# KW tie-bars snapped. Now with pictures.



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

Driving along in normal traffic on the A413 today when I felt the back end twitch quite aggressively, I pulled over into a very well placed bus stop immediately to find the drivers side tie bar had snapped on the threaded section. 

The bars have been on for around 6 months and were fitted when I changed to the eibach springs. I am baffled to why these have broken, after inspecting the road I was driving on there was nothing that could have caused it to snap, it just snapped.

Do I have a case for getting these replaced FOC under the warranty of the part?

PS. Major thanks to the RAC by the way.


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

O cr*p Jimmy..

Did it damage the car at all..?

warranty *should* replace it.. Where did you buy them ?


----------



## robokn (Feb 21, 2006)

I am sure someone may correct me but they should be replaced under warranty as they were faulty resulting in a quite a bad failure, .....hope the car is ok


----------



## conlechi (May 6, 2006)

Don't like the sound of that 

iv'e got the KW's fitted :?

should be under waranty being less than 12 months old :?


----------



## scott-tt225 (Jul 9, 2006)

They should be replaced and I would want to know why they snapped.

If the part that failed caused any subsequent damage then that should also be put right.

Scott


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

That's why those that know go for Forge... :wink:

Sorry to hear of your issues guys but Forge will back their products up to the hilt...

And that would probably include replacement...

I'll leave that for a Forge bod to confirm...


----------



## chrishTT (May 14, 2006)

were yours standard OEM tie bars?


----------



## JAAYDE (Aug 15, 2006)

chrishTT said:


> were yours standard OEM tie bars?


Have you read the post :?


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

J1MMY said:


> Driving along in normal traffic on the A413 today when I felt the back end twitch quite aggressively, I pulled over into a very well placed bus stop immediately to find the drivers side tie bar had snapped on the threaded section.
> 
> The bars have been on for around 6 months and were fitted when I changed to the eibach springs. I am baffled to why these have broken, after inspecting the road I was driving on there was nothing that could have caused it to snap, it just snapped.
> 
> ...


Glad you are OK.

Did you abide by the stated amount of thread showing. There is a measurement which you must not exceed. Obviously you don't want the adjustment hanging on the last thread. Also some mechanics can't tell their left hand from their right and leave the lock nuts not tightened because the tie bars have a left handed thread and a right handed thread in the design and this seems to confuse some people.

*All this applies to every manufacturers' tie bars.* My guess is that the lock nuts were never tightened correctly which conbined with too much thread showing would eventualy cause a failure. Ed at APS told me they have fitted dozens of the KW bars. Who did your job, if you don't mind?

Joe


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

J1MMY said:


> ...drivers side tie bar had snapped on the threaded section...


You said it snapped - has the threaded bar sheared through or stripped the thread or did the outer welded bar shear? I'm wondering if this is a metal stress fracture with possible design/fabrication fault or stripped thread due to incorrect fitting as Joe suggests. Some close up pictures of the failure would be useful.


----------



## vfunk (Dec 28, 2006)

I would take this up with the company that fitted these for you asap as mentioned above there are strict guidelines to adhere to when fitting, We have fitted many sets also with ZERO issues.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

vfunk said:


> I would take this up with the company that fitted these for you asap as mentioned above there are strict guidelines to adhere to when fitting, We have fitted many sets also with ZERO issues.


vfunk

Those guidlines are common sense IMO. I have the KW tie bars on my car and I'm not expecting any problem. If there had not been any instructions with the bars, they would have been fitted exactly the same way. Common sense.

Joe


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

Thanks for all the replies, I'll try and answer a few of the questions:

Car seems to be ok, although the position the wheel moved into when trying to get the car on the flat bed made me wince. I certainly hope there is no subsequent damage.

For the competence of the set up, all I can say is it was done by one of the top firms on the forum and was done to their usual high standard, it would of been set up perfectly I'm sure.

In reply to John-H, the bar had sheared through about an inch from where it joins the wheel area (don't know tech term) I will get some photos on Monday, car had to be towed to a friends near the garage for Monday otherwise I'd of had an additional fee of Â£100 for the second tow 

I think I was just unlucky with a defective bar, I'm just glad it went at low speed where I could pull over, the thought of it happening on a motorway doesn't bear thinking about.


----------



## Major Audi Parts Guru (May 7, 2002)

rustyintegrale said:


> That's why those that know go for Forge... :wink:
> 
> Sorry to hear of your issues guys but Forge will back their products up to the hilt...
> 
> ...


I have to agree with that :wink:


----------



## forgemotorsport (May 6, 2002)

warranty for life ....forever


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

I here what your saying but KW are a reputable firm, just have to see how they respond to one of their products breaking.


----------



## forgemotorsport (May 6, 2002)

I agree , I am sure they will fix it ,any probs let me know


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

forgemotorsport said:


> I agree , I am sure they will fix it ,any probs let me know


Cheers, will do.


