Upper control arm interference with spindle.

[Paul Y]

Hi All,

Back at Woody again and have come across a possible problem.

I think.

When I tighten the upper ball joint nut to the correct torque the upper control arms hits the top of the spindle as you move it through its arc. Its not much but noticed it because moving it from lock too lock it became quite stiff at the straight ahead position.

Also noticed that the hole for the split pin is above the castle nut. Have put the wheel on and, unless you knew it was there, you cant feel the resistance.

Now everything is still not torqued up, there is no weight on the suspension etc so am I being super picky or is there a problem? Thinking about it as I type this the suspension is in full droop so that could well be the issue. Mmmm...

Anyway, parts used -

McGaughy's 2 1/2" dropped spindles

Moog extended upper ball joint

Standard bottom ball joint

MOOG 6454 1-ton coil springs with 1 1/2coils cut off

My thought was to take a little off the top pad on the spindle - would need very little - or off the arm itself. Or let it self clearance....

Don't remember there being an issue before but then didn't drive far enough to notice probably.

As always look forward to hearing from those that have a suggestion.

On a positive, first time Woody has been on all four wheels (well 3 actually but lets not split hairs) in 5 years. Too say I am motivated is an understatement....

Onwards!

P.

[SkinnyG]

Are you sure it's the correct upper ball joint?

By "moving it through its arc" do you mean suspension arc, or steering arc?

[Paul Y]

Originally Posted by SkinnyG

Are you sure it's the correct upper ball joint?

By "moving it through its arc" do you mean suspension arc, or steering arc?

Steering arc Skinny. The truck is a bare chassis so jacking the suspension to cycle it through its travel just lifts the chassis up.

Having had another look I 'think' the issue is that the suspension is at full droop, not a usual state for it to be in. I will put the other side on tomorrow minus the spring and see what happens when I move through the suspension arc.

If there is still contact a quick going over with Mrs. Grinder will sort that out. Will also check th edit of the upper ball joint just in case.

I did check on McGaughy web site and it specifies "Uses original style ball joints and tie-rod ends" so pretty sure I am good to go one that side.

Thanks!

P.

[Paul Y]

Glad to report that this ended up being an easy fix.

Looked at the upper arm that I hadn’t fitted and noticed that the underside of the arm was not smooth with marks looking like somebody had tried to lever the arm down to enable the ball joint nut to be undone.

Quick go over with the flap disk to smooth it out, assembled and plenty of clearance. Same on the side I had already fitted.

As for the castle nut realised that I had used the shorter ones from the track from ends, used the right ones and it all looks good.

Phew. Thought I had made a mistake in my component choice.

Onwards!!!!!

P.

[SkinnyG]

I appreciate that you came back with the "fix" for future readers through whom Google brings them here.

Having said that....

SMOKE SHOW! SMOKE SHOW!!

[Paul Y]

Might be a while yet Skinny but, until then….

https://youtu.be/ucVmsET4BFw

P.

[SCOTI]

Contact amongst the parts is not uncommon when the suspension is in the fully extended position. Before modifying anything, check things @ the anticipated ride height.

[Paul Y]

Very true Scott.

My Sherlock Holmes deduction is that the interference was due to the judicious use of a lever of some description between the spindle and upper arm, probably to stop the ball joint turning whilst undoing the castle nut.

That probably says more about me than anything else!

Anyway, knocked the high spots down with the flap disk and all golden.

P.