Prematurely worn LBJ

[Tyler James Inc]

Why is everyone so concerned with replacing these ball joints immedietly? ...it seems like a very severe situation on this forum.

Uh, yeah- very prone. Toyota slipped- big time- when they went from the UCA torsion bar IFS to the coil-over design. Basically, the LBJ isn't designed to handle all the load that it sees- being setup under tension.
They'll generally last over 100k miles- many of us had the OEM units last 250k+. So it's not like they have an unusually short life span. Some have reported fails even when no play was present at a recent inspection.

 

[nobb]

Why is everyone so concerned with replacing these ball joints immedietly? Once they develop a small amount of play are they prone to breaking sooner than other ball joint designs? In my experience a worn ball joint can have a decent amount of play before it gets really serious.

The problem is because our ball joint designs are under tension and not compression (the proper way to design a ball joint). Joints under tension dont have much tolerance for end play. On a compression loaded joint, there could be mm's of play before it poses any safety issues. Toyota does have an official spec on how much play is accepted on our LBJs, but that amount is so small that it's hardly detectable even with the crowbar method.

 

[mountainbiker42]

Well you learn something new everyday. Looks like I'm gonna park my 4runner until the new parts are installed. I was driving it around loose but I had no idea about the tension design. Thanks for everyones input. I guess in summary the only theory I can conclude for the premature failure is driving on an out of alignment front end with fairly bad caster/camber adjustments.

$300 bucks down the toilet. Lesson learned.

 

[RAD4Runner]

...the LBJ... under tension....Some have reported fails even when no play was present at a recent inspection.

Yes^^^.

This just in from my daughter regarding her BF's 1999 4R... We recently inspected the LBJ's and saw no play vertical nor sideways. (However, we found a missing cotter pin for the castellated nut and fixed that.)
No injury, it happened at low speed on forest road.

I do not understand why Toyota has not recalled all affected models and converted them to this:

 

[nobb]

I do not understand why Toyota has not recalled all affected models and converted them to this:

There are a handful of other vehicles with the same flawed LBJ design (eg. Jeep Liberty). But I think our Toyota's get so much infamous attention from this since the other vehicles are usually junked before this becomes an issue.

Redesigning the entire LBJ/wheel hub assembly is HUGE money, especially for a 20 year old truck. Even if a class action lawsuit were to force Toyota to do something about this, it's probably cheaper for them to just offer lifetime LBJ replacements every 50k instead of actually fixing the design.

 

[RAD4Runner]

...offer lifetime LBJ replacements every 50k instead of actually fixing the design.

That would be reasonable. Toyota should do that.

 

[nevada]

I agree it should be tightened with no load on the joint. I'm sure lots of people feel differently but if it works for them then good deal, everyone wins.

Why is everyone so concerned with replacing these ball joints immedietly? Once they develop a small amount of play are they prone to breaking sooner than other ball joint designs? In my experience a worn ball joint can have a decent amount of play before it gets really serious. Not to say it shouldn't be replaced immedietly but it seems like a very severe situation on this forum. If that makes any sense.

the short answer is YES.


as to the Balljoints themselves, while not OEM/nor Toyota that I can recall, I have seen NEW ball joints with play in them. they were just poorly made I suppose. ive seen it with TRE's also.
though it is rare, it can happen.

just like I have seen brand new tires of varying brands to be bad, and have a separated tread when NEW.

 

[Randall44]

I thought I read that there was a recall on 3rd Gen 4Runner LBJ. I just bought a 2001. (with 80k miles!) Dealer says it was not done, but also that no recalls are on this VIN. Double-checked at safercar.gov

??? apologies for the hijack

 

[RAD4Runner]

...I can try making some more noise with Toyota but I doubt they'll warranty two lower joints. They'll think it's my fault not theirs they failed so quickly.

Yes, 3rd-gen owners should make some noise about this potentially deadly flaw.
It's Toyota's fault for making this poor design that puts the BJ under tension, for fixing things that weren't broken (solid axle was not broken; it's still used on the 70-series. the torsion bar was not broken; a first-gen's BJ that's under compression can have play and still not have catasthropic failure).

