I have a copy but am having issues sending it since it requires a login in order to view the file. It is covered under CPO, that is purely an extended factory warranty. Tell him to suck it and stop being a d bag, tell him Kyle from King Volvo sent you and that if he has a problem to feel free and give me a call haha.

 

Hi Kyle,
I know this was along time ago but do you have the RTJ and can you send it to this forum? Thanks for the info

 

Thanks Kyle.

 

I did finally get a copy of the RTJ. Unfortunately, the document says not to replace the control arm if the camber is less negative than the recommended threshold (-2.4 deg). Since mine are -2.4 and -2.3 degs, only one meets the criteria. I'd rather not have just one replaced. Therefore, I'll either buy the service parts or the adjustable type and do it myself.
Stan

 

Thats just given as an example, they wouldnt replace the one and not the other since too much variation in camber can cause a pull. Id still give it a try, the bulletin states if excessive wear is present or a noise then the arms can be installed. The threshold given is just an example to show what would be considered excessive. Technically you are out of factory updated spec from volvo.

 

I think I over-adjusted my camber to about -0.5. Now I have tire wear on the outside of my tires...

 

I tried this since I am at -2.1 and -1.7. Dealer said no dice since spec is up to -2.5 which is total BS, that will kill tires!

 

Thats a negative, volvo released an update on the camber specs. Its no longer that high. Ill have to find the sheet again. Our machine isnt up to date I just automatically recommend them if I see camber much higher than -2.0*

Spec is -1.52* of camber. If you arent even lowered and are about -2* theres no reason why the arms cant be installed.

Dealers are being stupid to turn down work, volvo wont kick the repair under warranty as long as a customer complaint can be duplicated whether thats tire wear or a noise. It doesnt just have to be based on the numbers.

Oh and -.5* camber is a little bit excessive positive lol. I would have put it more towards -1.2* for optimal wear without sacrificing performance too much.

 

Spec is -1.52° ± 1° for rear camber, so even the -2.52° is within the limits. Personally I prefere -2.2° which handles great without excessive tyre wear.
Front camber is -0.68° ± 0.7°. I set it to -1.2° for better handling (to reduce understeer).

These are values for AWD, standard and dynamic chassis.
For Sport chassis the values are even more negative (which is logical): -0.9° ± 0.7° (front) and -1.92° ± 1° (rear).

 

-2.52* is not considered acceptable rear camber for a stock S40. Thus why they had to change the spec. The difference is the dealer is supposed to make the call and they are just being lazy. Rather than installing a set of arms under warranty to make the customer happy they are just stating that its within spec. The point of the bulletin is to say that even if its in spec, if a customer has a complaint, its acceptable to install the arms.

 

The figures I gave for camber and toe are from official Volvo document, so legally speaking they can claim -2.52° rear camber is within specs and send you to do the optics to set the camber to some other value. Of course there is tire wear when set to this value, but the handling is also superb - you can't have both, as you know.

You are right when looking from the perspective of customer satisfaction, but that's another issue..

 

I'm calling Volvo to take this matter up. My dealer is being crappy about it.

 

Customer care should side with you, if you are experiencing wear then that's warrantable per the bulletin.

 

A dealer is retarded if they arent willing to install the arms, if the customer makes a complaint regarding it and theres no confliction just do it. Dont understand why people are programmed to piss off customers. We bend over backwards for our customers, a lot of times at the cost of the technicians paycheck.

 

I think in my case the service writer believes that the CPO warranty and the VIP extended warranty are the same. Are they? From the description, the CPO warranty is a Volvo sponsored warranty. I believe that this differs from the VIP warranty which is through Automobile Protection Corporation (APCO). To the consumer and service center, it means that with the VIP warranty they don't like to pay out and it is more difficult to justify warranty repairs.

I believe that my service writer is reluctant to replace the control arm (saying that it would not be covered before he has seen any measurements) because he doesn't think he can justify it to the warranty company and would eat the cost. The other issue that I see is the wording of the RTJ. It states:

If the rear camber is still high after correcting
the toe-in, then replace the upper control arm
with the service part.

