# removing zlink from Cruze RS 2 LT LTZ or DIESEL



## Schnurd (Nov 2, 2013)

Why would you want to remove it? You'd have to figure out how to reinstall the non-zlink rear suspension


----------



## boneheaddoctor (Dec 10, 2014)

I need to ask "WHY".


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

boneheaddoctor said:


> I need to ask "WHY".


Why indeed! I would bet it would make the car very ill handling by upsetting the rear suspension movements. The Link is there for a reason, not just for advertisement purposes. OP, please explain why you want to remove it.


----------



## mtomac (Mar 7, 2014)

Curious how the cruze would drive & corner w/o it. The LS LT & eco don't have it. The standard suspension looks the same other than zlink. It can be removed with a few bolts


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

LS Rear Suspension:

http://www.gmpartsdirect.co/auto-pa...gine/rear-suspension-cat/rear-suspension-scat


LTZ Rear Suspension:

http://www.gmpartsdirect.co/auto-pa...gine/rear-suspension-cat/rear-suspension-scat


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

Just remove it and take it for a ride, will be interesting to get someones perspective on with/without in the same car. Can't see no ill effect(besides slightly more sloppy rear end) from driving it this way. From the looks of things, its as simple as removing 4 bolts.


EDIT: Adding image to help others see how the zlink attaches to the rear suspension. It's more of a rear suspension add on that compliments the existing rear suspension. The zlink sits behind the rear axle 8-12inches.


----------



## S-Fitz (Jul 16, 2012)

Considering the watts linkage is a centering link that prevents lateral movement of the wheels, cornering will only get worse. The weight is all sprung anyway. Only the links themselves add a fraction of their mass to the total unsprung weight. I've done a lot of things "for science!' out of curiosity, so i guess trying can't hurt though.


----------



## Robby (Mar 1, 2013)

The watts link type axle is not quite as 'Robust' as the non-watts version.

If you look at trailing link attach points (welded) one car next to the other, where the arms attach to the twist beam you can see the beam is stouter on the non-link.

Makes sense.....the link gives the rigidity back and more.....the non link needs the mass to keep the trailing axle ends from bending (and springing back) creating a phenominom called 'Frame Steer' in this case, the rear wheels could create rather evil handling.

If there is a unsprung weight thought I suspect the additional mass the non-link axle requires is similar or more than the watts link(s) add.......remember, unsprung becomes sprung at some point along the length of the link.

BTW.....DON'T DO IT......BOZO NO NO...avoid trying to out engineer a engineer......he somehow got it past the bean counters so it really is there for a reason.....most likely, crisp handling.

Rob


----------



## Merc6 (Jun 8, 2013)

If you have snow outside, I'd delay testing this theory.


----------



## jalaner (Dec 28, 2013)

I drove a 1LT rental for a month while my CTD was at dealer waiting for parts. The non Z link 1LT ride and handling was a definite, noticeable downgrade from the Z link CTD.


----------

