" Exess Play " in steering ( W203 )

[Shanusacarabus]

Hi all, I recently only noticed that on my MOT i had an idvisory for exessive play in steering, whats this mean and can it be fixed easilly ( DIY ).

If not whats the bad news ??

 

[C180 Chris]

I adjusted a fair bit of play out of my S class steering very easily using the adjustment, but there are some safety issues to consider first and as far as i am aware slop in the steering is more likely to be down to worn components ie, idler arms,track rod ends etc. So check all of these first before any adjustments are contemplated, and if all these are good we can move on to the adjustment itself.

 

[Shanusacarabus]

Ah right, deffo a job for the pro's then i guess... thanks for the input

 

[television]

If the tester did not know much about MBs.

You should have no more than 25mm measured at the steering wheel with the engine running and the wheels pointing straight ahead

 

[type49]

I adjusted a fair bit of play out of my S class steering very easily using the adjustment, but there are some safety issues to consider first and as far as i am aware slop in the steering is more likely to be down to worn components ie, idler arms,track rod ends etc. So check all of these first before any adjustments are contemplated, and if all these are good we can move on to the adjustment itself.

There is no adjustment in the steering rack. There is no idler arm on a 203. You need to find out if the play is in the end ball joint (easy repair ) or in the rack itself (new rack required )

 

[Number_Cruncher]

*************

 

[C180 Chris]

*************

I think i might need a number crunching computer to decipher this one

 

[Number_Cruncher]

I think i might need a number crunching computer to decipher this one

Yes! I had written a post relevant to steering boxes, making my usual points about checking the rest of the system before fiddling about with them.

However, this car has a rack! D'oh!

The situation is so much simpler! The source of the play should be found and fixed. The good thing is that track rods including the inner ball joint are available and reasonably easy to fit.


For MOT purposes, the make of car is irrelevant in determing acceptable limits for steering wheel play. In the straight ahead position, for steering box systems, 75mm play is the limit, for steering rack systems, 13mm.

 

[turbopete]

Yes! I had written a post relevant to steering boxes, making my usual points about checking the rest of the system before fiddling about with them.

However, this car has a rack! D'oh!

The situation is so much simpler! The source of the play should be found and fixed. The good thing is that track rods including the inner ball joint are available and reasonably easy to fit.


For MOT purposes, the make of car is irrelevant in determing acceptable limits for steering wheel play. In the straight ahead position, for steering box systems, 75mm play is the limit, for steering rack systems, 13mm.

ive never understood this method of measuring free pla. its measured at the steering wheel rim. so (and ive seen this done!) if your steering has too much free play, simply put a smaller steering wheel on! reduces the distance moved for the same amount of plat, car then passes MOT! im sure theres logic in the method used to check free play, but i havent found it yet!

 

[Number_Cruncher]

>>im sure theres logic in the method used to check free play, but i havent found it yet!

While you're right, remember that the MOT isn't a thorough or rigourous check of vehicle safety (I'll avoid the meaningless phrase roadworthy). It's possible for an absolutely lethal car to be correctly given an MOT, and it's possible for a perfectly safe car to fail one!

The MOT is (was*) a fairly sensible set of easily performed checks that a vehicle in good order should have no problem in passing. This means that an MOT is in many areas quite subjective, and the personal prejudice of the tester has a part in determining the outcome.

In an ideal world, this would be improved upon. However, if you make the MOT more of a thorough engineering based inspection, you would have to employ people with much higher levels of skill to do it, and the test itself would take longer. All of this would make the MOT very expensive, and the cost of MOT itself would begin to scrap perfectly good cars - compare with the Japanese Shaken.

While I agree with and support the basic aims of the MOT, don't be fooled into thinking that the MOT itself contributes significantly to road safety.

You may be surprised by what you read in this study;

http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_MOT.pdf

Based on the type of logic presented in the research, I think our sensible, quick, cheap MOT is OK, but, I definitely do not support making it more rigorous, time consuming and expensive.

For me, the big danger of the MOT is that most of the public have no idea what the MOT does and what it means, and I think that many think a new MOT certificate gives the carte blanche to run the car for a year regardless of its condition. Of course, the law says differently, and that vehicle condition is always the responsibility of the driver (this responsibility may be shared in cases where there are other responsible people who have caused or permitted the vehicle's use - a fleet engineer responsible for company cars, or a CPC holder responsible for a fleet of trucks, for example)

* The MOT was sensible before political requirements like the emissions testing, number plate BS marking etc. became a part of it.