Note! The recommended threshold level for
the negative camber angle is -2.4 degrees
for comfort and dynamic chassis (see VIDA,
Vehicle Details) Do not replace the upper
control arm if the camber angle is less
negative than the recommended threshold
levels. If only one side is beyond this
threshold, then only replace the control arm
on that side!

As reluctant as my service writer is to do anything, if pushed, he would say that he is only justified to replace one.

Kyle, I wish I lived closer to your service center. Your customer satisfaction must be first rate. In general, the one I go to is good unless they fear that they aren't going to get paid for the work.

Cover me, I'm going to make the call to schedule my appointment for the CV Boots (warranty!), Radio Freeze (again) and other minor stuff. I hope I get a decent loaner this time.
Stan

 

This seems like a relevant thread to add my comment/question to. 2005 V50 T5, just turned 60,000 miles: we just installed our 4th set of tires. OE Michelins, Goodyear F1s, Goodyear GTs...each only lasted about 20,000 miles and twice we had cord showing thru on the right rear tire. Yes: we rotate the tires; have noticed the rears always wear faster than the fronts. Now we're going with Continental ExtremeContact DWS' and hoping for better results. We did have the alignment checked this time; rears were off per the tire installer. Wife's car used mostly for around town driving (low miles, considered delivered in late 2004). Is rapid tire wear characteristic for the V50?

We also had to change the D's side rear hub/bearing assembly...growling badly. Local shop (Curry's, Arlington, VA) attributes failure to pot hole impact at some time. Very likely considering the road in/around WashDC. Comments on this?

 

My V50 has about -2.4 deg of camber on the rears. I bought my V50 with 28K miles and the OEM tires were chewed up but had good tread otherwise. I replaced them with Michelin Pilot Exalto A/S and got 40K miles out of those. These were very good performing but since they were directional I couldn't cross rotate the rears and they were a little chewed. I am now running the Continental ExtremeContact DWS and they seem to be doing very well with 20K miles so far. They are not down to the snow wear indicator yet and are very quite. Performance wise, I'd say the Pilot Exaltos had a slight edge but overall, I like the ExtremeContact DWS.
Stan

 

40,000 miles +/- would be great! As the V50 is my wife's car, "performance" isn't so much of an issue. Reliability and mileage are top of the list. Visually the DWS' look narrower than the former Goodyears, but what the hay, can't have everything. I certainly don't want to be buying yet another set of tires 20,000 miles from now so your words are encouraging.

 

Autogeek wrote about an RTJ which calls for the replacement of the upper control arms with the part number 31201356 which reduces the camber by .7 degrees. Is this applicable on my 2008 C70 and has this been proven to work? Thanks

 

Success!

Volvo replaced the upper control arms and realigned the vehicle under warranty. Kudos to Kyle. The rear camber adjustments are now -1.6* and -1.7*

 

....."realligned" ? There is no camber adgustment on the rear of the 2005+ C70, V50, S40, C30. Hence the problem. The original control arms installed were designed to improve cornering/handling, and they worked with respect to that.
......The problem is the excessive tire wear and noise that these "fixed" control arms created as a result of the large amount of negative camber. As with most of the world's manufacturers, the rear camber should have been around -0.5 to -1.2 degrees. My 2010 C30 is at -2.0 both sides, and the OE zero nero's were done at 20,000 miles.
......It seems Volvo is trying to make the problem go away [for them] with the incredably wide spec. The only fix is to replace the rear upper control arms. Volvo is in "lock step" at every level of management/customer service, in denying the problem. It seems they would rather loose loyal customers than to spend the money for the parts to fix the problem.
......I have been going round and round with my dealer and "Betty" at customer service in N.J., who left a message on my home answering machine, "that it would be dangerous to replace the control arms, as that might effect my transmission". WOW ! Could you believe that?..... I think Volvo's game plan is to stall you until the warranty is expired. They have no interest in the customer's satisfaction what-so-ever.

