Sequoia/Tundra LBJs on 4Runner

[AntleredRuin]

So I'm looking to buy my wife a 1st Gen Sequoia, and I know that they are susceptible to the same LBJ failures that plague most of the Toyota trucks of this era. 4Runner, Tundra, Taco, etc.

So part of my preventative maintenance was going to be to replace whatever's there immediately with OEM, no problem.

I was doing some research, though, and found that Toyota revised the LBJ design for the 1st Gen Tundra and the Sequoia TWICE (they made it overall beefier in 2003, and then changed the entire mount in 2004+).
If it fails, it's still pretty catastrophic, but it's apparently a whole lot more sturdy, to hold the weight of the bigger trucks and V8. The most failures happen to 00-02 Tundra/Sequoias, so evidently the design change helped a little at least.



Then, I saw *somewhere* (but can't find it again), that even though the 3rd Gen 4Runner and pre-03 Tundra/Sequoia LBJs are different part numbers, they are directly compatible.

So this made me think. Unless this nameless person was just blowing smoke, has anyone else tried to use Tundra/Sequoia LBJs on our 3rd Gen 4Runners? If it works, it'd be stronger, OEM parts.
Pre-03 LBJs supposedly fit fine, and by that token, the 03 should fit fine too because the mount is the same; the ball is just bigger. To use the 04+, you'll need to change the spindle and LCA (don't know if they're compatible with the 4Runner)


When I get my wife's Sequoia, I'll see what I can do to compare, but that may be a ways off.
Any takers?

LBJ Part numbers, for those who care:
4Runner (96-02):
43330-39585
43340-39465

Sequoia/Tundra
Pre-03
43330-39466
43340-39356

03
43330-39605
43340-39485

04+
43330-39825
43340-39595

 

[nobb]

Are you sure they actually made it stronger (bigger ball + socket)? It could also be that they just added the plastic shield. In principle it sounds like a good idea, but the shield also makes it harder to tell when your boot is leaking

 

[JohnMc]

A lot of the failures don't involve the ball and socket. They involve the 4 smaller bolts breaking (possibly due to under or overtightening - pay attention to those torque specs! Tighter isn't better). Of the large single nut breaking (same issues as with the bolts). Or the neck between the ball and the threaded part.

And usually, when the ball pops out, it's because the ball joint was just plain worn out. Either tooooo many miles, or it was damaged by water/lack of grease. A larger ball *might* help in that situation, might not.

 

[Dezert4Runner]

Tundra, Sequoia and 3rd gens all share the same spindle, so the ball joints will all bolt up universally. The big question is, are our OTRE’s compatible with them and is the newer Tundra/ Sequoia ball joints any stronger. We all know the first gen Tacoma also shares the same spindle, but the OTRE size that the Tacoma ball joint uses is different (larger IIRC) than our factory tie rods.

A lot of the failures don't involve the ball and socket. They involve the 4 smaller bolts breaking (possibly due to under or overtightening - pay attention to those torque specs! Tighter isn't better). Of the large single nut breaking (same issues as with the bolts). Or the neck between the ball and the threaded part.

And usually, when the ball pops out, it's because the ball joint was just plain worn out. Either tooooo many miles, or it was damaged by water/lack of grease. A larger ball *might* help in that situation, might not.

Agreed 100%. The guys that are constantly breaking stuff wheeling hard trails are still shearing LBJ bolts. Paging [MENTION=118730]AssBurns[/MENTION] and [MENTION=143526]theesotericone[/MENTION]

The push for OEM LBJ’s is really just to curb shitty aftermarket joints from the ball separating from the socket but even an OEM LBJ has it’s breaking point (LBJ bolts). That being said, I’m intrigued about a potentially stronger design, especially of it bolts on and can be had as OEM Toyota.

 

[AntleredRuin]

I still can't find it, but I swear I saw someone say that they used 02 4Runner LBJs on their 01 Sequoia and it bolted up fine, tie rods included.

From what I read, I believe that just the ball and receiving socket (not sure about the neck; I would hope so) was upgraded on the 03.

On the 04+, it kept the 03 upgrades, but also the upgraded the mount for a wider area (less extreme angle for mount bolt shearing?) and gave it larger mount bolts (not sure of the bolt size, but the head increased from 14mm to 17mm).

If it fits on the 4runner, I don't see how it could be a bad thing as long as it aligns properly.

 

[T4R2014]

It's all horse shit. They will bolt up but are not designed for your 4Runner. It will "work", but in the way a POS car "works". The forum follower crowd pulled the exact same logic with Tacoma ball joints 6 years ago. The results were trash AF. Use the parts designed for your vehicle. Installing these will not give a 1/2 ton pickup strength upgrade. If you are eating through ball joints then you need limiting straps.

 

[4v power]

No idea but do you really need the extra strength? Most users really do not.

