When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I went to install these last night but it seems that the stock (GM OE) ball joints are sized at 2" (maybe more exact is 2.080" ?)and the UMI A-arms have an ID that I measured at 2.1". Needless to say the Howe 22429 ball joints did not stay in as soon as you tried to compress the spring by putting the jack under spring pocket of the A-arm.
Scrounging through Howe's online catalog it looks like a 22437 base or "ball joint -less stud" with a 2243810 would get me the 2.090 OD with a similar overall height of 4.15.
I came across a thread or two where members replaced the stock UMI ball joint with an extended ball joint
(https://www.thirdgen.org/forums/engi...ml#post5460399) but I can't find any posted part number for what they used. Anybody have experience with this?
I pm'd you.
The arms use standard ball joints, same ones as stock. I used extended ones from proforged or power forged. Fit fine, used a 10ton shop press to install.
Thanks 86TA, it looks like the company name is ProForged, their online site isn't too helpful for specifics but I'll keep looking.
I'm going to stop by autozone on my way home tonight and measure one of the OD of one of their ball joints, remeasure the ball joint that came out of the UMI A-arm and the opening in the A-arm and report back.
I asked GMan 3MT his experience with the Howe ball joint (22429) and the factory A-arms and he had no issues, they fit fine and had to be pressed it. I think I'll end up calling UMI and Howe on Monday and get the official measurements of what these parts are supposed to be to rule out me getting a mislabeled part from Howe or the 2nd generation UMI A-arms using a different than stock ball joint.
I've had both generations of UMI a arms, used the same tall joints in both. Sounds like the set you got from Howe are the problem as I see no reason why UMI would suddenly change the ball joint size.
I've had both generations of UMI a arms, used the same tall joints in both. Sounds like the set you got from Howe are the problem as I see no reason why UMI would suddenly change the ball joint size.
Thanks, that helps. I was also just about to post that I measured everything out again and am leaning towards that.
Stock Ball joint from O'Reilly measured 2.105"
Ball joint that came on UMI A-arms measured 2.103-2.105"
The UMI A-arm ball joint opening was harder measure. I used a telescoping gauge on three places and got 2.105" and on my caliper I got 2.097"
The Howe Ball joints measured 2.090"
So it looks like I might have received a wrong part from Howe because again, Gman 3MT said he had these (22429) installed with no issues.
The other ball joint that I have read that members recommend is the QA1 1210-209P https://www.daymotorsports.com/shop-...l-joints-10504
However this has a stated press in measurement of 2.092" which is nearly identical to the Howe ball joint that I currently have that is not big enough. So I'll have to call QA1 Monday.
I don't see how multiple members have used these ball joints as neither seem to measure large enough. QA1 even labels them as being for 70-02 Camaro.
EDIT: Members have also recommended this ball joint by Summit, part number SUM-77-1130003: https://www.summitracing.com/parts/s...0003/overview/
After calling into Summit I found it uses the Moog K6145 cup which is also, you guessed it, 2.090"
However(!) part number K6145T is the oversized version so it may be possible to get the summit ball joint in the wider base. Calls to Moog and Summit will be placed on Monday also...
Starting to make sense of this. It looks like the ball joints that I need for the UMI A-arms are usually referred to as "oversized"or Moogs branding of their "problem solver" line. The stamped steel A-arms can become ovaled or wallowed and require a slightly larger fit. So it looks like a vehicle with GM Factory A-arms can use the 2.090 ball joints if the opening is in good condition. However the UMI A-arms are a round steel cup that is measured out for the oversized 2.105 ball joints. It would be possible to have the Ball joint press fit part of the A-arm bored out and weld a sleeve in and then bore that slightly. A friend owns a small machine shop but it would be a lot of work. Still hoping to find an extended ball joint off the shelf or at least that I can assemble.
But 86TA said he used ProForged joints so I will have to keep looking for that part number.
EDIT: ProForged online site is worthless, even if I had the part number it wouldn't give me any specifics like dimensions.
Interesting, Tibo;
I used the above mentioned QA1's. Chose them over Howe as they can be rebuilt/refurbished on car. I had an alignment shop press them in for me - they absolutely had to be pressed in. I have Spohn adj a-arms. I've encountered no problems.