 

[turbopete]

quite correct N/C! in fact as an example, for a tyre to be legal, it must have 1.6mm of tread minimum on the centre 3/4 of the tyre, with visible tread on the rest. to pass an mot however, it needs minimum 1.6mm of tread on 3/4 (not the middle 3/4) of the tyre with visible tread on the rest. so your car could pass an mot but be illegal!!! so whats the point? surely the standards should be made to match, if nothing else?!

 

[Number_Cruncher]

>>so whats the point?

The way I tend to view MOTs are as a quality check of your car's servicing and maintenance regime. Apart from the political test aspects which I mentioned, if your car fails an MOT it means that you really aren't looking after it well enough.

I like the situation with HGV and PSV testing. If vehicles on your fleet regularly fail when presented for MOT, you'll get a visit from VOSA, and they'll inspect
the whole fleet as they come back into the yard after a day's work!

>>so whats the point?

I think the stats presented in the research paper from the Netherlands make that really clear. Despite appealing to many people's common sense view of vehicle safety, MOTs do not prevent many accidents, and they don't save many lives.

 

[C180 Chris]

*************

I got the bit about it having a rack rather than a box, it was the relevance of all the stars that lost me....and still does! Doh!

 

[Number_Cruncher]

>>and still does!

Ah! I deleted the text in the post, and then got a message saying that the post needed a certain number of characters - I just put a row of **** in to make the tedious nag box go away.

 

[C180 Chris]

Ah! Now i've got it!!

Thought it was maybe one of those abbreviation's that pop up on forums from time to time that i didn't know (like IIRC or HWMBO)

 

[Shanusacarabus]

I reckon the answer is simply take it to a MB Indie and ask them to diagnose the actual fault... then decide if i can fix it myself or get it repaired

 

[dharan65]

steering play

hi - my E220 has a little excessiveplay in the idler bush of the steering. can the bush be replaced from the inside ie the passenger compartment or does the box need to be removed to do this, if so this is going to be a real nightmare. can anyone help out here.......................dharan65-W124

 

[type49]

hi - my E220 has a little excessiveplay in the idler bush of the steering. can the bush be replaced from the inside ie the passenger compartment or does the box need to be removed to do this, if so this is going to be a real nightmare. can anyone help out here.......................dharan65-W124

E220 as in 124?? If so, this has a box on the OS & the idler arm/bushes on the NS, accessed from underneath the car & quite easy/cheap to repair (with the car in the air, that is)

 

[Jingo711]

>>im sure theres logic in the method used to check free play, but i havent found it yet!

While you're right, remember that the MOT isn't a thorough or rigourous check of vehicle safety (I'll avoid the meaningless phrase roadworthy). It's possible for an absolutely lethal car to be correctly given an MOT, and it's possible for a perfectly safe car to fail one!

The MOT is (was*) a fairly sensible set of easily performed checks that a vehicle in good order should have no problem in passing. This means that an MOT is in many areas quite subjective, and the personal prejudice of the tester has a part in determining the outcome.

In an ideal world, this would be improved upon. However, if you make the MOT more of a thorough engineering based inspection, you would have to employ people with much higher levels of skill to do it, and the test itself would take longer. Cheap MOT All of this would make the MOT very expensive, and the cost of MOT itself would begin to scrap perfectly good cars - compare with the Japanese Shaken.

While I agree with and support the basic aims of the MOT, don't be fooled into thinking that the MOT itself contributes significantly to road safety.

You may be surprised by what you read in this study;

http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_MOT.pdf

Based on the type of logic presented in the research, I think our sensible, quick, cheap MOT is OK, but, I definitely do not support making it more rigorous, time consuming and expensive.

For me, the big danger of the MOT is that most of the public have no idea what the MOT does and what it means, and I think that many think a new MOT certificate gives the carte blanche to run the car for a year regardless of its condition. Of course, the law says differently, and that vehicle condition is always the responsibility of the driver (this responsibility may be shared in cases where there are other responsible people who have caused or permitted the vehicle's use - a fleet engineer responsible for company cars, or a CPC holder responsible for a fleet of trucks, for example)

* The MOT was sensible before political requirements like the emissions testing, number plate BS marking etc. became a part of it.

Of course, any part can fail at any time

 

[SteveX]

Could be track rod ball joint, could mean a number of things really but that 'I think' is most common. Not too hard to do, just couple of nuts / bolts. If it's a pattern part it should be ok, but mark the current length it is adjusted to and try to get the other one as spot on as possible (assuming the original is correct).

Most garages charge about £100 to do one including the part (for the average car).

I'd just do it yourself if you find that is the problem then pay for a front wheel toe / tracking alignment for about £25.00