Balljoint Spacers for Lowered 1st Gen W-bodies

[xtremerevolution]

I have a modification I've decided to make for 1st gen w-bodies. However, all knowledge and advice would be appreciated, even if you don't or have never owned one of these cars.

 

The problem we have with our balljoint to strut angle is a result of our effective shortening of the strut when our cars are lowered. The consequence of this is presumably an undesirable wheel angle during travel. To describe this in more detail, imagine that our control arms and balljoints are at a near 90 degree angle when the car is lowered. As a result of this, during cornering, suspension travel will result in positive camber, which can compromise traction.

 

 

The only two solutions I can possibly think of are balljoint spacers and relocation of the control arm mounts. The latter will require fabrication and re-welding of said fabricated mounts to the subframe at a higher location. Knowing that some of our cars are lowered as much as 4" from factory ride height, both of these solutions may need to be used. For the time being, given my lack of welder, balljoint spacers will have to do. This is also a more universal solution and requires little modification by comparison.

 

But first I need some information.

 

1. I need to know the clearance from the balljoint bolt to the inner rim on a GP crosslace rim. That will determine the limitations in thickness of the balljoint spacer I intend to design and fabricate.

2. In addition, I need to know both the size and the hardness grade of the bolts. My understanding is that SAE Grade 5 bolts are equivalent in hardness to Metric Grade 8.8 bolts, and the same can be said for Metric SAE Grade 8 and Metric Grade 10.9. Rob mentioned to me that the factory replacement bolts are SAE Grade 5. I'd like someone to confirm this.

 

My understanding is that balljoint spacers will add stress to the balljoint bolts. With the assumption that they are indeed SAE 5/Metric 8.8, these would be replaced with hardened SAE 8/Metric 10.9.

 

In addition, I have an idea I'd like to bounce off of people.

 

Factory balljoint:

 

My proposed modification (the addition of two bolts):

 

At this point I'm playing with numbers from 0.5" to 1.0" in regard to spacer thickness. This would compensate for just that much in ride height, so if you're lowered 2", a .5" balljoint spacer would, as far as suspension geometry is concerned, increase the length of your strut by .5". These balljoint spacers would be made of aluminum and would come with 6 hardened bolts, hardened locknuts (nylon inserts), and if we deem it necessary, lock washers.

 

If any of you are so inclined, I would appreciate some numbers as far as the true difference in wheel angle change during travel on one of our lowered cars. This would involve taking measurements that I could take personally, but given that my car is in Ohio, I cannot do so, so any help here would be greatly appreciated.

 

Does anyone have any concerns with the use of these balljoint spacers? As I understand it, it is a commonly used modification. Any thoughts or ideas would be appreciated.

Edited August 19, 2010 by xtremerevolution

[Crazy K]

I had to re-read it a few times for what you are saying to sink in, and it makes sense now.

 

I think you have enough clearance for 1/2 to 3/4 inch of clearance on a GP crosslace having inspected a balljoint on a gp earlier tonight... but the height of clearance can also be affected by the type of ball joint(this was a failed moog, car hit a rim breaking hole)... some may need grinding for clearance and each manufacturer can have a different stud height.... but grinding is a quick easy solution as long as it does not damage the cotter pin retention point (did I mention one car I have lost it's balljoint's stud tip and I have safety wire holding the castle nut on? been good for the last 70,000 miles... if you need THAT much clearance LOL)

 

spacer issues:

1 Will it be functional without compromising durability of the suspension, as it will just be bolted on? I would think the spacer would need solid welding to the strut to be effective without risking twisting or shifting action at the spacer to strut interface.

2 The strut's ball joint mounting surface has always seemed weak and capable of flex, and the closer the joint is to the plain of the base of the strut the less noticeable it is. Move the ball joint away from the plane and the more twisting torque you get. that can cause the strut geometry to shift and lead to metal fatigue and cracking... which IIRC kills Dodge trucks. that area will need welding reinforcement, and maybe extra bracing to box in the inner edge.

3 Think about what hub- and lug-centric mean: I feel the balljoint it the equivalent of HUB centric, it has a hollow in which it nests meaning that more than just the bolts hold it in place.... and your spacer must be designed to do the same, otherwise the bolts would be acting as lugs and are not sufficient for that task.

Edited August 19, 2010 by Crazy K

[xtremerevolution]

Which wheel angle are we concerned with, or what is the lowered geometry seen to affect... castor? camber? toe???? and is that just when it exceeds the normal height range of travel?

I'm trying to understand what the point of the spacer is... does the balljoint get damaged by being extended pass it's normal range when the tire is pushed up?

