MOT Failure

[Aidan]

This is from the Haynes manual:
Balljoints
Retaining bolts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 to 62 Nm 41 to 45 Ftlbs
Ball stud nuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 to 68 Nm 35 to 50 Ftlbs

Thanks Morkster, but I do have the torque settings from Haynes. I'm wondering if it's somehow possible to use a torque wrench when the vertical link and disc brake are still in place. There seems to be no room.

Thanks anyway.

Regards

[katar83]

You should be able to lift the lower arm up enough to get a socket over that bolt if needs be, not sure you'll be able to fit a torque wrench to it as it depends on its size as they are usually much bigger than normal wrench but the latter fits for sure as I've undone mine first time I was changing them before I got a ringed angled spanner just for that job.

[Aidan]

I'll give it a go tomorrow, unless the predicted "clear skies" end up being another storm .

Regards

[Aidan]

Has anyone had problems bolting the lower balljoint onto the car? The Britishparts items have a different design to the underside - see attached picture. The pencil points to the space between the bolt hole and the edge of the conical underside of the original balljoint. The part on the left is the new one that I tried to fit today.
The new part has about 2mm from the edge of the hole to the bottom of the balljoint which reduces to about 1mm or less once the bolt is inserted, so you cannot get a socket on enough to torque it to the specs. The old part has about 4,5mm to 5mm, and the underside of the balljoint is conical and slopes away from the bolt heads, leaving plenty of space for the bolt and a torque wrench socket.
I did grind off about half a millimetre or so from the new balljoint's shoulder, as you can see, but that's not enough and I don't want to chance removing more metal - nor should I have to.

I can't see any option but to return the parts to Britishparts for a refund.

Has anyone succeeded in fitting this style of balljoint and torqued it correctly, and if so, how did you do it?

Regards

[katar83]

The left side is fine and honestly looks more like the genuine jag ball joint than the presumably original one on the right? Lemforder ones use this design now I think, at least the one I've bought last time looked very similar. Surely there is enough space on the head to use a 1/4" inch wrench socket on it? I assume your new bolts aren't bigger than the original ones? I think british parts had them larger in their ball joint kits.

[Aidan]

Hello Katar,

It's all a bit confusing.

Interesting that you should say British Parts' bolts were larger in their balljoint kits, because I bought a set of bolts from them as well as the balljoints. But the old bolt heads are the same size as the new ones and all are a 1/2" socket or 13mm.

It seems as if the problem is that the bottom of the balljoint is too wide and/or incorrectly shaped to allow a socket between it and the bolt head. I contacted BP today and they refused to refund me for the parts because: they said I'd exceeded the 14 day return period (which is true as I ordered them a year ago), that me grinding a bit off has made it unsuitable for resale (also true but only because they couldn't be tightened any other way) and because they say they sell over 500 of these in a year and have never had a complaint. I accept the point about the return period, but out of interest I have asked BP if they are selling a part that is intended to be fitted with a torque wrench, but which they expect to be installed without a torque wrench, because there is no way a socket will fit onto the bolt head. I'm awaiting their reply tomorrow.

I don't understand how no one else has experienced this before. These 4 small bolts are easily accessible from below so a torque wrench or at least socket would easily be expected to fit them, unlike other bolts which are sometimes just inaccessible. It seems that the parts they sell are just not suitable?

According to SNG Barratt's website, the Lemforder items, which they say is the OE supplier, have the same conical design as my original but they are out of stock until 10th February. I've asked them to confirm if their Borg and Beck items - which they recommend - are conical as well, like the Lemforder ones, which they said they will do tomorrow. If that is so, I'll probably order one of those.

Interestingly, the pictures of these cars in the manuals and maintenance guides that I have all show the conical design. As my car has only done about 90 000 miles or so, I'm assuming that was the original design. I'd rather stick with that if it allows me to use a proper socket to torque them up correctly.

I'll report back when I know more. I won't be grinding anymore metal off a balljoint.

Regards

[Aidan]

I finally bought a Borg and Beck one from SNG Barratt. It's got a much smaller underside - like a smaller version of the British Parts item - and it easily takes the bolts with socket over. The pin is a bit longer than my original one, so this reduces the space on top to get a spanner or socket on the big nut on top of the joint - makes it impossible actually, even with an open-ended spanner.

So I had to undo the top balljoint so that the vertical link could pivot downwards which gives easy access to the lower balljoint's top nut - just remember that the vertical link, hub, disc and caliper weighs a lot, so you need to be ready to lower it carefully onto and axle stand, or your knees whilst sitting on a stool like I did.

You can torque the lower joint's top nut quite easily this way.

Unfortunately, I stupidly tried to undo the upper balljoint's big nut first instead of the two fixing bolts in the wishbone in order to pivot the link out because I feared the two bolts would be seized and snap off after a Youtube video warned me about this potential for disaster. As it happened, the two bolts were very stiff but some Plusgas and patience had them out with no problems. After cleaning them with a wire brush in my drill, along with the spacers, all went together again quite nicely. That is, all except for the upper balljoint's big nut. That just keeps spinning around with the balljoint pin which is a problem.

A garage advised me to use my impact wrench to spin it quickly before it turns the pin inside the joint, whilst bracing the balljoint with a long bar fed over the joint, between the wishbone arm and shock absorber, and underneath the crossmember/subframe. So that's what I'll do when I can get someone to sit on the iron bar to apply force to it while I used the impact wrench from below.

The attached picture shows the three types of lower balljoint for comparison. The original on the left, SNG Barratt (Borg and Beck) middle, BritPart on the right. The comparative space for a socket to go over the bolt head is easily seen.
I don't know which is better for durability, as I was more concerned about being able to fit a socket onto the four small bolts so that I could just fit the damn thing onto the car.
One other thing to think about is that the bottom plate of both the replacement joints is noticeably thinner than the original. This means that the bolts protrude above the joint slightly towards the rubber boot. On the original the bolts were slightly recessed so there was no danger of damage to the boot. I found the SNG Barratt bolts were a few millimeters longer than the BritPart ones so I decided to use the Britpart bolts because I was worried that the length of protrusion might start to snag on the rubber boot and damage it. You could grind the bolts a bit shorter but I felt that using the slightly shorter bolts would suffice in my case.

I hope this thread gives others facing this job a few pointers as to what they might encounter.