----------



## Lock_Stock (May 22, 2007)

I find this really concerning. I don't have these fitted so no vested interest but is no-one else from an engineering or manufacturing background?

This is a critical part of the suspension, it should not be subject to any acceptable % of failure.

I know it has not been determined as to the cause of the failure, but the product should be overengineered so % wise it basically never happens.

I think the acceptable (generally termed as 6 Sigma) failure rate in engineering terms is usually 3.4 in 1 million for critical parts. Maybe you were unlucky and this was the 1 in 300,000 that failed. but how many have KW sold?
Most companies will go far beyond this though were safety is concerned. and 3.4 woud be the absolute maximum.

Having read this, when I lower the car I'm going with Forge, no question/


----------



## Major Audi Parts Guru (May 7, 2002)

Lock_Stock said:


> I know it has not been determined as to the cause of the failure, but the product should be overengineered so % wise it basically never happens.


Although I've personally not see the KW tie arms, I have seen the Forge tie arms and they are without doubt a very well engineered item.


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

Major Audi Parts Guru said:


> Lock_Stock said:
> 
> 
> > I know it has not been determined as to the cause of the failure, but the product should be overengineered so % wise it basically never happens.
> ...


I believe they're 're-engineered' using genuine Audi parts... 

The Forge ones that is...


----------



## kingttoff (Sep 6, 2007)

> I think the acceptable (generally termed as 6 Sigma) failure rate in engineering terms is usually 3.4 in 1 million for critical parts. Maybe you were unlucky and this was the 1 in 300,000 that failed. but how many have KW sold?


In The aviation industry, where i work six sigma only works up to a point am sure its the same in the motor industry you can't take out the human element, the mechanic with the spanner.
It may have been fitted incorrectly the dude may have had a bad day :?

First speak to the guys that fitted it, then the manufacturer who will probably want it back to have a look and ascertain the reason for failure or im sure there will be an independant who could look at it for you and tell you wether it was fitters error or mechanical failure.

Depends how far you want to take it and what damage to your car has been caused by a faulty or incorrectly fitted component. But as was said above it could have been far far worse that could have caused an awful Accident especialy at high speed.
Glad you were not at speed mate


----------



## Lock_Stock (May 22, 2007)

kingttoff said:


> > I think the acceptable (generally termed as 6 Sigma) failure rate in engineering terms is usually 3.4 in 1 million for critical parts. Maybe you were unlucky and this was the 1 in 300,000 that failed. but how many have KW sold?
> 
> 
> In The aviation industry, where i work six sigma only works up to a point am sure its the same in the motor industry you can't take out the human element, the mechanic with the spanner.
> ...


'Sigma' is just a ratio after all. You are right there are so many factors during the manufacturing process it would be hard to acheive 6 sigma or better in terms of defects, however, Quality checks should be employed to remove or reduce human error to an acceptable level. If it does turn out to be a mechanical failure I won't be using their products.


----------



## kingttoff (Sep 6, 2007)

> Quality checks should be employed to remove or reduce human error to an acceptable level.


I hope they have that sort of procedure in place, i know a few of the large 'UK wide tyre and exhaust fitting companies' have that sort of procedure in place when it comes to correctly torqued wheel bolts/nuts.

But i know from personal experience i.e my missus sheding a front wheel as she turned in to the car park :x . That procedure and practice are not always the same.

I digress
Get an independant to look at the car and the failed component and list what ever damage was caused to the vehicle and claim that from either manufacturer or garage im not a fan of claim culture but if damage was caused, it needs to be fixed by the offending party.


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

I taking the car in tomorrow morning to the garage where the parts were fitted, they are good blokes and if any damage has been caused due to a fault on their part I'm sure they will rectify it.

Anyway thanks for all the advice, I'll post some detailed pictures of the broken part tomorrow.


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

Pictures as promised!


----------



## trev (Aug 5, 2005)

Is this the area which failed on your tie-bar?


----------



## trev (Aug 5, 2005)

you beat me to it


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

Car has had a quick check over at the garage this morning and the cause of the break could be a seized bearing in the joint preventing the bar from any movment.


----------



## Rhod_TT (May 7, 2002)

J1MMY said:


> Car has had a quick check over at the garage this morning and the cause of the break could be a seized bearing in the joint preventing the bar from any movment.


That's the same reason that the original Audi one's failed IIRC.


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

Rhod_TT said:


> J1MMY said:
> 
> 
> > Car has had a quick check over at the garage this morning and the cause of the break could be a seized bearing in the joint preventing the bar from any movment.
> ...


Yeah, thats what I got told. Aparently I need all the bearings changed to rubber bushes or something similar.


