question about stock spindles and the balljoint mods

Flipping the uppers like that is a terrible idea, its hard to believe people even do that. I dont reccomend doing that, and i cant believe anyone in their right mind would either.

Raise your upper mounts and you should not have to.



Taylor

Edited: 2/13/2011 9:27:29 PM by txaggie08

Im not seeing that extensive bolt on kit yall referenced earlier. I'd like to keep welding to a minimum as I'm not skilled with one...

Also curious, is the mod really necessary for laying an 18 or so...

Curious as to why flipping the upper control arms, with balljoints facing down, and swapping sides with the uppers is a terrible idea? Ive done it on a few different trucks and it works great. It puts the upper balljoint at a better angle to lay frame without maxing the balljoint out, while keeping the suspension geometry stock. Then switching sides with the upper arms puts the caster angle back to where it should be for setups without symmetrical upper arms. Plus its really easy to do and safe. If im missing something here let me know...

92zu i was basically asking the same ?. i'm kinda new to the bagged world so i'm just trying to figure it out myself.

chopped mazda- from what you do, i can tell you know alot about this so could you chime back in a break it down barney style basically for us. just trying to get the whole picture.

Edited: 2/14/2011 7:16:07 AM by Chopped Mazda

For the most part, the main reasoning is the same as the reason you do not flip your stock lower ball joint and have it face down.

When the mfg's design these ball joints, they design them for certain applications, they put their strength and integrity features into those designs and applications. When you go and put that specifically designed piece, into a complete 180 of an application, the majior weakness of the part will start to show.

For the most part the answer can be as simple as, that ball joint was 100% not designed to be used in that application. Its the same reason you dont take a lower ball joint that mounts into the spindle from the top side, and flip it......its not designed to be that way. The same reason you dont use an upper ball joint, for a lower ball joint and vice versa, they are absolutely not designed to be used that way.

It seems all to often that people are scabbing stuff together and just making it work, and hoping it lasts for them, that just seems to be the way to do it, take the cheepest and easiest way, and make it work regardless of saftey. I dont know why you would want to do that, with your family in the vehicle.

I know there is a thread on SSM somewhere of a guy with a chevy truck i think it was an 02, who went with this exact mod on his uppers, flipped them up side down and swapped sides, and after about 500 miles and he had thought they were tried and true, had one of his ball joints just fall out of its housing and flop his wheel on its side going 55 down a street. No warning, just pop out of its socket. Im pretty sure nobody got hurt, and he was fine, the truck was pretty fucked up.

Im not saying that this idea wont work, hell you may be able to drive the rest of your life like this, but its a poor idea, and a complete 180 from what the part was designed and built to do. Or, you may put a few hundred miles on it and have both of them fail at the same time.... idk, its a guessing game with that kind of application. The better of two evils would be to raise the UCA to keep it from binding, with some solid welded, strong brackets. It would not be much harder of a job, and would be a ton safer.

Taylor

also, another thing that i forgot to mention.

Usually, when you re-ream a spindle from either the top or bottom side, you are reaming it to a larger ball joint taper and diamiater. There for, you get a new solid grip on the full length of the taper, and it holds good inside of the spindle, and keeps material around the entire taper of the ball joint.

When you simply take the same ball joint size and just "flip" it in the spindle, and ream it from the bottom, instead of having a full material around the taper of the shaft, you now only have half the material around the shaft, because that same taper wont eat up any more than to stock ball joint will, your going from \_/ to >

Taylor

If he raises his mounts, he would have to raise the steering rack also if im not mistaken? Otherwise it will handle like poop..

Edited: 2/14/2011 8:31:33 PM by whataberger

by raising the mount, all he is doing is pushing the the upper ball joint up and out, therefore alleviating the bind on the ball joint. and lessening the camber...and taylor is right about the flipping ball joints, mikey of las vegas had his ball joint flip out in his f150 at 55..he was able to make it home.

this is a pic of the ekstensive bracket on mikey's truck.





my f150 currently lays a 255/35-20 with nothing but drop spindles...stock everything else. and it lays front crossmember.

^^^ my point exactly.


that could have been a lot worse!


Just because it can be done, does not mean it should. Things tend to work fine for a few hundred miles, then when they start to break in, all goes to hell and stuff like that happens.



Taylor

Taylor...im about to body drop my 98...im ordering my ekmw raised upper kit and doin ball joint/tie rod flip and running a 255/30/22. plan on bd it 4 inches...with such a small tire and with the raised uppers do i still need to run a ranger/explorer booster? or does everybodys truck varry?