Ball joints

MartinClan · #1 24th September 2008, 12:34

I have purchased new ball joints to go with the Marlin "uprated" wishbones. I think I will take the opportunity to take one of the "old" ones to bits and see just how well it fits in the BMW upright. Its difficult to see with the rubber shield in place. The rubber shield certainly seems to be squashed - it will be interesting to see if there is any damage to the ball joint itself.

My new ball joints, bought from a local motor factor, are Quinten Hazel (Metro front upper ball joint) and are identical to those supplied to me by Marlin in case anyone is still in any doubt of their provenance.

Cheers

Robin

MartinClan · #2 24th September 2008, 20:38

Well I removed the rubber cover from one of the "old" ball joints. It looked fine underneath and its robust design means it would have to have some serious abuse to damage it anyway.

I then refitted it to the BMW upright. The tapered bit disappears further up the BMW upright than I am sure BL intended but not far enough up to do any damage to the ball joint itself which operates fine.

Two conclusions I have reached.

1. The rubber cover certainly gets squashed more than I guess was intended in its original application and could lead to premature failure (but hey - who does zillions of miles in their Sportster anyway)

2. I suspect the tapers are not quite the same but without the correct equipment I can't be sure and, as long as it is secure, does it really matter?

I will post up some pictures (honest)

My personal conclusion is the ball joint should be fine as long as you use a decent quality one and keep an eye on the cover to make sure it doesn't split (Mr MOT man will do that anyway)

Robin

peterux · #3 24th September 2008, 22:45

I crushed the second set of balljoints that i fitted because the tapers were too narrow and that failed the MOT.(see my previous post called "SVA ready?" in June 2008)
The original BMW ball joints have tapers that are about 1mm larger diameter, so the use of metro balljoints is a bit of a compromise.

My third set I fitted, had one narrow and one not so narrow tapers. (Bought from the same supplier and the same packaging but clearly different manufacturing sources)
I have the narrow tapered one fitted with a 0.5mm copper shim and the other one fitted as normal. The copper shim stops the taper going in to far and damaging the balljoint collar. Both seem to be fine and I check their tightness regularly.

If anybody wants any samples, I seem to have quite a collection in my garage!

MartinClan · #4 25th September 2008, 07:28

Here is a picture of the Quinten Hazel one (as from Marlin) without its rubber cover. It fits fine as you can see although there isn't a lot of room for the cover.

All the Quinten Hazel ones I have had (first from Marlin and then from local supplier) are identical and seem to be well made.

Robin

MartinClan · #5 4th October 2008, 19:05

Well - the plot thickens...

I just stripped the nearside in order to fit the new wishbone. This seems to have suffered the same problem that Peter's car had with damage to the balljoint as the Metro taper has pulled too far up into the BMW upright. I wonder if there are some marginal differences in the nearside and offside uprights? The balljoints seem to be the same design both sides (Both from Marlin)

Peter - which side was it that you had problems with?

Robin

peterux · #6 4th October 2008, 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinClan

Well - the plot thickens...

I just stripped the nearside in order to fit the new wishbone. This seems to have suffered the same problem that Peter's car had with damage to the balljoint as the Metro taper has pulled too far up into the BMW upright. I wonder if there are some marginal differences in the nearside and offside uprights? The balljoints seem to be the same design both sides (Both from Marlin)

Peter - which side was it that you had problems with?

Robin

Interesting?
I had the same problem both sides and definately have two ball joints currently with different thickness tapers. I am currently running with one fitted with a conical copper shim and one without.

My theory is
1) the metro ball joint tapers are, by design, about 1mm narrower than the BMW. This is fact as I have measured a BMW balljoint and you have confirmed your metro ball joints locate higher than intended.
2) there is a fair degree of tolerence in the manufacture of these metro joints +/- 0.25mm
3) because the taper is a bit narrow for the tappered hole it is easy to overtighten the nut and pull the taper through the hole in the upright.

