Ball Joints

I just replaced my lower balls, ya I said that, and I used 4Runner LBJs from NAPA, and the the ride is much improved, I had two separate mechanics from two separate shops check my wheels to see if there was any play, they agreed that there was no issue and suggested I not replace them. After pulling them the right ball joint was trashed! They had 218000 miles on them, I knew they had to go. If you are on the fence about doing this project I suggest you just go ahead and replace sooner rather than later.
 
tbst said:
I just did it to spec.

http://www.ncttora.com/fsm/1996/SIL...oypdf/02rmsour/2002/024runne/sa/flbj/remo.pdf

Make sure to put some BLUE loctite on.
Click to expand...

There been discussion that earlier years like <2000 had 59 ft lbs and >2000 had 37 ft Lbs. Blue loctite? I use anti-seize. I'll have to keep an eye on them but I'm pretty sure that they're not going anywhere. You know the FSM typically specifies when loctite is needed and I didn't see that in the instructions.

*Just a side note, When I removed the original bolts, there was no sign of thread locker on any of them and all were tight.
 
Last edited:
Drcoffee said:
There been discussion that earlier years like <2000 had 57 ft lbs and >2000 had 37 ft Lbs. Blue loctite? I use anti-seize. I'll have to keep an eye on them but I'm pretty sure that they're not going anywhere. You know the FSM typically specifies when loctite is needed and I didn't see that in the instructions.
Click to expand...

You used anti-seize? Oooh I sure hope those bolts don't come un done.
 
Crap, I over-torqued the lower ball joint to knuckle bolts. I must have been looking at the Tacoma torque specs. They are 50 something, and the 4runner is 37 ft lbs. Guess I'll go see if I did any damage, and re-torque them with new locktite.
 
Qyota said:
Crap, I over-torqued the lower ball joint to knuckle bolts. I must have been looking at the Tacoma torque specs. They are 50 something, and the 4runner is 37 ft lbs. Guess I'll go see if I did any damage, and re-torque them with new locktite.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. There's no way I would only go 37# on suspension bolts. It must have been a misprint in the manual. Heck, even the jamb nut on the tie rod is 41#.
 
Drcoffee said:
There been discussion that earlier years like <2000 had 59 ft lbs and >2000 had 37 ft Lbs. Blue loctite? I use anti-seize. I'll have to keep an eye on them but I'm pretty sure that they're not going anywhere. You know the FSM typically specifies when loctite is needed and I didn't see that in the instructions.

*Just a side note, When I removed the original bolts, there was no sign of thread locker on any of them and all were tight.
Click to expand...

Anti seize isn't not what you want. However , it seems that you have already made your mind up before posting here.

I would run loctite though. But I enjoy my tires still being connected to my car.
 
Definitely want to Locktite them. Good news is the castle nut and cotter pin will keep the LBJ in place. Can't picture the OTRE's backing out either.

But the 4 bolts holding the LBJ to the spindle should most definitely be Locktite'd.
 
tbst said:
Anti seize isn't not what you want. However , it seems that you have already made your mind up before posting here.

I would run loctite though. But I enjoy my tires still being connected to my car.
Click to expand...

You're still busting my balls over the trans cooler, aren't you. Anyway, if you only torqued them to "spec" of 37#, that could explain why they are backing out.

I'll clean them off and Loctite them in. It will be the next owners problem getting them off in 150k miles.
 
OK, so what's the "official" torque spec for the LBJ-to-knucle bolts (the 4 14mm bolts). I re-torqued mine to 37 last night, and it didn't seem like enough. Tight yes, but not as "sure" as the 59 ft lbs felt. The threads looked fine, FWIW, not stretched out.
 
59ft up through 2000, at least that what it says in my 99 FSM and the 2000 one I saw last year in a Toy indy garage.

Given there are many places to use anti-seize on autos, on those LBJ bolts would not be one of them, at least for me.
 
Curious why the aversion to anti seize? Has there been an issue with the bolts working themselves out?

I got after all my stuff starting yesterday. Passenger side went without a hitch. Driver side had one of the LBJ mounting bolts break and left the majority of the bolt in the knuckle. Now with the knuckle removed, and the majority of the old bolt drilled out, it is so corroded the threads in the knuckle are packed with whats left of the bolt. Now I have to take it to a machine shop to have the hole drilled out and repaired.

I have never had any issues in the past with fasteners working themselves loose when using anti-seize and properly torqued.
 
I did the Taco LBJ's and OTRE's and I'm experiencing all the good drivability except my turning radius is much larger than before. When I turn now, I only get 1.5 turns of the wheel from center before I hit the steering stops where I should get 2.5 turns and a much tighter circle. No big deal on the road, but it could be a heckuva big deal on a tight trail somewhere.

In the picture, the yellow circle hits the red circle at full lock. It almost hits the sway bar link, but hits the steering stop just in time. I don't think its possible that I put anything on backwards...but if you've got an idea then please share!
 

Attachments

  • lbj1.jpg
    lbj1.jpg
    111.7 KB · Views: 11,820
Fonerunner, I think that is pretty common and why I'm sticking with 4runner ball joints over Tacoma ball joints.


From what I've gathered here and on TTORA, the 37 ft/lbs is a misprint. Also blue loctite should be used.
 
I thought about it, and bluntly put, while I may do some occasional off-roading, and while I will end up lifting this thing (trust me - some of the places I have to drive, it WILL get used lol), I don't plan on doing any serious technical stuff with it; so the larger turning radius is nowhere near as much a concern for me.
 
FoneRunner said:
I did the Taco LBJ's and OTRE's and I'm experiencing all the good drivability except my turning radius is much larger than before. When I turn now, I only get 1.5 turns of the wheel from center before I hit the steering stops where I should get 2.5 turns and a much tighter circle. No big deal on the road, but it could be a heckuva big deal on a tight trail somewhere.

In the picture, the yellow circle hits the red circle at full lock. It almost hits the sway bar link, but hits the steering stop just in time. I don't think its possible that I put anything on backwards...but if you've got an idea then please share!
Click to expand...

You can always grind the stop back by 1/8" or more on the LBJ to give you back the turn radius. It won't hurt anything.
 
KHoffRunner said:
Is the vehicle gonna need to be aligned after I replace the LBJ's?
Click to expand...

Technically, no. If all you replace is like for like Lower Ball Joints then the tie rod position never changes and you technically are good to go.

That being said, an alignment is part of my maintenance routine. Like rotating your tires, it can't hurt and its not all that expensive. Some people here even have lifetime deals with certain tire places.
 
FoneRunner said:
That being said, an alignment is part of my maintenance routine. Like rotating your tires, it can't hurt and its not all that expensive. Some people here even have lifetime deals with certain tire places.
Click to expand...

Okay good deal, I just got new tires and had it aligned so I didn't wanna put the ball joints on and have it realigned so quick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 210 (members: 5, guests: 205)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,309
Messages
3,554,070
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top