Meyle lower control arm problems, am I the only one?

I recently replaced the front lower control arms (often referred to as the coffin) on my 2002 911 C4S since the ball joint rubber boots were torn. I used Meyle part # 4160500000 because it is much cheaper than OEM and I've had great luck with Meyle parts over the many years I've used them in the past. These control arms fit fine, but after I installed them I had significant visible negative toe. I didn't think much of it, figuring that it would be reasonable to expect alignment to be off a bit after changing such a critical suspension component. However, to get my toe back in spec, I had to screw the inner tie rods into the outer tie rods to the point where there is almost no visible threads left behind the jam nut. Also, my camber was positive, and when I pushed the struts to maximum negative camber within their slots, I can only get to zero camber, can't get into the negative. From what I can see the Meyle arms appear to be significantly shorter (bushing to ball joint) than OE arms, hence they are pulling the wheel carrier towards the center of the car causing positive camber and negative toe (toe out). I don't know how Meyle screwed something like this up. I am just curious if perhaps I just got a bad batch or if anyone else has run into this problem. I don't want to spend $400+ for the original Porsche part, but curious if anyone here can confirm what aftermarket options are actually the correct length.

Did you buy the correct parts?

I believe that I got the correct parts. The original Porsche part # is 99634105307 and this Meyle part cross-lists to that. This is actually a very common part because it first the front and rear suspension on the 911 as well as the 997 generation Boxster. The ball joint and bushings fit perfectly, so the only issue is the overall part length. This is why I didn't expect to have any problems with this part because I woudl imagine a lot of people use the Meyle part given the price differential to the OE part.

Quotes source post: 16214348

You say that you have a C4S which would be different to a C2,C4 and Boxster as far as suspension parts go, correct?

C4S would be the same from what I just checked. Post a link to what you bought.

Have you compared length of old with new arms?

Quotes source post: 16214282

I have these arms as well and I had no problem getting to the alignment I wanted, but it is key to point out that the alignment WILL be way off when you install them even if the metal parts are exactly the same dimensions. Because the rubber bushings in the arm wear and displace a little over time, when you put the new one in you're effectively changing the point at which the tuning fork arm attaches, which can dramatically change toe, and the point at which the coffin arm attaches to the subframe, which can dramatically change camber. For this reason you could definitely see your alignment change over time even if you never hit a pothole or anything; conceivably even if you don't drive the car. When you replace these parts it's not unusual for the alignment to be completely wrong, but it should be within the adjustment range to fix it. The same parts fit all 9x6 cars, regardless of engine or 2wd/4wd, other than the GT cars, so I don't think there's any way you got the wrong part. It would be interesting if you can actually measure the length somehow (probably hard now that the new parts are on your car) and see if the length of the cast part is actually different, or if it's just the location of the inner sleeve of the bushings that's different relative to your old parts. Perhaps somehow it was a bad batch of parts with more shrinkage after casting? Or badly-placed bushings? On the inner end there is a little bit of slop; can you pull the arm all the way outward before tightening that bolt? That might effectively net you a millimeter or two of control arm length, giving you a tiny bit more negative camber.

Thanks for all the responses. The part I bought is this: https://www.fcpeuro.com/products/por...man-4160500000 . As prior poster mentioned, I don't think that it can be the wrong part since it is used on all the 9x6 cars, including C4S. I have the old arms, but I can't really measure them directly with with Meyle parts because those are installed on my car. The car is driveable as is, although not idea. As I mentioned, I had to tighten the tie rod threads almost all the way (no visible threads remaining) to get the toe correctly, and I am at zero camber with the struts maxed out at negative camber setting in the car. A note to self in the future is to do a side by side comparison prior to installation, which I normally do, but didn't in this case because the parts looked very similar visually. I did email FCP and asked them to do a side by side comparison since they carry the Porsche OE part and the Meyle part. Will circle back if they do respond and comply. DKRAIGE, Regarding you slop comment, not sure what you are referring to. I simply insert the bushing end into the front subframe then insert the bold and tighten under the weight of the car. There does not appear to be any slop in that bushing that I could feel. I am just curious, has anyone actually installed this Meyle part on their car and had no alignment issues?