The difference between 2.092 (QA1) and 2.103/5 is hard to compare as different metals from stock a-arms to aftermarket; and, different metals in ***** from stock to aftermarket. As mentioned, some deformity over time can happen in the a-arm openings and the ***** can expand at different rates, too. But I'm no engineer.
i remembered this question from earlier this year as i use a lot of UMI parts and was thinking of this same mod, i didn't do it yet, but in the thread below ramey from umi gave a response on this subject
i remembered this question from earlier this year as i use a lot of UMI parts and was thinking of this same mod, i didn't do it yet, but in the thread below ramey from umi gave a response on this subject
That's helpful though I wish he would have replied with the part number for standard and extended ball joints in addition to addressing if they are considered "oversized" ball joints. I'll have to call Proforged on Monday still because their website contains no dimensional information. I'm not going to pull the trigger on another ball joint unless I know it's OD at the interference. After talking with my friend it might be the best option (but probably the most expensive) to return the set of Howe ball joints I have now and exchange them for Howe 22491 (ball joint -less stud) and use stud 224310. This would probably set me back another $60-70. The OD of these is 2.185" so I could turn them down to have a perfect interference fit.
Helpful. Those are ProForged part number 10110048 and stated as tall while the OE length has a ProForged part number of 10110049. I'll call them Monday and ask for the exact dimensions. Thanks for that information!
I'm really wanting 1/2"-1" extended ball joints so what I've been wondering is if moog has an OE ball joint, whose stud would match the dimensions of the extended ball joints but whose base is bigger, that I could just turn down a little on a lathe. Being able to walk into a parts store, buy an off the shelf ball joint and do a five minute machine operation and have extended ball joints for $60 less than the next closest thing would be awesome.
As far as I can see the 101-10048 should be the .5" taller ball joint for our cars, they list them for the RWD S10, and those call for the k6145 as well. The only descrepensy I see would the OD for pressing them in.
We can get the Proforged ball joints through O'Reilly as well, I'm the night manager at the Algonac, MI location. I'm probably calling XRF Chassis tomorrow to see if they can/have made an equivalent to the k6145t with a longer stud.
Spoke with a UMI employee on the technical assistance line and he confirmed that the ball joints they used are the ProForged standard height (101-10049) or the extended height (101-10048). Of interest was that he said that the engineers told him that the A-arms were made to be able to use a stock ball joint. I asked him how they arrived at that conclusion and he said they used a Moog ball joint when creating it, a K6145t. I had to explain to him that the Moog K6145t (2.105) ball joints are the slightly larger OD problem solver while the normal K6145 (2.090) is the normal OE dimensioned ball joint. I also suggested that UMI put the information about what ball joints they use on their website and possibly stock a few to sell. Nice guy to talk with, hope I didn't come off as rude. I'll give Moog and Howe and summit a call now.
EDIT: The plot is thickening.
I was able to contact Moog and they claim that the K6145 and K6145T are the same dimensions but he no longer had information on the 6145 as it had been out of production for a while. He continually said it's the same thing just the enhanced version. At any rate he said the current offering has an OD of 2.0975"
I also contacted Proforged and was told that the 10049 and 10048 also measure 2.0984" OD
Spoke with Howe Racing and they said that yes indeed, I could purchase a 22491 ball joint -less stud (2.185) and machine that down to what I needed. They said "that sucker has a thick wall." They suggested a 3 thousands interference fit between the OD and ID.
Still trying to reach the Summit tech line about info on their extended ball joint offering. I've been getting a busy signal all morning.
Spoke with Howe Racing and they said that yes indeed, I could purchase a 22491 ball joint -less stud (2.185) and machine that down to what I needed. They said "that sucker has a thick wall." They suggested a 3 thousands interference fit between the OD and ID.
Still trying to reach the Summit tech line about info on their extended ball joint offering. I've been getting a busy signal all morning.
I guess we talked to the same person at Proforged, I just got the same information, I think I'm going to be using my XRF balljoints until I lower mine, then I'll get the Proforged ball joints.
I finally got hold of Summit and found out that they do not have dimensional information for their Summit branded ball joint SUM-77-1130003. The guy did tell me that he believes that they are manufactured by AFCO with a normal K6145t cup and an extended stud. I'll call Afco to confirm now.
EDIT: I had been wondering if UMI made their own ball joint sleeves or just boring the Ball joint hole to a certain spec, I might call and ask tomorrow. Here is a sleeve set for a K6145: https://www.speedwaymotors.com/Steel...yle,49397.html
I would still wonder if they are using this sleeve which shows an ID of 2.09 and has powder coat on it (which should make it smaller yet) why am I repeatedly measuring >2.1"?
