OK it's me again, gal with the infinite alignment & balancing issues. Need some advice on the mechanical aspects of an alignment. Awhile ago, I posted that the dealer had charged me $500 for a 4-wheel alignment, after which everything was in specs (though not as close to center as you'd expect for that price) EXCEPT for right rear camber which was in specs (-0.9) on my before measurement, and outside specs (-2.0) when all was said and done. The car was then pulling right (with a light grip I'd be on the rumble strips in seconds) so I brought it to an independent mechanic who installed a right rear camber kit to fix what was out of specs; of course this affected other aspects of the alignment having to be redone in the normal order of alignment. First question, I read that caster-camber-toe is the order of an alignment. Is that for front only?, or is the order the same for rear? This guy charged only $59.95 for front alignment, $59.95 for rear, and $85 for the camber kit. Most importantly, the car propelled straight afterward & I've had no alignment issues since.

I wrote a strongly-worded letter to the dealership (much more detail than the above) asking for my money back. They replied that they would refund some money but I needed to provide the receipt for the place that did the 2nd alignment. When I did, they said they would refund me what the independent mechanic charged me for the alignment (as opposed to the dealer's original rates) and that they would not refund the part (kit) because if I had that work done at the dealer I would've had to buy the part from them too. I said I only needed the part because they caused my right rear camber to be out of specs; the service manager disagreed - said that it had to be a measurement error, that nothing they could do in a course of an alignment could cause the right rear camber to go from -0.9 to -2.0; he said they must've done the initial measurement wrong, but couldn't have "caused" this swing in measurement in the course of an alignment. My second question is that true? Do any of you with expertise in this area believe that a degradation in camber like that could be caused by an incompetent aligner, or do you agree that the error was only in measurement? Significantly complicating this was that the alignment was done on 2 separate days with a week's time intervening (on day 1 the machine became inoperable [I believe it's power source] - all they did was rear toe & did everything else a 2nd day). Also significantly complicating it is they didn't bother to give me an "after" measurement on Day 1 (because the alignment wasn't complete) so I can't compare before/after on Day 1, but only across Days 1 and 2. So the manager is saying I expect them to take my word for it that the car wasn't hit between days 1 and 2 (causing the camber problem), while I won't take their word for it that they didn't cause it in the course of alignment.

Lastly, what do you think about reimbursement at the lower (independent mechanic) labor rates as opposed to the dealer's original rates? The service manager said if the 2nd guy charged me $1,000 labor, Chrysler would be looking at reimbursing me $1,000, but since the 2nd guy charged me only $120, that's all Chrysler is responsible for. He said if we'd go to court, that's how the judge would see it too. Do you believe that's true? I'm sure others on the forum have experience in this area, if one place does something wrong, and someplace else fixes it, and the first rate was higher, is it reasonable to get reimbursed at the original (higher) or corrective (lower) rates? A friend of mine said reimbursing the original rates would be good customer service but that the dealer is probably right that only the corrective rates would be seen as reimbursable in court. Maybe this is too basic a view, but I ask myself, if the dealer charged me $500 to fix something, and at best did not fix it - and at worst made it worse - and I pay $120 to correct it, for what does the dealer get to keep $380? Especially when fixing the right rear camber to correct the pull & get it back in specs caused other aspects of the alignment which the dealer had done correctly to be redone. Mechanically speaking, if the right rear camber was redone, did rear caster and toe have to be redone? And what about front camber, caster, and toe? I'm not clear on this & I think it needs to be part of my arguments.

The original dealer charges were for 2.5 hours labor (which he said is in the Chilton manual for a 4-wheel alignment on this car), caster and camber bolts, and 2 more hrs labor for the bolts. Labor is about $90 here in the DC area.

 

CFG...what an odyssey!

I have no experience with taking dealers to court over this type thing. Clearly, it seems reasonable that the dealer charged for something that they did not fix...but then again I'm not an attorney. Perhaps someone has some thoughts.

In the end though, your mechanical problem was fixed? That part, if nothing else, is valuable information for the group. I'll see ya in two weeks at the show...I'm sure we'll have a few things to chat about!

 

Sennaspirit, Yes! It is finally aligned properly after the, as you put it, odyssey (good word!). Looking forward to meeting you and the other DC forum members at the car show.