Quotes source post: 16214471

It shouldn't be a force or friction-fit for that bolt in the subframe, there should be a minimal amount of slop. Not a ton, probably 1 mm or so; I'm just saying in theory if you're trying to squeeze every bit negative camber you can into the car without adding other adjustable components, you'll want to have any slop in that bolt utilized, by pulling outward on the control arm before torquing the bolt. I can confirm that I have Meyle control arms on my car and have no issue getting to a normal alignment setting. I'm limited by the slotted upper mounting holes for the strut; those allow me to get ~1 degree of negative camber in the front. One side hits the stop at 1'; the other could go slightly further to about 1'+10". If I wanted more I'd have to use adjustable control arms or camber plates. In the rear I have 2 degrees negative camber using the same Meyle control arms.

So I took a closer look at the pictures of these parts on FCP website and at least to me it looks like these pictures are of different part. Specifically, I highlighted in the photos, notice that the casting around the balljoint is different in the two pictures, while they are supposedly the same part. I don't know which one I have on my car, will have to look when I get a chance, but do you guys agree that these look like different castings or am I just delusional? Hard to be precise with these pictures, but looks to me like this can account for the difference in length if I have the second and not the first part as pictured below.

Sorry, if I wasn't clear in my prior post, these are two pictures of supposedly the same part listed on the FCP website, however, to me they look different. Perhaps the pictures are of different batches with the same part number.

Quotes source post: 16214523

I think it's just a trick of the camera. The thing that looks like a raised boss around the ball joint in the 2nd picture is an optical illusion involving the diagonal web coming down from the middle bushing down toward the ball joint. That plus the foreshortening of looking at it from a reverse angle, plus the lighting effects makes it look different. The parts look the same to me in both pictures. FYI there are slight differences in casting, e.g. I know my HID leveling sensor didn't fit the new one exactly and I had to modify the bracket to fit; basically the Meyle arm was slightly thicker than the Porsche arm in cross-section, but that doesn't affect alignment at all.

Is the part number cast into the new part? Does this match the number on the box and the number listed on the website?

From what I recall the part # isn't cast into the Meyle part, the part comes in a sealed bag in a box and the sealed bag has a part # sticker on it. Also, I received a reply back from FCP and they said that they can't do a comparison to OEM because they actually don't stock the OEM part and only get it if/when someone orders it. I still have my original part so will try to compare it to the Meyle part mounted on the car this weekend. Not sure how well this comparison will go. I will update the thread when I make more progress on this.

Quick update. I emailed Meyle regarding the situation and they provided and interesting response. Apparently they make 2 versions of this part. The one I got ( 4160500000) and the other is identical in every way but is 8mm longer (part #: 4160500009). Their catalog suggests that my car needs the shorter one, but in my view the additional 8mm seems approximately just what my car would need to get back to factory camber and be roughly within the middle part of the camber adjustment range. They took my VIN # and said that they are doing additional work and will get back to me with their findings. I have a C4S and while I am not the original owner, I think that the suspension is stock. Anyone with a C4S have tried either of the Meyle lower control arms?

Quotes source post: 16215881

The longer one is for 997. Might fit your car and do what you need, but it's not the correct part for your car.

Maybe someone changed the entire front suspension to a newer model, included the inner tie rods but that's a lot of work for something not really necessary. The chances are higher that the part you got was the wrong one.

youtube heidi and franny's garage 996 control arm video. They also installed Meyle and had issue with the length...so you may not be the 1st. Read the 1st comment/post. They removed the Meyle after a few days....

