JohnN
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 01:44 PM |
|
|
Bottom balljoint failure
Bottom balljoint, ex Luego wishbone kit.
Has anybody else experienced this kind of failure, I always thought that the balljoint was loaded the wrong way around (ie pulling it apart, as
opposed to compressing it)
Joint will have been on the road 3 yrs in July, but only 3k miles
 
Bottom ball joint failure
 
Ball joint closeup
|
|
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 01:54 PM |
|
|
Hi
Not that unusual if it is the kind that is assembled from above and crimped over. The better desighn ones are assembled from below so they can not
pull apart.
Identification wise if it has a domed bottom to the joint it is the crimped version. If it has a round but square profile it is the type assembled
from below. Far better desighn.
Cheers Matt
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:08 PM |
|
|
tbh looking at the pictures it appears it's the top one that has failed???
If it had failed, I'd have expected the rubber boot to be either sheared or popped off, how about a picture of the upper one?
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:18 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
tbh looking at the pictures it appears it's the top one that has failed???
That was my first thought as well. Surely the only thing that could cause the upright to be leaning back at such an angle in that pic would be a
problem with the upper wishbone/balljoint?
The Maxi balljoints are loaded in the wrong direction compared to their design application, though I haven't heard of any failures up till now.
|
|
|
JohnN
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:26 PM |
|
|
I haven't actually seen it myself, yet. The photos are from No. 1 son.
From memory, the balljoints came from a Luego wishbones "package" and were Austin Maxi? I'm fairly certain that they are the
crimped version, I don't suppose there is an exact cross reference version for the "assembled for below" type?
Either way, I'm going to change both sides to the "assembled from below" type for safety's sake.
Any suggestions for one such balljoint to use
This occured whilst reversing to park, it could have been a lot worse if it had come apart whilst at speed
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:32 PM |
|
|
It certainly doesn't look "failed" to me, though it's sitting probably at the limit of it's articulation, and for that
reason alone would be worth replacing. If the tapered pin had sheared or the ball had popped out of the joint, the lower wishbone would be sitting on
the inside of the wheel rim.
Don't forget the failures that procomp will have seen will have been in track cars that are hopping over kerbs at high speed most of their life.
If these were a weak point on road cars I'm sure there would have been many more instances reported on here since so many kits use them.
[Edited on 11/5/09 by MikeRJ]
|
|
|
JohnN
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:32 PM |
|
|
I'll see the top joint myself, tonight, but here is a 3rd photo, which seeems to show that the castor has increased with the wheel rolling
backward.
Photo taken from above the passenger side front wheel. If you imagine the whole stub axle assembly rotating clockwise, due to a loose or no joint at
the bottom, that would give the view in the photo, with the spring against the top wishbone. - Or so I imagine, I'll see tonight
 