I thought I read that there was a recall on 3rd Gen 4Runner LBJ. I just bought a 2001.
??? apologies for the hijack

Yes, IIRC there was a recall, but it should not be Only for 2001. All trucks that converted from torsion bar to coil-overs at that time are affected by the design flaw.
No hijack at all. This is good discussion that could help save lives or vehicles.

 

[RAD4Runner]

Another Lower Ball-Joint Failure - First-gen Tacoma

Last Thursday, around 1148 hours, north-bound on 405Fwy and just south of CA-22, a first-gen Tacoma was on the shoulder with tell-tale sign of failed left lower ball-joint.

 

[AntleredRuin]

Don't do that! Torque with the wheels up (unloaded). When you torque while the joint is loaded, that affects the actual torque that is "seen" by the bolt resulting in an under-torque value. Remember, these bolts are under tension forces. No where in the service manual does it say to torque with the wheel lowered.

I had a question about this when I did my LBJs last year, and someone (I forget who) said that in all likelyhood, Toyota installed and torqued to spec all the front suspension parts while still lifted on the assembly line before even adding the tires/wheels. Many original LBJs lasted well over 200k+ (some even 300k+) so I just torqued while lifted, then rechecked the torque once lowered.
Fingers crossed, but I'm at 26k on them so far with no issues.

 

[HiLife]

Just curious, would turning the steering wheel with the truck at a stand still contribute to rapid lbj wear? Especially with a tire that has a huge contact patch (grip)? I would think the suspension would be under less stress if the tires were rolling a little while turning the wheel, vs at a stand still. Just wondering

 

[pluton]

Just curious, would turning the steering wheel with the truck at a stand still contribute to rapid lbj wear? Especially with a tire that has a huge contact patch (grip)? I would think the suspension would be under less stress if the tires were rolling a little while turning the wheel, vs at a stand still. Just wondering

I have always assumed that there would be less wear if steering is done while rolling, but I do not know of any hard data to confirm or deny.

 

[RAD4Runner]

Don't do that! Torque with the wheels up (unloaded).... When you torque while the joint is loaded, that affects the actual torque that is "seen" by the bolt resulting in an under-torque value. Remember, these bolts are under tension forces. No where in the service manual does it say to torque with the wheel lowered.

... in all likelyhood, Toyota installed and torqued to spec all the front suspension parts while still lifted on the assembly line before even adding the tires/wheels...
...so I just torqued while lifted, then rechecked the torque once lowered.
...

I haven't seen the manual but knowing mechanics and manufacturing engineering.... +1 to above.

Just curious, would turning the steering wheel with the truck at a stand still contribute to rapid lbj wear? Especially with a tire that has a huge contact patch (grip)? I would think the suspension would be under less stress if the tires were rolling a little while turning the wheel, vs at a stand still. Just wondering

I have always assumed that there would be less wear if steering is done while rolling, but I do not know of any hard data to confirm or deny.

+1 to above.
Others may disagree, but ON MY TRUCK I observe this.
It may be minor but every little bit of stress to the parts add up, especially to steering components.

 

[mountainbiker42]

Just curious, would turning the steering wheel with the truck at a stand still contribute to rapid lbj wear? Especially with a tire that has a huge contact patch (grip)? I would think the suspension would be under less stress if the tires were rolling a little while turning the wheel, vs at a stand still. Just wondering

Great question. I think it puts more stress on steering components. I cant visualize the lower ball joint being under more stress but I could be wrong. So far I'm the only one to disagree

 

[Acorn22]

Leaking grease after 3 months...?

So I installed brand new oem LBJs about 3 months ago in June and my passenger side already has some grease coming out of the boot. The boot itself is fine and has no tears or holes in it, so I guess the grease is coming out of the top of the boot.

I have been wheeling my 4runner and definitely been flexing the suspension fully, but is this normal? The driver side has no grease leaking out, but the joint itself is fine it seems, just so weird to see it already doing this so early.