 

All the dealer can adj is toe, front and rear unless camber and/or caster adj bolts fitted.
The rear would not be affected in any way by their work on rear toe.
I have had to fit camber kits to the rear of my SLK when I went to wider rims and 1/2' lower pads to keep camber on spec.

Bazzle

 

I feel your pain...My alignment has been out of whack since I got the car at 2k miles...Went to the dealership 2 times and it still butterflies...I'm only at 10k miles and I need new rear tires because of extreme wear on the inside. Ridiculous!

 

I had my alignment done today at Firestone. They did all four wheels and also aligned the steering wheel which was tending about 5-10 degrees to the left. Appears they did a fine job. My front tires were way out of alignment. The car only has 4,000 miles - a 2004 coupe.
The cost was $69 and it took about 1 hour.

Bill Kirch
Chicago

 

This is an un-fortunate debacle; however as you stated "A friend of mine said reimbursing the original rates would be good customer service but that the dealer is probably right that only the corrective rates would be seen as reimbursable in court.", and I believe your friend is correct. It stinks and your friend is VERY correct with the customer service angle. As discussed "ad-nauseum", I would guess Chrysler dealers in general do not care about Xfires or their owners as they view the Xfire as a M-B coupe forced down through sales channels for a "marriage" (Chrysler & Mercedes) which resulted in a "Cerebus" divorce that Chrysler Service Depts are now stuck with. I am guessing from other "bad" service posts on this forum that the bulk of Chrysler service depts would rather the Xfire (and their respective owners) would go away...its a German car, with strong and precise engineering that is out of production and they don't want the hassle, the training, and the problems...all which probably stretches their service techs expertise. They don't want what we bring. You're right to expect more, but legally/technically your friend is probably correct and you won't likely get any more than you already have received.

 

Hi,

I also noticed that my rear tires are completely ruin, and after only 11,000 miles.

I had two alignments done this summer by two different dealers, and the inside of the tires are now to the mesh, and the outer part is almost like new.

No one ever mentioned a kit for alignment. Please could you please tell me what this kit is, what it does to the alignment, and where can I purchase such item ?

Thanks,
George

 

I installed K-MAC adjustable camber bushings in my rear lower control arms when I done the Eibach lowering springs. I think they were around $250, I also installed the OEM camber bolt kit in the front, witch is not adjustable. It gains you 3 degrees more positive camber, witch put the front camber right on the money, but the tow was way out. The rear tow was also way out, but the tow on the rear is adjustable.

 

I am going thru the same problem as you, my dealership brought in a set of camber/caster bolts, for a 4 wheel alignment, now they need to bring in more bolts, from T.O. I purchased new tires 3 weeks ago and asked for a 4 wheel alignment, and since then its been a waiting game. TABERNAC

 

I don't think that Chrysler makes the adjustable rear camber bolts and the front bolts they do make are not adjustable, they just add 3 degrees more positive camber.You might want to question them about this.

 

The camber bolts do not allow a 3 degree change in camber. 0.3 maybe (I believe the manual says they'll give you 0.5, but they didn't get me that much). They can be used to go either less negative or more negative.

 

I knew there was a 3 in there somewhere and I knew they would go either way. I done the install myself using floor jacks and a chain com-along, it was no easy task. I used K-MAC adjustable bushings in the back.

 

This seems to be a common problem with excessive tire wear and camber/castor adjustment/alignment. I have checked thru the TSB's but have not found anything, would anyone have any info?. AMG LOVER is there a problem / recall with SLK's regarding alignment ? or is this just a Crossfire thing.

 

I personally think it is a design problem. They did not make the camber adjustable on the car, front or rear. But I don't know if the SLK's or CL's are any different.

 

The amount of camber available in a stock Crossfire is not going to adversely affect tire wear. *Toe* is much, much harder on tires than camber. Caster certainly isn't going to have an effect.

And after getting an alignment again, it appears that some "settling" occurred with my camber bolts and I did get about a 0.5 deg improvement...at -1.6 and -1.8 up front now. That settling (essentially the notch in the bolt working it's way a little further into the slot) unfortunately also affected toe...I had a ton of toe out up front which caused some excessive wear on the insides of the front (not too bad since it was only a couple thousand miles, but noticeable nonetheless).