ball joint failure from above
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:45 PM |
|
|
Hi
Ah no pictures my end just a cross in the square. So assumed it was the bottom.
Cheers Matt
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:47 PM |
|
|
id say its definately the top joint thats failed judging by the top picture - the top of the wheel has moved in a few inches.
If the bottom joint had failed if expect the car to be sat on the road.
|
|
|
Richard Quinn
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 02:51 PM |
|
|
I don't get that. The bottom of the upright is roughly where it should be in relation to the end of the bottom wishbone. The 1st picture shows
the top of the wheel a lot further in than the NSF suggesting that it is a problem with the top joint. However, the point about the spring against the
wishbone (or vice versa) is also valid (and slightly bizarre!)
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 03:07 PM |
|
|
i dont think its touching the spring, merely an illusion. Likewise the top bone isnt pointing back more than usual. Top joint is out (id guess the
nuts come off, but it might've twisted out under breaking), and the wheel is held there because the top bone is resting on the wheel itself, or
maybe the brake disc.
I want a prize if im right though! 
|
|
|
adithorp
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 03:10 PM |
|
|
Has the top wishbone rear mounting gone? Can't see properly from the picture but the front one looks a bit twisted.
adrian
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire
http://jpsc.org.uk/forum/
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 03:14 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by adithorp
Has the top wishbone rear mounting gone? Can't see properly from the picture but the front one looks a bit twisted.
adrian
Looks a bit like it, but I reckon that's just the camera angle.
Are these Sierra uprights? I've read it can be quite tricky to tighten the upper balljoint into the mushrooms?
|
|
|
g.gilo
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 03:50 PM |
|
|
ball joint
from 1st pic i think its the top joint, if the uprights are siera which top hats are u using, central or offset taper.
i changed to cortina because of lack of articulation using sieara u/rs.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 05:31 PM |
|
|
Definately not the bottom joint as it's still transfering that corner's weight and compressing your spring. As somebody else mentioned,
if the bottom BJ went, the end of your bottom wishbone would be scraping the floor or close to!
Also - if either BJ has gone and the upright moved, how could this have moved the top wishbone against the spring? Last time I checked the
coilover's weren't attached to the upright!  . Either that top view picture is an illusion and the wishbone is not in contact with the
spring (although it does look pushed hard up against the damper body), or you must have wishbone movement. Maybe caused by the top joint failing and
the upright rotating backwards and smacking the wheel rim into the wishbone?
Dunno, can't wait to hear the verdict . And I hope it's nothing to serious  .
Liam
|
|
|
JohnN
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 06:05 PM |
|
|
Well, I've had a quick look and the top ball joint is OK. It's a Sierra hub with eccentric mushrooms. They haven't moved and the
ball joint is closed up and tight.
We pushed the car forwards under cover for the night, and when the steering was centred (it was half a turn away in the pictures) it all straightened
up. Very Strange.
The problem originally happened on full lock, when about to reverse, there was a loud bang and the wheel fell over, as in the pictures.
Straightening up the lock and pushing the car forward appears to get everything back into position.
When I get some time I'll take a jack and take the weight off the wheel and see what is loose. However, it still looks very much like the bottom
ball has pulled partly out.
Can anybody remember what the original ball joint type is, it was a Luego wishbone set for a Velocity XT. I seem to remember Austin Maxi?
Is there a better (as in cannot PULL out) alternative. I feel the need to change both sides.
[Edited on 11/5/09 by JohnN]
|
|
|
Mad Dave
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 06:06 PM |
|
|
That photo makes me think the top rear wishbone mounting has failed. It could be the bracket being torn off the chassis or the chassis itself
failing??? What ever it is, those mounting brackets aren't lined up anymore
|
|
|
Dusty
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 06:08 PM |
|
|
Bottom wishbone rear inboard end come undone?
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 07:08 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnNHowever, it still looks very much like the bottom ball has pulled partly out.
If that is the case, it doesn't tie in with the angle that the upright is at. If the balljoint has partly pulled out, this is likely just a
symptom of another failure, i.e. something has broken and forced the balljoint beyond it's articulation range.
Either the end of the bottom wishbone has moved forwards, or the end of the top wishbone has moved back. Only this can explain the angle of the
upright and the relative position of the spring with the top wishbone.
Since the upper balljoint is intact, I think a close inspection of the chassis end of the wishbones and the brackets is called for. If pushing the
car forward gets everything aligned, then pay particular attention to rear lower wishbone mounting as per Dusty's suggestion (coincidently the
only one that's hidden by bodywork...)
[Edited on 11/5/09 by MikeRJ]
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 11/5/09 at 07:58 PM |
|
|
Dont see how you can still think it's the lower BJ?! For the wheel/upright to move that much the bottom BJ would have to have pulled apart
completely and moved a few inches. Yours hasn't even torn the rubber boot.
And that still doesn't explain your spring being hit. You absolutely must have a wishbone moving, and as the last two posts I'm going
with lower rear mount. It's either lost its bolt, the bracket has come off the chassis, or the bush tube has come off the bone.
I'll bet you a tenner
|
|
|
Daddylonglegs
|
| posted on 12/5/09 at 06:06 AM |
|
|
Going with the 3rd picture, my money is on the bottom rear pivot bolt having vacated the vehicle.
JB
It looks like the Midget is winning at the moment......
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 12/5/09 at 06:55 AM |
|
|
Hi
Still can not see pictures. But it is worth noting that on some of the Luego's when they where setup with a decent amount of Castor the top
wishbone was very close to the spring. So much so it restricted it to the use of the smaller 1.9 Id springs rather than 2 1/4's.
Cheers Matt
|
|
|
procomp
|
| posted on 12/5/09 at 07:36 AM |
|
|
Hi
Having just searched the web for photos of the two different desighn of the lower joint. Surprisingly i can only find pictures of the better desighn
type. Even the suppliers who supply the poor desighn type will not show pictures that will identify it as such. And some even use the picture of the
better desighn although supply the poor desighn.
Anyhow here is a pic of the BETTER designed one where the joint is assembled from below so as not to allow the joint to pull apart.
 
Description
[/img]
As i said earlier the POOR desighn ones have a domed bottom to them. Will try and get a picture later as i am sure i have one that has pulled out
somwhere.
Cheers Matt
|
|
|
mad-butcher
|
| posted on 12/5/09 at 08:09 AM |
|
|
what's the QH part number please
tony
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 12/5/09 at 10:04 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mad-butcher
what's the QH part number please
tony
QSJ602S
|
|
|
