Torque Values for Lower Balljoint Bolts - Very Important - Please Read

[glen_ep]

Great bit of information, Thanks Tim. This should clear up some confusion for sure.

I wonder why the change? Why a weaker bolt with lower torque values for the 01/02's? What was the engineers reasoning?

Yeah, my thoughts as well. I know they chose a longer bolt due to the dust covers on the 01 and 02 models but why didn't they spec a bolt with the same tensile strength as the other bolts. I guess to save money?

I don't think tensiles are as simple as lower equals weaker - it's a complex and debatable topic. I believe the higher the tensile, the more critical torque accuracy is, the less room for error (tends to snap), whilst lower tends to bend. But it's a debate for people with more knowledge than me.

From photos online, it seems a few of the higher tensile ones have been snapping, but then again... so have the lower tensile ones. Though if everyone is following the higher torque specification, we should be seeing an over abundance of lower tensile bolts snapping, and almost zero of the higher tensiles.

One thing reasonably certain is the dust cover mounting rings will be crushed from the torque of higher tensile. So that alone necessitates a change. Of course one then asks, if higher tensile bolt was important, couldn't they have implemented a higher tensile insert for the mounting ring? However this assumes that small insert doesn't cause other issues within the tighter tolerances of a higher tensile loading...

Speaking of the dust covers, there was an earlier dust cover which was held by 2 screws, instead of the LBJ bolts.

 

[glen_ep]

Oh thanks, I missed that link. There's tons of good info in there.

The 90080-10066 bolts that the 96-00 4Runners spec appears to be a part number that supercedes the 90105-10406 part number he references as the "best" bolt in the Prado 9 0post.

The bolt head marking, four stripes and two dots, indicate it's a Toyota 11T class which is the strongest bolt noted in the FSM.

I believe these are M10-1.25 bolts about 30mm long. ARB makes a replacement that may be stronger but interestingly the torque rating is lower... might be due to lower thread friction from special bolt coating, dunno:
The Official ARP Web Site | Kits

Metric 8.8 = 110ksi
Metric 10.9 = 150ksi (probably what the Toyota bolts are equivalent to)
Metric 12.9 = 170ksi (maybe too brittle
ARP bolts 8740 chromoly = 180-210ksi

Another idea no one has mentioned yet is to replace the bolts with high strength studs and flange nuts. A stud connection is nearly always superior to a bolted connection.

Lubrication plays a huge factor in the torque required to achieve a given clamp load too.

For example a lubricated bolt vs a dry bolt can vary from 30 ft*lbs all the way up to 50 ft*lbs of torque to achieve the same clamp load.

In general adding a washer under the bolt head will reduce friction during tightening.

I haven't seen a specification in the FSM for a particular lubrication process for the ball joint bolts. This could account for some of the bolt failures that have occured in the past. If a person were to well lubricate the bolt and tighten to 59 ft*lbs versus using no lubricant and only torquing to 37 ft*lbs, the clamp load could vary by as much as 4,000 - 5,000 lbs.

I don't think it's worth placing any value on the head markings. There's an image in the linked post showing bolts with the same markings, yet are different tensiles. Unless, as you both point out, surface coating/lubrication matters enough - from the **stock-coatings** of these Toyota bolts (they were used as supplied, nothing added).

I could revisit the bolt testing again with this in mind. Eg, remove the stock coatings, test. Also remove and apply something else, test again. If anyone has suggestions on the cleaning or coating/lube products to test with, I'm all ears...

 

[thegipper]

When I did my LBJ's, I used the old style flange bolts, torqued to 59 ft/lbs and used red loctite.

It would be awesome if we could reach out to the engineering department at Toyota and get their reason behind the two different bolts and torque values. Without speaking to them, I think everything is just going to be speculation. I always follow the FSM specs unless it is obviously a typo which does happen.

 

[mtbtim]

When I did my LBJ's, I used the old style flange bolts, torqued to 59 ft/lbs and used red loctite.

It would be awesome if we could reach out to the engineering department at Toyota and get their reason behind the two different bolts and torque values. Without speaking to them, I think everything is just going to be speculation. I always follow the FSM specs unless it is obviously a typo which does happen.

I sort of doubt we could have a conversation with somebody in the Toyota Engineering department let alone find one of them that was involved with the design of our 3rd Gen 4runners.

The FSM does give us conflicting torque values for these bolts but it does match with up with the change in years. That guy's testing of the bolts was enough proof for me that that there's some credence to having a lower torque value for the newer bolts.

I honestly have never used red loctite on any fastener because if I ever have to remove it, I don't want a high chance I'm going to snap it off. I've used Blue 242 for lots of things and that's all you really need. You don't want permanent. You just want some extra insurance the bolt won't back out and fall off.

 

[Greaser]

I had a shop do my LBJ's due to a lack of garage/tools at that point. Is there an easy way to figure out which bolts I have by sight? This is on a 2000 SR5.

Maybe just upgrade to some grade 8 bolts to be safe?

 

[thegipper]

I sort of doubt we could have a conversation with somebody in the Toyota Engineering department let alone find one of them that was involved with the design of our 3rd Gen 4runners.

The FSM does give us conflicting torque values for these bolts but it does match with up with the change in years. That guy's testing of the bolts was enough proof for me that that there's some credence to having a lower torque value for the newer bolts.

I honestly have never used red loctite on any fastener because if I ever have to remove it, I don't want a high chance I'm going to snap it off. I've used Blue 242 for lots of things and that's all you really need. You don't want permanent. You just want some extra insurance the bolt won't back out and fall off.

Yeah I doubt they'd ever let us pick the brains of their engineers even though it would be awesome if they would.

I generally use blue loctite but I figured red would give me a little extra security from them ever backing off. If I need to remove them, a little heat form the torch will release them.