 

 

I think you have enough clearance for 1/2 to 3/4 inch of clearance on a GP crosslace if you want, having inspected a balljoint on a gp earlier tonight...

 

I'm inclined to ask... what about a wedge shaped spacer designed to keep the ball joint at it's original angle?

 

The first picture is a representation of our stock suspension; control arm, strut, and wheel. What angle does the wheel assume under travel? The second picture is a representation of our stock suspension. Keep in mind both of these are inaccurate to any degree are here to simply illustrate a concept. What difference is there now in the angle of the wheel under travel?

 

The stock suspension will have negative camber under travel, which is essentially what you want as the car is leaning anyway. The lowered suspension, if low enough, will have positive camber under travel, which is what you don't want. Balljoint spacers effectively increase the length of your strut without affecting ride height, and therefore alleviate this problem to some degree.

[Crazy K]

damn! you beat me to my redraft as I had to re-read and try to get what you are saying... and then the thought struck home. read my post above again.

[Galaxie500XL]

I'm trying to wrap my head around this...

 

Aren't you changing the angle and load the ball joint experiences by using spacers, and will the balljoint handle those different stresses? On RWD cars, the answer would be dropped spindles, to lower the car without affecting basic steering geometry. I'm assuming no such option is available for our cars?

[mra32]

the equivalent of a drop spindle on a stamped steel macpherson strut setup like the front of our cars would be taking the hub mount and moving it higher on the strut, pretty much by cutting and welding.

 

If youre using coilovers or lowering springs, you are essentially shortening the static length of the strut. These spacers work to take what you took off above where the wheel mounts and put some of it back on the strut below where the wheel mounts, more or less moving the hub mount up relative to the rest of the suspension.

 

If you were able to use shims to space both the hub and the caliper mount out the same angle, this might also be something to look into to work on static camber. It would be cheap and you can make shims very easily.

[xtremerevolution]

I'm trying to wrap my head around this...

 

Aren't you changing the angle and load the ball joint experiences by using spacers, and will the balljoint handle those different stresses? On RWD cars, the answer would be dropped spindles, to lower the car without affecting basic steering geometry. I'm assuming no such option is available for our cars?

 

The balljoint angle was already changed when the car was lowered. This would help bring it closer to what it was before the car was lowered.

 

I had to re-read it a few times for what you are saying to sink in, and it makes sense now.

 

I think you have enough clearance for 1/2 to 3/4 inch of clearance on a GP crosslace having inspected a balljoint on a gp earlier tonight... but the height of clearance can also be affected by the type of ball joint(this was a failed moog, car hit a rim breaking hole)... some may need grinding for clearance and each manufacturer can have a different stud height.... but grinding is a quick easy solution as long as it does not damage the cotter pin retention point (did I mention one car I have lost it's balljoint's stud tip and I have safety wire holding the castle nut on? been good for the last 70,000 miles... if you need THAT much clearance LOL)

 

spacer issues:

1 Will it be functional without compromising durability of the suspension, as it will just be bolted on? I would think the spacer would need solid welding to the strut to be effective without risking twisting or shifting action at the spacer to strut interface.

2 The strut's ball joint mounting surface has always seemed weak and capable of flex, and the closer the joint is to the plain of the base of the strut the less noticeable it is. Move the ball joint away from the plane and the more twisting torque you get. that can cause the strut geometry to shift and lead to metal fatigue and cracking... which IIRC kills Dodge trucks. that area will need welding reinforcement, and maybe extra bracing to box in the inner edge.

3 Think about what hub- and lug-centric mean: I feel the balljoint it the equivalent of HUB centric, it has a hollow in which it nests meaning that more than just the bolts hold it in place.... and your spacer must be designed to do the same, otherwise the bolts would be acting as lugs and are not sufficient for that task.

 

I was talking to Mike (MRA32) the other night and we decided that the only load that will be experienced on the balljoint spacer will be on the inner bolts longitudinally, hence the decision to use hardened bolts and the addition of an extra 2 bolts.

 

Can you take a picture to describe what you're referring to in the 2nd concern you made?

 

I'm aware of the hubcentric type of design on the original balljoint. However, I wonder if there is actually a significant amount of lateral load on the balljoint mount.

[mra32]

you could probably also fit some roll pins or dowel pins into the thing all the way thru all 3 pieces where the holes for the heat shield are currently to alleviate kens concern

[xtremerevolution]

I'm trying to wrap my head around this...

 

Aren't you changing the angle and load the ball joint experiences by using spacers, and will the balljoint handle those different stresses? On RWD cars, the answer would be dropped spindles, to lower the car without affecting basic steering geometry. I'm assuming no such option is available for our cars?

