 5.7L
Joined
·
8,534 Posts
A few months ago, I was driven off a two-lane country road by a semi that wandered into my lane. The holes I drove over were brutal. I had the alignment checked, using a Hunter 811 aligner with DSP600 sensors, and found camber and caster of both wheels to be spot-on. Total toe was slightly off, due to the potholes, so I had it set correctly. This was the first time the alignment had needed adjustment since I left Hunter in 2001. During that time, it had been checked, but there was no need to adjust it, and I am (for obvious reasons) very particular about alignment. The Tundra is that good.

My truck spends a large percentage of its life on paved roads, but it is a hunting truck; it spends a lot of its life where there are no roads at all. It holds its alignment settings better than any other model of truck I have ever seen, and in my former profession, I saw them all.
As always DJ, you cut right to the heart of the matter and show us where our analysis -- or conclusions -- gets off track!

What I should have said is that, when our alignment does get out of spec, usually our first notice is either excessive tire wear and/or variations in steering, i.e. 'pulling'. This is (usually) toe being out of alignment, and, in my experience, seems to the most common 'out-of-alignment' spec on our trucks. I have felt that the adjustment components were just not robust enough for the weight of our vehicles, especially when we start moving the suspension away from stock, i.e. lifting and putting the suspension through its paces.

However, I do defer to your experience so I'll rethink my conclusions!

My $0.02.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,510 Posts
I tried getting my alignment done correctly at a dealership with District Rep from Toyota involved due to my steering rack taking a dump which was only part of my issue! The other part was the Alignment Tech not knowing what he was doing and all he had done during the previous 2 alignments was what DJ called setting the toe and letting me go which did nothing more than prematurely wear out a set of tires during the 28K miles i had on the truck. Since then i had a set of Michelin LTXAT2's installed and they all road force balanced ok when installed except for 1 of them which i had replaced. Well shortly after i had them all pass the road force balance i had them checked again at the rotation cycle which was 7500 miles and all 4 are now not within tolerance of the Hunter road Force balancer and was told they never will be able to road force balance them? I am confused as to why they all of a sudden now are all 4 bad tires? All it's causing is vibration but it's getting really old watching my passengers seat vibrate like i was on a NM washboard which is basically any street in NM! I mean it looks like the seat is being hit with 60 MPH winds and it's becoming an issue. take your truck to an Independent Alignment shop that has Hunter Equipment and use DJ's specs but use Toyota's numbers! The 2006 numbers are a tad different than the earlier trucks but keep the numbers close to each other and near the top of their spec'd ranges! i think that is why my tires have developed a vibration because alignment has not been adjusted properly yet? I had them use earlier model specs to align my truck which i think could have ruined a set of tires?
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPIGSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIE!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
I'll say, I had my ball joint's replaced at around 45,000 miles or so....
I just checked and I can't find any joints in my balls at all. Not a single one. Is that a good thing? :devil:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,842 Posts
[...]

I have felt that the adjustment components were just not robust enough for the weight of our vehicles, especially when we start moving the suspension away from stock, i.e. lifting and putting the suspension through its paces.

[...]
Possibly they aren't. It depends on the modifications done.

Sometimes, what appears to be small modifications can make large changes in the stresses experienced by the suspension components and joints. Usually, what appears to be large modifications can make extreme changes in those stresses. When you change the suspension, particularly by lifting it, you are, in effect, substituting your judgment for that of the engineers who designed the vehicle.

So, don't be surprised if the response isn't what you wanted or expected, and don't be surprised if it doesn't wear well. And, I suggest against drawing conclusions about stock vehicles based on the performance of modified vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
If this were my truck, I would change the alignment.

.... Tastes great, less filling.
yep, it's miller time!

drove to hotlanta today. about a 5 hour drive. feels the same as ever-because it is. HA!

when i get back home, i will post up the parameters of toyotas specs on all 4 wheels for the 06 tundra 2wd. there was also another spec on the report that i had never heard of before (can't remember the name of it right now).

i appreciate your input, dj. have enjoyed your posts. while i really don't have any complaints about the way she drives right now, and even before you posted the above statement, my gut feeling was that the alignment could be better. my plan is to locate one of the hunter machines you have mentioned in another thread and follow your advise on the alignment.

perhaps when i get the parameters off the report posted up you could bless this thread once again.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,842 Posts
[...]

my plan is to locate one of the hunter machines you have mentioned in another thread and follow your advise on the alignment.

perhaps when i get the parameters off the report posted up you could bless this thread once again.
I'll be interested in your before-and-after comparison.

