joolsmi16
|
| posted on 2/12/07 at 11:35 PM |
|
|
bottom ball joint.
Is there any suggestions on a suitable ball joint similar to the transit drag link so I can use on my bottom wishbone to be used with either the
cortina/sierra uprights.
I recently looked at a DAX up close and they are using this setup but at the time didn't ask about the joint..
Thanks.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Chippy
|
| posted on 2/12/07 at 11:50 PM |
|
|
Hi, this is how I, and most others, have done it.
 
Start of the front suspension.
Hope that helps. Cheers Ray
|
|
|
joolsmi16
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 12:27 AM |
|
|
bottom joint
Aim familiar with both the cortina and maxi bottom ball joints however I looking for a drag link type joint I can use instead of the normal
cortina/maxi joints on a bottom wishbone.
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 12:42 AM |
|
|
You could still use the transit balljoints on the bottom if you got some of these made up. Their normally used in VW beetles and called bump steer
bushes. The original tapered hole is made straight and these inserts pushed in, you could get ones made up with the transits smaller hole instead. You
could even fit a large rose joint rather than a balljoint, maybe that's what you saw on the DAX?
[Edited on 3/12/07 by Mr Whippy]
 
Rescued attachment bump steer bush.jpg
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
Alex B
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 09:20 AM |
|
|
Chippy ....you should put some mortar on those blocks......it could be sat like that longer than you think
Alex
Much work still remains to be done before I can announce my total failure to make any progress
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 11:47 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
You could still use the transit balljoints on the bottom if you got some of these made up.
I suspect the issue is not getting them to physically fit, but the suitability of the joint to take the (considerable) forces that will be imposed on
it when used on the lower wishbone. Don't forget that unlike the top wishbone, a lot of the suspension forces will be attempting to pull the
ball out of it's socket!
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 12:50 PM |
|
|
I suspect that the thread would shear first since the ball is fitted from the back. Keeping in mine the weight of these cars I think the standard
suspension is an over kill.
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
You could still use the transit balljoints on the bottom if you got some of these made up.
I suspect the issue is not getting them to physically fit, but the suitability of the joint to take the (considerable) forces that will be imposed on
it when used on the lower wishbone. Don't forget that unlike the top wishbone, a lot of the suspension forces will be attempting to pull the
ball out of it's socket!
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 04:47 PM |
|
|
Unless you are running rocker arm front suspension (Similar to the Lotus 25/33) don't even think about it. This type of joint is not designed
for spring loads never mind pull out spring loads.
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 07:13 PM |
|
|
I use the fiat 124 spider, like the tiger avon does:
 
Description
Please feel free to correct my bad English, i'm still learning. Your Dutch is awfull! :-)
|
|
|
quattromike
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 09:51 PM |
|
|
I'm using an audi bottom ball joint but having second thought about it taking the loading of the suspension coz they are from a macpherson strut.
I'm using pushrod suspention at the front so mabey I could mount the pushrod straight on to the bolt that grips the ball joint in some how? hmmm,
now you got me thinkin
Mike
 
cossie upright with audi balljoint straight fit
"At the end of the day, I think it's going to get very dark"
|
|
|
Chippy
|
| posted on 3/12/07 at 11:22 PM |
|
|
ALEX B
Picture is nearly four years old, done a few thousand miles since then, Ray
|
|
|