Helpful. Those are ProForged part number 10110048 and stated as tall while the OE length has a ProForged part number of 10110049. I'll call them Monday and ask for the exact dimensions. Thanks for that information!
I'm really wanting 1/2"-1" extended ball joints so what I've been wondering is if moog has an OE ball joint, whose stud would match the dimensions of the extended ball joints but whose base is bigger, that I could just turn down a little on a lathe. Being able to walk into a parts store, buy an off the shelf ball joint and do a five minute machine operation and have extended ball joints for $60 less than the next closest thing would be awesome.
Huh, how would you hold the BJ to do that? I don't think that stock style ones can be easily disassembled and I would imagine the cup/ball assembly would keep from getting a well-centered good grip on that end.
Otherwise, I really like the idea since getting a boot to fit the extended ones seems to be a problem and this would solve that quickly with a cheap ball joint.
Originally Posted by Tibo
Spoke with a UMI employee on the technical assistance line and he confirmed that the ball joints they used are the ProForged standard height (101-10049) or the extended height (101-10048). Of interest was that he said that the engineers told him that the A-arms were made to be able to use a stock ball joint. I asked him how they arrived at that conclusion and he said they used a Moog ball joint when creating it, a K6145t. I had to explain to him that the Moog K6145t (2.105) ball joints are the slightly larger OD problem solver while the normal K6145 (2.090) is the normal OE dimensioned ball joint. I also suggested that UMI put the information about what ball joints they use on their website and possibly stock a few to sell. Nice guy to talk with, hope I didn't come off as rude. I'll give Moog and Howe and summit a call now.
EDIT: The plot is thickening.
I was able to contact Moog and they claim that the K6145 and K6145T are the same dimensions but he no longer had information on the 6145 as it had been out of production for a while. He continually said it's the same thing just the enhanced version. At any rate he said the current offering has an OD of 2.0975"
I also contacted Proforged and was told that the 10049 and 10048 also measure 2.0984" OD
Plot thickening? That usually implies that you have more details that are starting to make sense. Everything I'm reading is that you have a 2.1xxx" hole and everyone is saying it should be 2.09xx", and if what moog is saying is correct I'm not sure how they were ever sold as "problem solver" BJs.
Your measurement with a snap gauge should be better than with calipers but you might have to go back and check again, something is not adding up. I'm debating going down this path right now with my UMI arms and I might have to go measure mine myself, but I don't want to press them apart if I can't get the right BJ for the job, especially since at some point I intend to go with lowering spindles to fix that geometry which would require me to go back to standard ball joints.
Originally Posted by Tibo
Spoke with Howe Racing and they said that yes indeed, I could purchase a 22491 ball joint -less stud (2.185) and machine that down to what I needed. They said "that sucker has a thick wall." They suggested a 3 thousands interference fit between the OD and ID.
That really confused me till I googled the part number:
To me that would be the cup or something, the stud would be the tapered part on the top...
So now you have me wondering, what ball joints did you pull out of your UMI control arms?
I ended up digging mine out first thing in the morning and taking a look at them. Every other set that I've seen have had a part number on the bottom of them, these only have an F13 label on them:
I have no idea how to identify them otherwise, they really look like a generic normal ball joint, but since some of the listings seem to show a "total height" I measured as close as I could (they are inset somewhat in the sleave making it hard to measure assembled quickly) and got roughly 3-3/4" from the bottom of the housing to the top of the stud.
I bought a set of Howe 22429 +3/4" (4.16" total height) extended ball joints and a set of the Spohn BJB-1 ball joint boots to put in my UMI A-arms in place of their UMI factory piece.
Now I'm wondering what total height actually means? Is it from the top of the stud to the bottom of the housing or just from the top of the stud to it's bottom, the bottom of the ball?
Either way looking at QA1's chart it doesn't add up. The bottom 3 are the QA-1 ball joints for our cars, the first stock height, second .100" taller and third .500" taller:
Now if whatever is in my UMI arms is ~3-3/4" total height, then that is only .1" taller than just the QA1 stud height for the standard height. If that "total height" is the whole assembly and they're made similarly to the QA-1's then they're about .6" shorter than the stock height QA1. Ok, weird but I guess it's possible that QA1's are that much bigger to account for making them rebuildable.
