Upper Ball Joint problems
Discussion
I know there has been plenty of info in recent times about lower ball joints and the associated lack of articulation in certain aftermarket offerings. With this in mind, when buying a complete set of new front ball joints, I decided to use RaceTech as they seem to have researched the problem. However, I wasn't expecting problems with the upper ones! I found that when I fitted them I had hardly any camber adjustment. upon measuring them against the originals I found that the machined edge finished short and the ball part of the joint was a larger diameter and this fouled the leading edge of the wishbone.
As TVR Power are local to me, I went across to take a look at their stock for comparison. I found myself opening a can of worms! Theirs, as they had to admit, were very poor. The machined edge could differ as much as 1cm from one side to the other! Andy, their parts chap (who I have to say is very helpful) immediately got on to his suppliers and the following day had a far superior offering. However, they were not really an improvement on the ones from RaceTech.
I decided to work with what I had.
I contacted Mark at RaceTech and he sent a fascinating response especially regarding the shims:
"I got talking to a chassis builder from TVR and found out some things that only TVR would do to save money, The basic thing is they used the ball joint I supplied you by changing the castor spacers from one thick one 8mm to 2 --- 4mm ones which will put the ball joint in the middle and this was what was used by them from appox 97 on , but he did tell me that once they ran out off the 4mm shims and so just used up some old stuff (back to the 8mm shims etc..) they had around the factory to get the cars out. The factory decided that the slight less castor would not be noticed by the customer..which I guess not if you never driven the car with 8mm shims.He also said that most off the time you would not need to push the ball joint all the way in to the wishbone to get the camber of ¾’ , but I think that maybe with so many different manufacturer off wishbones that this may not be totally right" .
Regards
Mark
My response was:
Hi Mark,
I’ve now been back to TVR Power. Their replacement ball joints are far better than the ones they had originally but did not offer the clearance of the original and were only marginally better than yours. I decided to stick with what I had and adapt things a little as necessary. I used a Dremel and a flat file to gain about 6mm extra on the joint then did the same with the leading edge of the upper wishbone to gain another 2mm. You can see in picture 1 a shadow of where the original machining finished. Neither were things that I wanted to do (especially having just got the wishbones back from powder coating) but I felt that I had few options. Even after making these alterations I still don’t have full camber adjustment.
The reason I bought the ball joints from your company was the fact that, after researching the situation, I found that you offered bottom ball joints that offered the articulation of the original. I’m sure you will have increased sales of these ball joints as a direct result. I presumed (wrongly) that there were no problems with the upper units. You have clearly gone to trouble to source a lower ball joint that works – it would help us owners if you could do the same for the uppers. I’m sure owners would pay a small premium if they new they were going to fit. If you need an original pattern I can send you one of mine.
This image shows the extent of the adjustment before modification.
As TVR Power are local to me, I went across to take a look at their stock for comparison. I found myself opening a can of worms! Theirs, as they had to admit, were very poor. The machined edge could differ as much as 1cm from one side to the other! Andy, their parts chap (who I have to say is very helpful) immediately got on to his suppliers and the following day had a far superior offering. However, they were not really an improvement on the ones from RaceTech.
I decided to work with what I had.
I contacted Mark at RaceTech and he sent a fascinating response especially regarding the shims:
"I got talking to a chassis builder from TVR and found out some things that only TVR would do to save money, The basic thing is they used the ball joint I supplied you by changing the castor spacers from one thick one 8mm to 2 --- 4mm ones which will put the ball joint in the middle and this was what was used by them from appox 97 on , but he did tell me that once they ran out off the 4mm shims and so just used up some old stuff (back to the 8mm shims etc..) they had around the factory to get the cars out. The factory decided that the slight less castor would not be noticed by the customer..which I guess not if you never driven the car with 8mm shims.He also said that most off the time you would not need to push the ball joint all the way in to the wishbone to get the camber of ¾’ , but I think that maybe with so many different manufacturer off wishbones that this may not be totally right" .
Regards
Mark
My response was:
Hi Mark,
I’ve now been back to TVR Power. Their replacement ball joints are far better than the ones they had originally but did not offer the clearance of the original and were only marginally better than yours. I decided to stick with what I had and adapt things a little as necessary. I used a Dremel and a flat file to gain about 6mm extra on the joint then did the same with the leading edge of the upper wishbone to gain another 2mm. You can see in picture 1 a shadow of where the original machining finished. Neither were things that I wanted to do (especially having just got the wishbones back from powder coating) but I felt that I had few options. Even after making these alterations I still don’t have full camber adjustment.
The reason I bought the ball joints from your company was the fact that, after researching the situation, I found that you offered bottom ball joints that offered the articulation of the original. I’m sure you will have increased sales of these ball joints as a direct result. I presumed (wrongly) that there were no problems with the upper units. You have clearly gone to trouble to source a lower ball joint that works – it would help us owners if you could do the same for the uppers. I’m sure owners would pay a small premium if they new they were going to fit. If you need an original pattern I can send you one of mine.
This image shows the extent of the adjustment before modification.
very valid point and as you say it is a problem that most, who have refurbed their front end have come across. The fact that there are now numerous wishbone suppliers can only make matters worse re exacting measurements. Plus i`m sure chassis pick up points probably differ ever so slightly car to car.
With reference to your top ball joint, yes the newer size ball joint wont go into the wishbone as far even with equal size spacers, however on mine with its new wishbones, to get the required camber i have to have the top balljoint pulled out as far as it will go, so for me it isnt a problem.