 

Dealers in general are just ridiculous, seems that more often than not they will deny a warranty claim as much as possible till your plan expires. Better off calling customer care at that point and have the repair pushed through. Volvo would not release the bulletin if not Diego's the benefit of the tech to support the customer, have to remember dealers are a franchise and although they represent VCNA they unfortunately are able to make decisions for themselves.

Volvo racing team has mentioned these cars perform best with this negative in camber in the rear, however Volvo isn't selling racecars so was kind of a bad choice lol. The arms do work and are ideal if you are much higher than -2.0* and do a lot of driving.

 

Can't believe it !!! Just after posting above, I got a call from Volvo.
..... After months of going round and round, I got a call from Volvo saying that they will replace the rear upper control arms.
......I'll let you all know the camber specs after installation.

 

Well this forum is collaborated with VCNA, eventually the complaints will make it to the head office lol.

 

2011 C30 with less than 6800 miles. Tires were rotated at 5500 when service was done. Ever since them road noise has gone up. Took the car into a local tire shop and they said all 4 tires show inside wear - cupping or feather due to bad TOE-IN or CAMBER. This is simply ridiculous given the age of the car. Volvo will be hearing lemon lawyers pretty soon if they don't get their act togteher and resolve this matter correcltly. There is enough noice out there in the WEB to add credibility to this issue. So VOLVO please resolve this issue. If it weren't for my wife loving this car, I would be dumping this car ASAP and taking an add out in LA times informing all other innocent folks to stay away from any VOLVO products!

 

I just rotated my new winters yesterday (205/55/16) after 3-4K and the driver rear tire is sawtoothed like a mother f#$%^@. Now that it's on the front, it howls like crazy. I can't stand this tire wear, and am sure I will sell the car this summer (nearing 100K by then). I don't think having to drop $$ on adjustable arms is acceptable. Needless to say, I'm pissed, too.

My rear camber is -2.1 and -1.8. Two dealers wouldn't acknowledge the issue when I was under warranty to insisting it get done.

 

Anyone having an Alignment from Volvo Dealer
Print out showing the rear cambers to be higher then
2.0 should of had been Informed - that was an up date
Or for a better name Wake-Up. Call !
Again take part off put parts on the Computer says it's OK.
LOL It's like everyone and the Cub Scouts Know Alingments
Are set to the best known settings to server the Customer.

5000 miles on Tires - there shot I'd say the balancing
Was Off Also. If the Toe was off that much there should have been
A Vibration at High Speed!
Which Means the factory tires weren't Balanced Properly.
Pretty Similar of what I just went thou on 2011 Tires.

Ps : Tire Issues , Balancing Issues , Quality - BS Tires they should be removed
Replaced and sent back to the tire vendor Rejects !
Ps: There some kind of Quality Issue going on with Tires.

 

Tires were balanced perfectly, not a single vibration felt. And mine were Nokian Hakkapeliitta 5 tires- not too shabby imo. I'm kind of over this car...

 

What is the Technical Spec's on those look to be a Bit soft ? (Nokian Hakkapeliitta)
2011 WITH ONLY 6800 MILES You made this out to be a New Car or New Tire on a New Car - either Way - post up this Alignment You got - You Screwed on , how's it the Cars fault ?

Did You have Volvo make any adjustment or Complain - Documentation Please !
That's what I do get it Documented , Before Print out & after Print Out .

Was Your Balancing Road Force balancing ?

Camber Spec's like Toe - Spec's are a mile wide .

It's like - Are set to the best known settings to server the Customer.
If they can't do that - Then Volvo should be adding those Camber Arm Kits .

Your still on stock Spring ?

SooBad - Yeah, that's what Volvo usually does , but If Present everything in a Logical manner , and attach Info to the Service
Writer's Write up - usually try and Get Behind It .

 

I just wanted to Add - these Guys have some Parts that like the : Focus - ST & Mazda Speed - will work on Our Model.

Could Help Alignment Issues & Mod Camber settings :

http://www.whiteline.com.au/do_segue4.php?make=Ford&model=Focus&model_final=FOCUS+MKII+LS%2C+LT+INCL+XR5+%26+ST&vehicle=5%2F05-10