 

[AssBurns]

Tundra, Sequoia and 3rd gens all share the same spindle, so the ball joints will all bolt up universally. The big question is, are our OTRE’s compatible with them and is the newer Tundra/ Sequoia ball joints any stronger. We all know the first gen Tacoma also shares the same spindle, but the OTRE size that the Tacoma ball joint uses is different (larger IIRC) than our factory tie rods.





Agreed 100%. The guys that are constantly breaking stuff wheeling hard trails are still shearing LBJ bolts. Paging [MENTION=118730]AssBurns[/MENTION] and [MENTION=143526]theesotericone[/MENTION]

The push for OEM LBJ’s is really just to curb shitty aftermarket joints from the ball separating from the socket but even an OEM LBJ has it’s breaking point (LBJ bolts). That being said, I’m intrigued about a potentially stronger design, especially of it bolts on and can be had as OEM Toyota.

I honestly think our LBJ bolt failures were from reusing the bolts too many times. I'm constantly replacing CV axles, and during that process I'm pulling the bolts and reinstalling them. I think the bolts start to stretch and wear out and come loose on their own even with torque and red loctite. I fully believe its user error, but I'd still like to have something stronger and simpler. I got something in the works for it, but it's not a good solution for the common person. Cough cough *fully fabbed spindle*

I've wheeled harder than most in a 3rd gen and honestly I don't believe the LBJ's are nearly as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Pay attention to the condition of the joints, and keep them greased. Sure they are a shitty design, but they aren't THAT bad. Failures seem to occur from poor maintenance and not checking the conditions of the parts often. I run moogs and haven't had an issue. This last set is almost two years old with mostly hard use, and they still feel fine. I'll probably be replacing them next time I have the front end apart. They are too cheap and easy to not inspect/replace often. The bolts shearing are IMO not a manufacturing issue. It's a user error issue and a somewhat poor initial design on Toyota's behalf.

Moral of the story. Inspect/Lube/Replace your LBJ's often, and buy spare bolts to carry on hand for the times you need to pull the LBJ and reinstall it.

 

[AntleredRuin]

I don't even offroad (I'm 2wd), so I'm not eating through mine at all. I just replace every 100k with OEM, just in case.

This was more of a hypothetical scenario. Toyota specifically acknowledged the LBJ problem and then designed and implemented a superior replacement, but only for the Tundra and Sequoia. If the replacement part fits the 4Runner fine and is OEM quality and you can get an alignment fine afterwards, then whats the harm? No it doesn't *fix* the problem because the LBJ will still fail downwards, but a stronger part overall, that's meant for a larger truck with a heavier engine, surely would make it that much less likely to happen in the first place. If for nothing else other than peace of mind.

Still inspect/change them regularly, etc. But how many people have busted one on the trail and had to swap back in an old one just to get going again? I'd bet they'd appreciate a stronger part overall that wouldn't fail at the worst possible time.


The 04+ would be a bit of an undertaking because of the spindle and LCA swap, but the 03 Tundra LBJs bolt right in, supposedly. They cost $104 each at CamelBack, vs $102 for the stock 4Runner LBJs. Simply get the Tundra ones instead of the 4Runner next time you're due for a change; it'll cost a total of $4 extra.


I mean, the TBU/SBU brake upgrade is common practice, seeing as it bolts right on. It doesn't mean that brakes won't eventually 'warp', but it makes it less likely because the larger calipers were designed for larger vehicles.
We could just have the TLBJ/SLBJ upgrade, now. Not a perfect solution, but better.

 

[feta]

have 01 sequoia and 99 4runner

Pretty sure the spindles, outer ball joints, and steering rack are the same.

I did the rack on the sequoia when I got it and pretty sure I remember it was the same as the 4runner.

 

[pluton]

I've wheeled harder than most in a 3rd gen and honestly I don't believe the LBJ's are nearly as bad as everyone makes them out to be. Pay attention to the condition of the joints, and keep them greased.

Stock ball joints have no built-in facility for greasing. How do you do it?

 

[theesotericone]

Agreed 100%. The guys that are constantly breaking stuff wheeling hard trails are still shearing LBJ bolts. Paging [MENTION=118730]AssBurns[/MENTION] and [MENTION=143526]theesotericone[/MENTION]

My only failure of an LBJ was the driver side. I sheared 3 of 4 bolts and the remaining one bent into a banana shape. The inherent problem with the design of the LBJ isn't so much it's strength. It's the fact that you can't see the upper part of 2 of 4 bolts. I check torque way more often then most just because of how I use my rig. The day mine failed I checked torque on them about 2 hours before I had the failure.

My temp solution is to weld the LBJ to the spindle with a few light welds. That way at least it won't fall off quickly if the bolts are compromised. I only recommend doing this if you wheel hard and have the skills to grind the welds down in case you need to. It's a temp fix till [MENTION=118730]AssBurns[/MENTION] get's the motivation to build something better.