I used to build linear actuators at a job when I was younger and we had this industrial grade green loctite that once it was cured, it was basically impossible to ever remove. I've twisted stainless steel tubes and that green stuff still held. You had to nuke the threads with mapp gas until it was basically red before it would budge.

 

[mtbtim]

I had a shop do my LBJ's due to a lack of garage/tools at that point. Is there an easy way to figure out which bolts I have by sight? This is on a 2000 SR5.

Maybe just upgrade to some grade 8 bolts to be safe?

Yeah, there is an easy way to tell the difference between the two style bolts. One is a flange bolt and the other has a washer. The flange bolt is the older design and has the higher torque value.

 

[nissanh]

If you look at the lower ball joint mount to the spindle on newer models, there are just 2 bolts! I prefer 4 bolts like we have in the 3rd gen.

It the bolt is tight the shock absorber/coil spring will do the damping.

 

[theesotericone]

Metric 8.8 = 110ksi
Metric 10.9 = 150ksi (probably what the Toyota bolts are equivalent to)
Metric 12.9 = 170ksi (maybe too brittle
ARP bolts 8740 chromoly = 180-210ksi

Another idea no one has mentioned yet is to replace the bolts with high strength studs and flange nuts. A stud connection is nearly always superior to a bolted connection.

The Toyota bolts are 8.8 at best. As someone who's broken 7 of them I will tell you they are crap if you are pushing your rig. About 9 months ago I went to 10.9 M10-1.25x30mm hex head flange bolts. In that 9 months I haven't broken a single one. They are torqued to 60 ft/lbs and red loctited. My wheeling hasn't changed so it's a direct apples to apples comparison.

The Toyo bolts are fine for what the engineers have them designed for. Once you step up to 35's and big rocks they aren't even close to strong enough.

 

[JZiggy]

The Toyota bolts are 8.8 at best. As someone who's broken 7 of them I will tell you they are crap if you are pushing your rig. About 9 months ago I went to 10.9 M10-1.25x30mm hex head flange bolts. In that 9 months I haven't broken a single one. They are torqued to 60 ft/lbs and red loctited. My wheeling hasn't changed so it's a direct apples to apples comparison.

The Toyo bolts are fine for what the engineers have them designed for. Once you step up to 35's and big rocks they aren't even close to strong enough.

I hear you Matt. One thing puzzling me is that most metric torque charts for an M10 fastener show about 40 ft-lb for 8.8 and 60 ft-lb for 10.9. So if Toyota specs 59 then they think they have a class 10 fastener.

 

[HiluxSurf SSR-G]

may we know the brand and where you bought the bolts? did you install the LBJ dust covers?
Thanks

The Toyota bolts are 8.8 at best. As someone who's broken 7 of them I will tell you they are crap if you are pushing your rig. About 9 months ago I went to 10.9 M10-1.25x30mm hex head flange bolts. In that 9 months I haven't broken a single one. They are torqued to 60 ft/lbs and red loctited. My wheeling hasn't changed so it's a direct apples to apples comparison.

The Toyo bolts are fine for what the engineers have them designed for. Once you step up to 35's and big rocks they aren't even close to strong enough.

 

[theesotericone]

may we know the brand and where you bought the bolts? did you install the LBJ dust covers?
Thanks

McMaster-Carr


What LBJ dust cover? I've installed a lot of LBJ's and have never seen a dust cover.

 

[heat]

like this

 

[phattyduck]

If you look at the lower ball joint mount to the spindle on newer models, there are just 2 bolts! I prefer 4 bolts like we have in the 3rd gen.

It the bolt is tight the shock absorber/coil spring will do the damping.

The new design doesn't put the lower ball joints (or bolts holding the ball joint) in tension. The two bolts are up-sized too, I believe.

-Charlie

 

[Kanoe]

The two bolts are up-sized too, I believe.

Yes, quite a bit bigger than the 4 used on our 4runners.

 

[jross20]

Is it best to stay with the older style, or buy aftermarket ones? What type should I get? Zinc or...? I feel safer with Japanese steel if possible...

I believe someone said: 10.9 M10-1.25x30mm hex head flange bolt

 

[Spiker Engineering]

We're running tests to gather quantitative data on these bolts (and others), to compare their strengths and appropriate torque levels. The results should answer all the questions and speculations raised in this thread - Everything you always wanted to know about LBJ bolts.

 

[scshack]

I made the mistake of over torquing the LBJ bolts in my 2002 to 59 ft-lbs and after posting to the forum, folks suggested buying new bolts and torquing them to the correct 37 ft-lbf. I went this route since the bolts are designed to be "on-and-done", basically they were over stretched at 59 ft-lbs. Here is my original post.

 

[3bears]

I wonder if the lower torque for the 2001 2002 is so the bolts dont tear the dust covers. I briefly had a 2001, replaced the LBJ's with the old style higher torque bolts. Someone had done this car b4 as neither one had the dust covers but had the newer style bolts.
will be interesting to see what spiker tests show
Everything you always wanted to know about LBJ bolts


and of course I have read threads saying dont reuse the bolts....and threads where people do reuse with no issue...so lots of questions on that....reuse or new....I go new and only use yota LBj's and bolts
the lbj is one thing about 3rd gens that make me nervous....poor design by yota

 

[Spiker Engineering]

I think the bolts are actually nowhere near failure even at 59 ft-lbs, I think that is one of the common myths that I plan to bust (or to confirm, I am open to new data).

BTW, I see that you applied loctite to the bolts during installation. While a good idea, loctite lubricates the threads and may cause a higher installation preload than you would get with dry threads - so that may contribute to damaging or breaking the bolts. That will be part of our testing as well.