Quotes source post: 16217261

I was just going to say the same thing. Here�s a link to that video You Tube

Quotes source post: 16217375

Maybe I missed it, but I saw no mention of the part having to be redone. Glad this was posted as I am taking delivery of new control arms in a few days and will make sure to compare them before installation

Quotes source post: 16217549

It’s not in the video, but in the description section. geetee also said it’s in the first comment/post, but I didn’t look for it. I look forward to hearing what you discover since these seem to be a good price and I've used Meyle components on other cars with satisfaction.

Quotes source post: 16217560

I'm trying a different brand though... Amazon Amazon

I don't think Franny mentioned it. If you do this with the car jacked up IE suspension hanging down. You need to align the cast-in pointers on the knuckle and frame before you torque the inner end. If you don't you will be preloading and over-stressing the rubber in the arm. You can see it at ~1:35 on Franny's video where she is pointing to "This big bolt here."

I bought Meyle arms because I believed them to be OEM equivalent. When I received them, in a Meyle box, there was a PRC sticker on the end of the box. Castings appeared cheap. I returned them and found parts made in Germany. More money, higher quality. Just saying. Lang G

There is such a thing as a ball-joint press that works fantastic on taper fit joints. Banging on them with a hammer is a no-no with aluminum suspension parts. https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mog-t40007/overview/

Quotes source post: 16218571

AKA, Ball-joint separator.

I have used this one many times and it works great and is much less expensive than the one at Summit. https://www.harborfreight.com/3-4-qu...tor-99849.html I also have 4 Meyle control/coffin arms on my car with no problems.

I was looking through the Porsche catalog and I am confused. Perhaps the experts here can help with the following question. My understanding is that Porsche made 2 bodies for the 996, regular narrow and wide body (C4S and Turbo). The wide body car is wider in the front and in the back. Lets stay focused on the front for now. The strut towers should be further apart in the wide body than the narrow body. In order to maintain suspension geometry, posrche would also need to widen the wheel track at the bottom. This can be done with either a wider front subframe, longer lower control arms, or wider wheel knuckles. Looking at the catalog it seems that all 2002+ cars use the same subframe and wheel knuckles. This makes sense as those would be expensive to redesign specifically for the wide body. As such, the only way I can see widening the track at the bottom is by making the lower control arms longer for the wide body than the narrow body car. What am I missing here? By the way, the part number on my original control arms is 996.341.341.06. See below. Oddly enough this part number is not even in the Porsche catalog.

First off, I think the widebody cars are only wider in the back, not in the front. Second, you can increase track width just by having more wheel offset, keeping everything else the same. All the 996 cars use the same control arms, except the fancy GT cars with their adjustable control arms.

One of the ways to make many cars handle is more camber and when you do that you get more room under the fender. longer lower A-arms are a long standing method to get track width and keeping the body inside the rules. Would love ot see both parts side by side.. with one end even..

Can someone show me what the LIT optioned control arm looks like? I just noticed that what I ordered in for non LIT optioned cars

Quotes source post: 16219845

Litronic...has a mount hole for the level sensor.

Quotes source post: 16219867

That I can just drill if needed? @Porschetec3, thank you for your help, you're a wealth of information. You've helped so many of us and it's greatly appreciated!

Quotes source post: 16219955

Yep, just drill to match.When you see it you will know, just a hole to mount the plastic bracket for the sensor arm. The factory ones all have it(see pic above of the OP old arm, the small hole on the left is where the Litronic bracket goes), I guess the Meyle ones make two different versions, or maybe they include the plastic bracket !! Thankx man, I need the feedback, sometimes I feel " invisible" on the forum (lots of lurkers not giving feedback to the community)..

Quotes source post: 16221252

Invisible? No way. You haven�t answered a question of mine, but I truly appreciate all the other questions you�ve answered! Thanks for being a part of this community.

Who’s Porschetech3? Is he a new guy?

Quotes source posts: 16221388, 16221786

Thankx man !!