It's all horse shit. If you are eating through ball joints then you need limiting straps.

Explain to me how limit straps, which I run, will stop me from eating through LBJs? They will save your CV's but I don't believe they will have any effect on the LBJ.

Moral of the story. Inspect/Lube/Replace your LBJ's often, and buy spare bolts to carry on hand for the times you need to pull the LBJ and reinstall it.

Speaking of that. My driver side OEM LBJ with less then 8000 miles on it is toast. It's got 1/4" of vertical play. Luckily I've got spare spindles waiting to have Total Chaos gussets welded up. Once that's done I'll replace the drivers spindles and LBJ. I think I'll leave the passenger spindle and LBJ alone for now.

Moral of the story: If you wheel hard pay attention to your rig and you should go with aftermarket LBJ's. If I had to replace them with OEM every 8000 miles I'd go broke. lol

 

[T4R2014]

I just looked at a 2007 Sequoia. Looks exactly like a 2001 Sequoia. Nothing is "beefed up" compared to a 1996 4Runner. It's pretty much the same stuff, just minor variances for each vehicle. The rumor spread around was actually a manufacturing defect in the ball joint. As a matter of fact, 2001-02 4Runners are involved as well.

http://media.fixed-ops.com/Toy_Campaigns/50Jdeal.pdf

 

[jkeith.w]

Tundra, Sequoia and 3rd gens all share the same spindle, so the ball joints will all bolt up universally. The big question is, are our OTRE’s compatible with them and is the newer Tundra/ Sequoia ball joints any stronger. We all know the first gen Tacoma also shares the same spindle, but the OTRE size that the Tacoma ball joint uses is different (larger IIRC) than our factory tie rods.

Probably for Ackerman, since the wheelbase is so much longer (hence a crappy turning radius on the Tacos)

 

[jkeith.w]

Explain to me how limit straps, which I run, will stop me from eating through LBJs? They will save your CV's but I don't believe they will have any effect on the LBJ.

Overextension (droop) damaging the socket is the theory here.

 

[theesotericone]

Overextension (droop) damaging the socket is the theory here.

I'm gonna call bullshit on that theory. No one I know runs limit straps in the front for any other reason then CV angle at full droop. I'm sure the LBJ has the range of motion to deal with another inch of droop. lol

What does beat up LBJ's is pushing large tires over large rocks. That force has to go somewhere and all the front end components get to share it. I've broken most of them at this point. Like I said upthread, if you wheel, just check your rig often.

 

[AssBurns]

Stock ball joints have no built-in facility for greasing. How do you do it?

Stop wasting money on OEM parts that are known to fail nearly as often as aftermarket. :gossip:

I'm gonna call bullshit on that theory. No one I know runs limit straps in the front for any other reason then CV angle at full droop. I'm sure the LBJ has the range of motion to deal with another inch of droop. lol

What does beat up LBJ's is pushing large tires over large rocks. That force has to go somewhere and all the front end components get to share it. I've broken most of them at this point. Like I said upthread, if you wheel, just check your rig often.

The main reason I got limit straps was to stop breaking shocks and shock towers. If you wheel hard, you are almost guaranteed to break the shock tower without straps. Everyone should have the [MENTION=28464]eimkeith[/MENTION] limit strap tab kit. For the cost, it's a no brainer.

 

[jkeith.w]

I'm gonna call bullshit on that theory. No one I know runs limit straps in the front for any other reason then CV angle at full droop. I'm sure the LBJ has the range of motion to deal with another inch of droop. lol

What does beat up LBJ's is pushing large tires over large rocks. That force has to go somewhere and all the front end components get to share it. I've broken most of them at this point. Like I said upthread, if you wheel, just check your rig often.

we're going to arm-wrestle, lol

 

[phattyduck]

Overextension (droop) damaging the socket is the theory here.

Stock, its the upper ball joint that limits droop with the shock removed. Once you have an aftermarket upper arm, it is probably close to a tie between the outer CV cup and the lower ball joint... But even extended travel coilovers should limit down travel before that point in normal use.

Lower ball joints may wear much faster when run lifted due to operating angle though... (force applied at an angle, causing uneven wear in the cup, maybe?)

-Charlie

 

[theesotericone]

The main reason I got limit straps was to stop breaking shocks and shock towers. If you wheel hard, you are almost guaranteed to break the shock tower without straps. Everyone should have the [MENTION=28464]eimkeith[/MENTION] limit strap tab kit. For the cost, it's a no brainer.

Come on man. I wheel plenty hard. All of it's crawling and my shock towers are fine. It's the high speed dirt shit that kills the towers and core support. There's no way you will convince me otherwise. lol

we're going to arm-wrestle, lol

How about truck wrestle? When we finally meet we'll hook up a tow strap back to back. Then we'll both engage lo/lo. Then we'll both engage F/R lockers. Then we tug of war it. Whoever pulls the other rig 20 feet wins.. lol