With reference to your top ball joint, yes the newer size ball joint wont go into the wishbone as far even with equal size spacers, however on mine with its new wishbones, to get the required camber i have to have the top balljoint pulled out as far as it will go, so for me it isnt a problem.
carsy said:
very valid point and as you say it is a problem that most, who have refurbed their front end have come across. The fact that there are now numerous wishbone suppliers can only make matters worse re exacting measurements. Plus i`m sure chassis pick up points probably differ ever so slightly car to car.
With reference to your top ball joint, yes the newer size ball joint wont go into the wishbone as far even with equal size spacers, however on mine with its new wishbones, to get the required camber i have to have the top balljoint pulled out as far as it will go, so for me it isnt a problem.
This would indicate that the aftermarket wishbones have been designed around ball joint availability rather than copying the original pattern. Maybe the parts suppliers could offer two variations - one for OE and one for replacement wishbones. If it were viable to do so it would really help. David.With reference to your top ball joint, yes the newer size ball joint wont go into the wishbone as far even with equal size spacers, however on mine with its new wishbones, to get the required camber i have to have the top balljoint pulled out as far as it will go, so for me it isnt a problem.
<a href="http://s142.photobucket.com/albums/r119/hansdaal/?action=view&current=TOPBalljointFitting-1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r119/hansdaal/TOPBalljointFitting-1.jpg" border="0" alt="Top Ball joint"></a>
Hallo,
I hope the "link" works. But as you can see in picture this balljoint doesn't rub against any edges on the wishbone. Will fit perfectly. Have sold quite a few never had any problems.
greetings
Hans.
Hallo,
I hope the "link" works. But as you can see in picture this balljoint doesn't rub against any edges on the wishbone. Will fit perfectly. Have sold quite a few never had any problems.
greetings
Hans.
hansdaal said:
Hallo,
Thanks this links works.
As you can see pleanty of room. Sorry for using the old rusty wishbone.
Hans
Hello Hans, There appears to be plenty of room if the ball joint is mounted centrally with a 4mm spacer on either side, but to obtain the right castor angle on a Griffith you need an 8mm spacer at the leading edge of the ball joint (see the note above from Mark at RaceTech) and this then pushes ball part of the joint up against the trailing edge of the wishbone. I'm not saying your ball joint won't be satisfactory but your picture does not demonstrate that it fits with an 8mm spacer allowing full camber adjustment. If it does I would be keen to buy a pair. Please let me know. David.Thanks this links works.
As you can see pleanty of room. Sorry for using the old rusty wishbone.
Hans
I am currently running 2 equal spacers either side of the top ball joint. As i said earlier my balljoint is pulled out to its outer most position. I would therefore get both spacers together. I take it they would be positioned towards the front of the car.
Is there going to be any real difference in doing this though. My car handles fine. At 80 -90mph it is rock steady. I recall Quinny stating on here that he went to two spacers either side of the balljoint and couldn`t tell any difference.
So what are the advantages supposed to be of one thick spacer.
Is there going to be any real difference in doing this though. My car handles fine. At 80 -90mph it is rock steady. I recall Quinny stating on here that he went to two spacers either side of the balljoint and couldn`t tell any difference.
So what are the advantages supposed to be of one thick spacer.
carsy said:
So what are the advantages supposed to be of one thick spacer.
The pivot line through which the upright is articulated is raked rearwards at a greater angle (castor). IMHO even more castor than TVR used is better, I wouldn't consider reducing the castor personally (after having the luxury of adjustable wishbones which have allowed greater testing of camber & castor settings on the road).I had a right nightmare with this, replaced the old with new ones from clever trevor and had the 2 smaller shims to replace the single big one. It was miles out, I had to grind off 1mm from each shim to fit. i tried one on either side (following instructions) and the steering was really, really light. Putting both on the same side is much better.
pushing the top joint to the rear will make the car steering heavier, and tend to improve stability. It will also make turn in slower though.
Jags used multiple shims like these in differing thicknesses for the caster setting. (xjs etc) pretty easy to swap those in and out, and it might assist those struggling with variations on clearance to try those, rather than trying to fit a ball joint that "wont" fit well.
Jags used multiple shims like these in differing thicknesses for the caster setting. (xjs etc) pretty easy to swap those in and out, and it might assist those struggling with variations on clearance to try those, rather than trying to fit a ball joint that "wont" fit well.
SSPPGG said:
pushing the top joint to the rear will make the car steering heavier, and tend to improve stability. It will also make turn in slower though.
Until you approach 10degs the steering effects are pretty much negated by the tyre flex, but the bump reaction is drastically improved IMHO ( rather than googling 
)
Hello,
The width of the upper BJ I use is 48.6 mm. A couple of years ago these was the same discussin that the uppers available were to wide. I sourced a few BJ form several suppliers in Europa and this one was the one with the smallest head Quality item I could find. Will try to make a pictue with the 8 mm spacers. But according to the partsmanual TVR changed form 1 x 8mm to 2 x 4mm for a reason I presume.
The width of the wishbone will stay the same. When I bought a small batch "same brand"same partnumbers some had small heads and the other wider. The wider you can use for Tuscan's and the smaller 48,6 mm will fit IMHO the Griffith and Chimaera. I will try to measure an OEM one.
greetings
hans.
The width of the upper BJ I use is 48.6 mm. A couple of years ago these was the same discussin that the uppers available were to wide. I sourced a few BJ form several suppliers in Europa and this one was the one with the smallest head Quality item I could find. Will try to make a pictue with the 8 mm spacers. But according to the partsmanual TVR changed form 1 x 8mm to 2 x 4mm for a reason I presume.
The width of the wishbone will stay the same. When I bought a small batch "same brand"same partnumbers some had small heads and the other wider. The wider you can use for Tuscan's and the smaller 48,6 mm will fit IMHO the Griffith and Chimaera. I will try to measure an OEM one.
greetings
hans.
Gassing Station | Griffith | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff