Taking a look on EPER, the GTA ARB is only fitted to the GTA (part number 51754199). All other models had the standard ARB (part number 51754198). It would be best though if you asked an Alfa dealer to confirm, but the copy of EPER I'm looking at is dated 2014 so it should be correct.But is the GTA ARB the same as on the Q2?
If I can answer this I at least know what to buy.
I thought I saw somewhere listed that they were the same but maybe I dreamed it.
TBH if it is different I'll probably upgrade,
If the grease dries out they can get creaky and noisy, but the creaking and noise isn't doing any damage. Polybushes should last for the life of the car though, they won't wear like rubber bushes.
They can go creaky after a while. I have Powerflex bushes on the front GTA bar and they were 're-lubricated' six months ago due to this problem, after being fitted for 3 years.New question.....
Are there any negatives regarding poly bushes?
Are they creaky noisy?
I've done a parts lookup for the specific chassis number of my Sport Q2, and it's showing 51754198, the standard ARB. Which also measures 22.0-22.3mm diameter, depending where I use the caliper. I think that's conclusive. I am surprised, as the car has very little roll, but apparently that's entirely due to the lower, stiffer suspension on this model.Taking a look on EPER, the GTA ARB is only fitted to the GTA (part number 51754199). All other models had the standard ARB (part number 51754198). It would be best though if you asked an Alfa dealer to confirm, but the copy of EPER I'm looking at is dated 2014 so it should be correct..
Me too, seems counter-intuitive, but it's correct. It's about the front vs rear distribution of the total lateral weight transfer, and how the relative stiffnesses of the front vs rear ARBs and springs affect this.A stiffer front ARB would increase the understeer tendency. A stiffer rear ARB would make it less understeery/ introduce oversteer.
I found that strange when I first learned about it
You don't actually need to completely drop the subframe to fit the ARB. Just dropping it a bit from the rear of the frame is enough to extract the old ARB.Yes, and I knew that when I posted the entirely wrong answer As said, it's counter-intuitive, especially before coffee, human Easy Start.
Personally I'm reluctant to mess with the existing set up, which is neutral and with little roll. The Sport Q2 has quite old school 'sports' suspension, not supple and quite harsh until you go fast enough, and it's never going to float over bad road surfaces. But it neither understeers nor oversteers. Nor do I get shoulder tyre wear at either end, so it's a case of not fixing what isn't broke. I suspect the previous owner had it tracked parallel instead of the standard slight toe-out at the front. So for me the choice is whether to polybush the existing ARB or replace with new. TBH, the original bushes are only now making a noise at 11yrs old, so I'm probably leaning toward new stock ARB, rather than polybushing.
However although I've done upper and lower wishbones, brakes, driveshaft, droplinks etc I don't think I can face DIY dropping the subframe in the gutter of an urban street. Too much traffic, too many idiots, camber not helpful and a local epidemic of attempts to steal catalysts and DPF's.
My TS 147 has a GTA front ARB (fitted by previous owner). The stock 14mm rear ARB might as well be made from coat hanger wire for all that it actually does (I couldn't detect any difference when it was removed and there was no rear ARB at all for a few days). The 16mm rear ARB must be an improvement, but I doubt it could be a big one. The car now has a 20mm rear ARB (a modified front ARB originally from a Holden Rodeo light truck), which was a huge improvement.Certainly in the case of the JTD engine, which is a heavy unit, the GTA ARB is a welcome upgrade. The increased stability and grip is a big plus over the standard ARB. Ok, so the difference is 23mm over 22mm, but it does make a difference. The rear is easy to fit, and this upgrade from 14mm to 16mm is also a big plus.