----------



## Lock_Stock (May 22, 2007)

maybe it has rusted since the failure, but there seems to be corrosion on the cross section of the screw thread next to where it has clearly sheared off. If this is not since the failure this suggests damage before the failure.

If it failed for the same reason as the audi recall, maybe it didnt fail all in one go??

Not a very helpful post from me, just doing the old Roy Walker.... "Say what ya see"...


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

J1MMY said:


> Car has had a quick check over at the garage this morning and the cause of the break could be a seized bearing in the joint preventing the bar from any movment.


Glad you mentioned that. I was about to say the very same. It is probably the only way the part could snap, but that would apply to any tie bar. The following assumes that what you say, in fact, has happened; your Rose joint is seized.

So, why is it neccesary to cut and weld Audi tie bars exclusively. I've used fabricated parts on 'every' part of my racing cars with no problems. When my TT was in APS, Nathan checked to see if my Rose joint had seized, it hadn't 

A seized Rose joint is a reason for ANY tie bar on a TT to fail. I'm just trying to keep thigs in perspective. I will not be changing my KW bars.

Look here: an OEM Audi snapped link. The very one that is cut and welded. If you're Rose joint is seized, the OEM tie bar will break, probably in the same place as in this pic.

http://www.forgemotorsport.co.uk/images ... iebars.jpg


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

TTCool said:


> J1MMY said:
> 
> 
> > Car has had a quick check over at the garage this morning and the cause of the break could be a seized bearing in the joint preventing the bar from any movment.
> ...


Thats what I've been told, will find out for def later. Looks like the wallet will get another battering 

Was hoping it might get replaced for free due to manufacturing error.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

You can see parallel stress lines in the sheared bar suggesting an up and down bending moment was the cause of the eventual stress fracture which ties in with a seized joint.

Might be worth a good will ask but it seems the failure is due to the seized joint (which should have been replaced in the Audi recall BTW!).

Design wise, the narrow tie bar threaded section would have been better as far as possible from a potentially seizing joint, so the bending moment is reduced. Bending in threaded bars is particularly bad because the thread itself is a natural stress point. So in that respect there is some culpability but true that it wouldn't happen with a rubber joint that allows flex.


----------



## jbell (May 15, 2006)

J1MMY said:


> Pictures as promised!


Why is the end so rusty, it looks as if someone has cut through part of it then left it waiting for it to snap :?


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

jbell said:


> J1MMY said:
> 
> 
> > Pictures as promised!
> ...


Could have cracked and got worse over time untill it snapped :idea:


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Usually the way of such cracks, the crack slowly works its way through, moisture and oxygen gets in, rust happens and eventually the last bit snaps which is the non rusty bit.


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

It looks to me as though it's been twisted... :?


----------



## trev (Aug 5, 2005)

in this picture you can see the stress thats been put on the bar, as John says you think the adjustments would be away from the load


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

Those pictures are very very good quality; good detail.

My TT still has the Rose joint (not seized, I might add). The car is May 2000. I checked with Audi about the recall and they told me my car was outside the recall dates, what have you.

Question is 'Do I believe them'. If there is any sign of seizing in the future I will change to rubber or maybe sooner for peace of mind. It's easy to check. Nathan showed me 

Joe


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

TTCool said:


> Those pictures are very very good quality; good detail.
> 
> My TT still has the Rose joint (not seized, I might add). The car is May 2000. I checked with Audi about the recall and they told me my car was outside the recall dates, what have you.
> 
> ...


My car is a 51 plate 2001, is this within the dates for the recall?

Took the pictures when it was up on the truck this morning, used a little digi on macro setting with flash. Amazing what you can get for a few quid these days, makes me wonder why I've shelled out loads on decent camera equipment :?


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

JIMMY's car is in APS as I type  Will be ready tomorrow and a first class job, no doubt.

Joe

PS It is a seized Rose joint; forgot to mention that.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

J1MMY said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > Those pictures are very very good quality; good detail.
> ...


Not sure, but I'm going to make further enquiries.

Joe


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

TTCool said:


> JIMMY's car is in APS as I type  Will be ready tomorrow and a first class job, no doubt.
> 
> Joe


Hi Joe

 Is it still up on the trolley jack outside :lol:

Yep I have no doubt it will come back in tip top shape, always does. Only garage I trust with the car.


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

TTCool said:


> J1MMY said:
> 
> 
> > TTCool said:
> ...


Let me know what you find out Joe mine is a 51 plate 2001 and did not have the recall


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

YELLOW_TT said:


> TTCool said:
> 
> 
> > J1MMY said:
> ...


Andy

It's enough to make you spit :evil:

I've already been told my car was outside the recall, yet I still has the Rose joint. Why should I be concerned? I think we know the answer to that question. You can get fed up of watching your back all the time.

I'll get back to you if I can find out anything new. It is possible that it was _not _a recall, the joint might have been changed in the natural course of events, but then why didn't they say that.