OK, Fine, you said your Howe 3/4" taller BJ's have a total height of 4.16" That doesn't really make sense at all, since just the stud height of the QA1 1/2" longer BJ's is 4.14", just .02" shorter than the total (whatever that is) height of the 3/4" taller Howe racing ones.
I just took one of mine and "pressed" it apart. The reason that "pressed" is in quotes is that I put it on the press, put a little pressure on it to line things up, accidentally twisted the back side of the control arm down and the ball joint fell out. I didn't have to "press" at all.
If you look at these pictures you can see that the knurling on the BJ was only contacting in 2 places, and if you look carefully at the bore in the control arm you can see that it was only digging into the powder coat on the R/L (the way the picture is oriented) of the bore, not on the top/bottom. Measured, the BJ measures 2.093", and the powdercoated bore measured 2.094" R/L (where the knurling dug into the powerdercoat) and 2.105" top/bottom WITH the powdercoat. Essentially the only thing that is holding the BJ in is the powdercoat at 2 points.
Last edited by 83 Crossfire TA; 07-24-2018 at 06:31 PM.
It's not like they even sized this for the problem solver joints as best as I can tell. WITH the powdercoating it looks like the bore was right around 2.100" before welding and got distorted when welded. With an average polyester powedercoat thickness of .003-.005", that means the bore was about 2.108", which is about .006" too big for the "problem solver" OD of 2.105 (assuming you're shooting for about a .003" interference fit.
How much does it matter? I don't know. The spring pressure should keep the ball joint pulled up tight against the shoulder, but the fact that the problem solver joints existed seems to imply that play in there could wallow it out and if that's the case you definitely need a positive press fit (around .003" would be about normal). It seems like Howe expects about that tight a press fit, and I would say that is consistent with what I've seen pressing stock assemblies apart and back together again.
Assuming you want the press fit, how do you fix it? Again, I don't know.
That sleeve is too thin to bore it out and make an insert to make the thing fit correctly.
If you used a BJ with a smooth outer shell you could probably get away with dropping it in there with some Loctite sleeve adhesive, but that will then be bonded to the powedercoat.
If you trust the powdercoat the ugly way to do it would be to use about a .010" shim, or if you clean the powdercoat off and leave a bare steel bore you could re-measure, I suspect that you'll need around .018" (if you try to make the shim go the whole way around the BJ then it would be half that thickness but I suspect that would be a bear to assemble).
Is there anyone that works at UMI on this board or does anyone know someone that you can point at my last post and this one? I'd love to hear their input on this. I can't believe that they don't know this is a problem. OTOH, they may have fixed it, mine have sat in a box for a couple of years.
I just took one of mine and "pressed" it apart. The reason that "pressed" is in quotes is that I put it on the press, put a little pressure on it to line things up, accidentally twisted the back side of the control arm down and the ball joint fell out. I didn't have to "press" at all.
If you look at these pictures you can see that the knurling on the BJ was only contacting in 2 places, and if you look carefully at the bore in the control arm you can see that it was only digging into the powder coat on the R/L (the way the picture is oriented) of the bore, not on the top/bottom. Measured, the BJ measures 2.093", and the powdercoated bore measured 2.094" R/L (where the knurling dug into the powerdercoat) and 2.105" top/bottom WITH the powdercoat. Essentially the only thing that is holding the BJ in is the powdercoat at 2 points.
Vindication! I'm not crazy or measuring wrong after all. I remeasured with three different calipers last night and got the same measurements of 2.105. I even measured the calipers with the micrometer and got the same measurements. I had the same thoughts that the powder coating is what is causing the interference fit.
You asked about the size of the Howe 4.16 measurement, that's just the length of the stud. You can put any length stud in as long as the ball is the correct size. I called Moog and they said that unfortunately for me they do not have a master catalog of ball joints by dimension for me. Someday I might just ask to see every ball joint at O'Rielly. I ordered the ProForged extended ball joints that are only 1/2". Should be here Thursday or Wednesday. If they don't have a real interference fit I'll have to call UMI and ask what they are willing to do to help me cure this. I'm not averse to machining down a Howe ball joint but when this began I didn't plan on sinking $200 on ball joints that I'd still have to machine.
I've only done one side, I wonder if the other side will press out if I simply jack the car up under the spring pocket.
FWIW, yours looks A LOT better than mine. You look to have marks in the powder coat most of the way around, where I only have them in 2, roughly 1" long patches, the rest is untouched.