When I fitted my new wishones I was in a hurry to get them finished before my MOT so was a bit over enthusiastic tightening them up with the breaker bar I used to undo the old ones! Both sides were equally damaged which thankfully was caught by the MOT man.
I have been very careful to not overtighten the current ones.

Not very satisfactory.
BMW ball joints would be best but that would need special wishbones and have them pressed in. Either that or find some 'oversize' metro ball joints.
I tried buying some of the original mk 1 metro joints but they were even smaller!

Your thoughts?

MartinClan · #7 5th October 2008, 09:19

I think the solution is to use the Metro ball joints short term, but I would certainly be interested in making - or having made - my own design of wishbone that would accept the bmw balljoint. Would anyone else be interested?

Robin

MartinClan · #8 7th October 2008, 07:59

I did a comparison of the ball joints last night prior to refitting them. I am glad I did. The original ones supplied by Marlin are very different to the new ones that I purchased. (They are supposed to be the same - Metro - part) I will post a picture later but briefly for the Marlin ones:

The taper is fatter at the top with a distinct shoulder before the thread.
They are shorter
The thread is different (in fact it seems to be a non-standard thread at 12x1.5 - a pain if you mislay the nuts)

The important difference is that the Marlin supplied ones fit (just) whereas the new ones I bought are useless. With the nut screwed as far down the thread as it will go the taper is still loose in the hole in the upright. Difficult to notice this normally with the wishbone attached but I trial fitted the balljoints first before I fitted them to the wishbones - then it's obvious.

For anyone just starting their build I would suggest they check this carefully.

Kind regards

Robin

peterux · #9 7th October 2008, 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinClan

I did a comparison of the ball joints last night prior to refitting them. I am glad I did. The original ones supplied by Marlin are very different to the new ones that I purchased. (They are supposed to be the same - Metro - part) I will post a picture later but briefly for the Marlin ones:

The taper is fatter at the top with a distinct shoulder before the thread.
They are shorter
The thread is different (in fact it seems to be a non-standard thread at 12x1.5 - a pain if you mislay the nuts)

The important difference is that the Marlin supplied ones fit (just) whereas the new ones I bought are useless. With the nut screwed as far down the thread as it will go the taper is still loose in the hole in the upright. Difficult to notice this normally with the wishbone attached but I trial fitted the balljoints first before I fitted them to the wishbones - then it's obvious.

For anyone just starting their build I would suggest they check this carefully.

Kind regards

Robin

Well that is interesting.The one on the right actaully looks more like the bmw ball joint taper.

Have you been able to measure the diameter of the taper?

I wonder if Marlin's are specailly made or just another type??

Were both your original ball joints from Marlin the same?

peterux · #10 7th October 2008, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by MartinClan

I did a comparison of the ball joints last night prior to refitting them. I am glad I did. The original ones supplied by Marlin are very different to the new ones that I purchased. (They are supposed to be the same - Metro - part) I will post a picture later but briefly for the Marlin ones:

The taper is fatter at the top with a distinct shoulder before the thread.
They are shorter
The thread is different (in fact it seems to be a non-standard thread at 12x1.5 - a pain if you mislay the nuts)

The important difference is that the Marlin supplied ones fit (just) whereas the new ones I bought are useless. With the nut screwed as far down the thread as it will go the taper is still loose in the hole in the upright. Difficult to notice this normally with the wishbone attached but I trial fitted the balljoints first before I fitted them to the wishbones - then it's obvious.

For anyone just starting their build I would suggest they check this carefully.

Kind regards

Robin

just found a picture of one of the originally supplied ball joint.

Not sure if that helps any?

MartinClan · #11 8th October 2008, 07:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterux

Have you been able to measure the diameter of the taper?

Not yet - but I will before I put it all back together.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterux

I wonder if Marlin's are specially made or just another type??

I think they are all Metro - just two different designs that both work for the Metro - but not the Marlin

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterux

Were both your original ball joints from Marlin the same?