 

I had to re-read it a few times for what you are saying to sink in, and it makes sense now.

 

I think you have enough clearance for 1/2 to 3/4 inch of clearance on a GP crosslace having inspected a balljoint on a gp earlier tonight... but the height of clearance can also be affected by the type of ball joint(this was a failed moog, car hit a rim breaking hole)... some may need grinding for clearance and each manufacturer can have a different stud height.... but grinding is a quick easy solution as long as it does not damage the cotter pin retention point (did I mention one car I have lost it's balljoint's stud tip and I have safety wire holding the castle nut on? been good for the last 70,000 miles... if you need THAT much clearance LOL)

 

spacer issues:

1 Will it be functional without compromising durability of the suspension, as it will just be bolted on? I would think the spacer would need solid welding to the strut to be effective without risking twisting or shifting action at the spacer to strut interface.

2 The strut's ball joint mounting surface has always seemed weak and capable of flex, and the closer the joint is to the plain of the base of the strut the less noticeable it is. Move the ball joint away from the plane and the more twisting torque you get. that can cause the strut geometry to shift and lead to metal fatigue and cracking... which IIRC kills Dodge trucks. that area will need welding reinforcement, and maybe extra bracing to box in the inner edge.

3 Think about what hub- and lug-centric mean: I feel the balljoint it the equivalent of HUB centric, it has a hollow in which it nests meaning that more than just the bolts hold it in place.... and your spacer must be designed to do the same, otherwise the bolts would be acting as lugs and are not sufficient for that task.

 

you could probably also fit some roll pins or dowel pins into the thing all the way thru all 3 pieces where the holes for the heat shield are currently to alleviate kens concern

 

Would the addition of two bolts not do the same? Also, isn't that heat shield important?

[Crazy K]

up where the balljoint is...

 

I can get you a better pic later if you need....

[mra32]

dowel pins are good for shear. 2 more bolts would also help...and whos to say you cant fit the heat shield still, whos importance is debatable?

[xtremerevolution]

dowel pins are good for shear. 2 more bolts would also help...and whos to say you cant fit the heat shield still, whos importance is debatable?

 

Are there locations on the knuckle/strut to drill through 2 more holes that far out?

[xtremerevolution]

Ken, I'm thinking that 0.5" to 0.75" will not create much additional stress on the position you mentioned.

[mra32]

Are there locations on the knuckle/strut to drill through 2 more holes that far out?

I dunno i thought there were bolts or something through the strut already for the heat shield. I would imagine there is room if there are no holes already

[xtremerevolution]

I dunno i thought there were bolts or something through the strut already for the heat shield. I would imagine there is room if there are no holes already

 

I thought the heat shield was bolted to the balljoint...

[Crazy K]

heatshield is bolted to thew ball joint. I think reinforcement of the bottom of the strut it needed, like a piece of angle iron welded across the bottom...

[xtremerevolution]

Wouldn't that make it near impossible to get the wheel hub bolts out, or the balljoint nuts gripped? Also, isn't that a type of u-channel build that would be very difficult to bend? I imagine they chose not to reinforce it for a reason. The wheel hub itself also adds more strength.

Edited August 20, 2010 by xtremerevolution

[mra32]

the most i would be worried about with the strength of the knuckle is the strength of the material being sufficient enough to resist the head pulling thorugh

[xtremerevolution]

Alright, can someone get me a more precise measurement of how much space we have to work with from the balljoint to the crosslace inner rim?

[Mach 5]

def down for this I might be able to get a measurement tomorrow.. I have a set of rca's on my AE86 and they def help alot eliminated basically all my bumpsteer

[Dark Ride]

I'm curious to see how these turn out, they sound promising in theory.

[mra32]

def down for this I might be able to get a measurement tomorrow.. I have a set of rca's on my AE86 and they def help alot eliminated basically all my bumpsteer

 

very interesting. These should have an effect on bump steer. It would depend on how the geometry on the tie rod relates to the control arm, though. It would be something to look at when you have the wheel off..yet, it would be a little harder to evaluate when the car is in full droop

[Mach 5]

I dont think the knuckle/ ball joint - to wheel space should matter though full droop or lowered

[mra32]

i was just talking about looking at the way bump steer would effect it. Bump steer is rooted in suspension/steering geometry, even though things like bushing compliance have a big effect on it. It would be best to look at how the suspension/steering is going to be affected in its normal range of travel. You should be able to approximate the positions of the components at their typical positions

[xtremerevolution]

Anybody have a ruler/tape measure and a w-body with x-laces?