Joe

Joe


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

TTCool said:


> You can get fed up of watching your back all the time.


Ain't that the truth?

Why is it we can no longer assume that if someone says something needs doing we can no longer assume it *will* be done properly and honestly?

Cheers

rich :?


----------



## cyberdude (May 24, 2002)

TTCool said:


> Those pictures are very very good quality; good detail.
> 
> My TT still has the Rose joint (not seized, I might add). The car is May 2000. I checked with Audi about the recall and they told me my car was outside the recall dates, what have you.
> 
> ...


Can you point out which joint seizes (where / what is the Rose loint?) and how do you check these? Mine is an early 2000 model and was told it's not in the recall period.

It's a little worrying though driving at motorway speeds wondering if your tie rod is going to snap. :?


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Joints (4) top and bottom of rear of trailing arm.









See Wak's site:
http://www.wak-tt.com/tt/brokencontrolarm.htm

http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/apps/recalls/default.asp


----------



## MCPaudiTT (Jan 17, 2007)

Could you possibly post the part number for the rubber replacement of the Rose joint?


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

1J0 505 203

http://tech.bentleypublishers.com/servl ... earing.pdf


----------



## cyberdude (May 24, 2002)

Thanks John. Is there any simple way to check that these haven't seized or in the process of seizing?


----------



## J1MMY (Nov 13, 2006)

My car falls outside the recall dates, so do I have an case to put to audi for the rose joint seizing or will it be classed as wear and tear?

A seized joint at 70mph could have been fatal. :?

P.S. It's been confirmed that the rose joint had seized on my car.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

Here's a picture (courtesy of Chip_iTT) which shows the rubber bush in the upper position - the same bush is in the lower position. The rubber bush will not seize and can only decay and become sloppy - so no danger of stressing the arm by continual bending here.










I can't find a picture of the early TT rose joint, which was recalled, but it would have looked something like this - a spherical bearing. It would have been a press fit into the hub carrier and a bolt through the arm and the spherical bit clamped tight, would have formed the original design. I don't know what the materials where but possibly through rust it seized. and because there was no resulting flex the arm bent instead.










First check you have the rubber bush, in which case you're fine. If you have the rose joint it should have been recalled - I'm not sure how you'd stand on having it replaced - I thought the recall was for all rose joints - did Audi get their dates wrong? To test it, is best performed by releasing the inner end of the tie rod and seeing if the arm pivots up and down easily. This involves dissasssembly however and a new bolt. Possibly you could get a large pair of Mole grips or a Stilton wrench on the square section of the arm and twist it axially - the inner rubber joint should flex and so should the rose joint - difficult to "feel" how stiff the rose joint is like this but at least you could tell if it had seized.


----------



## cyberdude (May 24, 2002)

Fantastic. Those photos make it much clearer


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

Well done John 

Regards

Joe


----------



## Blue TTop (Jan 10, 2005)

Excellent information on this forum!

Time to lift the TT and check a few things.


----------



## SVStu (Dec 11, 2006)

J1MMY,

very concerning as I'm just about to fit some!! Was going to do it myself but may get garage to do it now!!!

One tip I have followed is to undo the bar, then insert a length of bike inner tube over the bar, copper slip all threads and re-assemble. Then once the trackings checked you can stretch over the inner tube to cover the locking nuts. Should stop all the road crap siezing up the threads, may have influenced the failure???

Hope you get it sorted.

Stu.


----------



## SVStu (Dec 11, 2006)

J1MMY,

very concerning as I'm just about to fit some!! Was going to do it myself but may get garage to do it now!!!

One tip I have followed is to undo the bar, then insert a length of bike inner tube over the bar, copper slip all threads and re-assemble. Then once the trackings checked you can stretch over the inner tube to cover the locking nuts. Should stop all the road crap siezing up the threads, may have influenced the failure???

Hope you get it sorted.

Stu.


----------



## TTCool (Feb 7, 2005)

SVStu said:


> J1MMY,
> 
> very concerning as I'm just about to fit some!! Was going to do it myself but may get garage to do it now!!!
> 
> ...


Just do as I suggested and as I did myself. Do the childs' bike innertube thing and tie wrap the ends, then you can get to the adjustment if needed. Nice to have been of assistance.

JMO but don't use heat shrink. It's not tough enough. The bike inner tube will fit tight and is a lot tougher and thicker. You won't be able to pull back the heat shrink. It's too delicate and will tear.

Joe :wink:


----------



## SVStu (Dec 11, 2006)

Point taken, I always knew it would need to come off to carry out further wheel allignments.


----------



## kazinak (Mar 23, 2010)

bump for Damien :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## TTSPORT666 (Dec 1, 2011)

Thanks Kaz....  "The plot thickens my dear Watson."

Damien.


----------