Yes...

Interestingly - the guy I bought the Fiesta bushes from on Ebay also sells Metro ball joints. The picture he shows looks like the good design. I think I may try to contact him. I think it's going to be worth having a few spares if I can get the good version.

BR

Robin

MartinClan · #12 8th October 2008, 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterux

Have you been able to measure the diameter of the taper?

14mm at the top
16mm at the bottom

Usable length about 16mm

All for the original ball joint from Marlin

Bruce · #13 8th October 2008, 19:13

The balljoint you want is from a Metro Turbo
I bought mine from my local motor factor and was told that the turbo version has the bigger taper

peterux · #14 8th October 2008, 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce

The balljoint you want is from a Metro Turbo
I bought mine from my local motor factor and was told that the turbo version has the bigger taper

Thanks, Bruce.

Do you have a part number?

thanks

Peter

MartinClan · #15 9th October 2008, 08:14

Not sure about Metro Turbo but I have just discovered QH list two different ball joints.

QSJ1059 - up to September 1984
QSJ1060 - September 1984 onwards

Could this be the problem?

I quick check in my notebook reveals that the ones Marlin originally supplied are QSJ1060. I will check what the part number of the new ones I bought (that don't fit) when I get home tonight.

Robin

peterux · #16 9th October 2008, 21:36

I bought an LSJ1059S by Lancer Products off eBay.
Its taper measures 13.25 - 14.45 so the narrowest metro ball joint I have seen. Interestingly its stamped BELL RN12-97 on its base and the two ball joints that I accidently crushed is stamped BELL RN-1-2000 so almost certainly the same manufacturer.

The third set of ball joints that I bought and are currently fitted to my car were from my local motor factor. The are First Line and are FBJ5151.
http://www.firstline.co.uk/op3/makes.php

Now one of these has the larger taper and fits fine whilst the second one is more like my second pair with narrow tapers.

There are in fact two styles (Metro 1980-84 and 84-90).
The later type are also used on the MGF.
Now I'm beginning to think that they are just frequently mixed up by suppliers as to the 'naked eye' they look identical. So even if you buy the right part number you get the wrong size.

I believe the original Unipart part numbers are GSJ268(QSJ1059S) and GSJ269(QSJ1060S).

Anybody know a suppplier for original Unipart parts?

MartinClan · #17 10th October 2008, 07:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterux

There are in fact two styles (Metro 1980-84 and 84-90).
The later type are also used on the MGF.
Now I'm beginning to think that they are just frequently mixed up by suppliers as to the 'naked eye' they look identical. So even if you buy the right part number you get the wrong size.

Yep - I agree. I checked the ones that I bought from my motor factor (that don't fit) and they are QSJ1059 (80 - 84) The ones that fit (supplied by Marlin) are QS1060 (84 onwards)

So - at least I think we now know what the problem is. Just need to find a supplier that recognizes the difference!

Robin

peterux · #18 15th October 2008, 20:53

My research into different types of balljoints available continues!

The balljoint on the left was an eBay purchase and is stamped BELL RN-1-2000. This is one of the pair that I damaged and failed my MOT.
The one on the right is a genuine QH QSJ1060 S. Note that the retaining nut threads are different.
The diameter of the taper at the top is identical. The diameter of the taper of the QH balljoint is 0.2mm larger at the base. Not much, but possibly significant to how far the balljoint will travel up the BMW struts tappered hole.

Finally, it is not the same construction as the originally supplied balljoint by Marlin to me but does look very much like the one supplied to Robin.

Patrick · #19 16th October 2008, 19:36

I must have been lucky with the ones I bought on eBay and got the right size!

peterux · #20 25th October 2008, 21:47

I had not noticed that i had this picture from earlier this year when I was changing my ball joints. You can see what happens when the ball joint taper is too small. I think the damage occurs when you have joints like this and you let the suspension drop to full droop. I think normal road use and only jacking up under the wishbones will prevent any problems.