Total toe being negative tends to produce a vehicle behavior that is often described as "squirrelly". If the vehicle rolls a bit to the right, then the right wheel has a bit more control authority than the left. Since it's pointed a bit to the right, it pulls the vehicle to the right, and that makes it roll to the left. The roles reverse (if you'll pardon the pun) and the left wheel then pulls the vehicle to the left, which makes the vehicle roll to the right, and so on. The result is a rolling, irregular oscillation that the driver has to continuously correct for.

You might not notice its presence, but you might notice its absence after correcting the alignment. It'll be interesting to see.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
Thanks a bunch, DJ

Guys, we are lucky to have DJ on our forum. He knows what he is talking about and is happy to share his vast and invaluable experience with us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,074 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
I'll be interested in your before-and-after comparison.

Total toe being negative tends to produce a vehicle behavior that is often described as "squirrelly". If the vehicle rolls a bit to the right, then the right wheel has a bit more control authority than the left. Since it's pointed a bit to the right, it pulls the vehicle to the right, and that makes it roll to the left. The roles reverse (if you'll pardon the pun) and the left wheel then pulls the vehicle to the left, which makes the vehicle roll to the right, and so on. The result is a rolling, irregular oscillation that the driver has to continuously correct for.

You might not notice its presence, but you might notice its absence after correcting the alignment. It'll be interesting to see.

gotcha! so driving home from hotlanta, i paid more attention to the characteristics of the steering and i felt what you are describing. very subtle.

here are the parameters from the printout for 06 tundra 4x2 2005-06 double cab with 265/65/17 tires (my measurements from printout in parenthesis)

FRONT

front left camber 0.7 to -0.8 degrees (0.1) & front right camber -.08 to 0.7 degrees (-0.2)

front left castor 2.9 to 1.4 degrees (3.4) & front right castor 1.4 to 2.9 degrees (2.8)
doesn't this castor measurement appear to be out of spec?

front left toe -0.04 to 0.16 degrees (-0.02) & front right toe .16 to -0.04 degrees (0.01)

total toe -0.08 to 0.32 degrees (-0.01)

steer ahead -0.05 to 0.05 degrees (-0.02)--this was the parameter i mentioned in an earlier post on this thread that i could not remember the name of

REAR

there are no parameters given with the rear measurements:

left camber -0.2 degrees
left toe 0.14 degrees

right camber -0.1 degrees
right toe 0.11 degrees

total rear toe 0.25 degrees
thrust angle 0.02 degrees

i'll start my search for an alignment shop this week. the first place i will check is the specialty alignment shop that aligned my mustang. not sure of their equipment, but they have what i call a "pit" set up (don't know what else to call it) where they can service limo's, busses, and other large vehicles if needed. they dialed my mustang in perfectly the way i wanted it with custom strut mounts, lower springs, etc.. i hung out in the pit during the work too. fun times!

concerning the rear... is the closer you have everything to 0.0 degrees, the better the set up?

as always, much appreciation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,842 Posts
front left castor 2.9 to 1.4 degrees (3.4) & front right castor 1.4 to 2.9 degrees (2.8)
doesn't this castor measurement appear to be out of spec?
Yes, it is out of spec. They should be the same on both sides, and I would set them right at the upper end of the allowed range, i.e. 2.9 degrees.

steer ahead -0.05 to 0.05 degrees (-0.02)--this was the parameter i mentioned in an earlier post on this thread that i could not remember the name of
"Steer ahead" is simply a measure of how the steering wheel was steered at the moment the printout was made. It is of no real use on a printout unless it was noted whether or not the steering wheel was level at that same moment. If it was, and "steer ahead" is not very close to zero, then the steering wheel will not be level when the vehicle rolls in a straight line. This is the #1 complaint that wheel alignment customers have, simply because it is both annoying and visible, so this item on the printout is there to help with diagnostics by the technician.
concerning the rear... is the closer you have everything to 0.0 degrees, the better the set up?
Yes, but don't expect perfection, even with a solid rear axle like the Tundra.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top