Last edited by 83 Crossfire TA; 07-24-2018 at 09:17 PM.
Smooth Howe's run on the small side and fall right out of our standard arms. We have some new race arms that are specifically designed for the smaller, smooth body Howe's.
FWIW, oval track racers often retain Howe's with a tack weld or two. They're an innovative bunch.
Also, while looking at the design change history of our arms, there have been small adjustments over the years for different brands of ball joints. We have used Moog in the past as well as Afco and even the occasional QA1. As you can imagine when buying in bulk occasional stock-outs and such require different products. The reality is the general size of the arm is intended for "stock ball joints" but occasional hot rodding may be required.
Just so people know, this is the response I got from him in email, I can only assume that this is a typo and wasn't intended to be insulting:
Hi Mark.
I'm familiar with your engineering and I'll fill you in on what we do with a few facts.
Stock stamped arms are pretty forgiving.
We use Proforged 101-10049 with the serrations, problem solver style.
Our ball joint cup is 2.094+/-0.001
We then powder coat it
The problem solver style serrations, plus the size, plus the powder coat all work together to make the fit proper for the 101-10049.
Your results may vary with other brands or sizes of ball joints.
Your results will probably be great if you choose a Proforged.
2.094 +/- 0.001 LMFAO yet you and Tibo both measured +0.010" hole including the powder coat. I like how he is insinuating the PC is part of holding the BJ in the cup, lol
This cracks me up, UMI couldn't even get the undercut on their welds, now this. It's a wonder no one has died yet, lol
RBob, are you hinting at a fix or really just throwing out another data point?
As posted, a data point. I kept one of the OEM factory ball joints as I was having issues getting the proper sized joints. The first set I purchased were Moog Problem Solvers, which were .060" (almost a 1/16") larger in diameter. No way would those ever been able to be pressed in.
I purchased a non-problem saver set and those too were oversize. Turned them down in a lathe for a better fit. I've gotten to the point where I despise aftermarket car parts. Check out the idler arm thread where the Moog part is all wrong.
I'm not going to tell aftermarket a-arm manufacturers how to design and build their parts. I just avoid them. Wanna' hear about the Spohn upper strut mounts that needed to be cut and welded to fit on the car? Hint, they didn't clear the stock master cylinder in the stock factory location (among another issue with them).
As posted, a data point. I kept one of the OEM factory ball joints as I was having issues getting the proper sized joints. The first set I purchased were Moog Problem Solvers, which were .060" (almost a 1/16") larger in diameter. No way would those ever been able to be pressed in.
I was wondering... My first thought is "huh, is that enough smaller that I can turn down the inside of the cup and make a sleave to make this work?" But really, depending on how much you were willing to cut out of the pocket you'd be looking at something like a .025-.035" thick sleave which would be pretty tough to make.
I purchased a non-problem saver set and those too were oversize. Turned them down in a lathe for a better fit. I've gotten to the point where I despise aftermarket car parts. Check out the idler arm thread where the Moog part is all wrong.
I'm not going to tell aftermarket a-arm manufacturers how to design and build their parts. I just avoid them. Wanna' hear about the Spohn upper strut mounts that needed to be cut and welded to fit on the car? Hint, they didn't clear the stock master cylinder in the stock factory location (among another issue with them).
RBob.
FWIW, Sphon and PA were 2 that were already way down on my "I'm not touching their crap with a 10' pole," list for proving themselves to be clueless. I'm genuinely surprised that both haven't been sued for causing major damage to cars, and in the case of PA, I'm shocked that they haven't killed someone (I know of 2 cars that were totaled in normal driving due to catastrophic failure of their parts).
The Moog thing I sort of understand even though it's still wrong (they're trying to get as few parts to fill as many applications as possible), and for the most part these are decisions that will not be noticed by anyone besides a "tech" that doesn't give a **** about the car.
I truly don't get this **** with companies making parts for "enthusiasts." YOU ARE SELLING PARTS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MAKING THESE CARS BETTER THAN FACTORY, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE AN IMPROVEMENT. Can't you take the time to engineer them correctly? Or more likely in most of these cases, they don't even know what correct is. In this case, it looks like someone made a mistake and instead of fixing it they're just lying about it.
This is the reason why my whole rear suspension, torque arm back, including the brackets on my 9" axle are all parts that I made. In a few cases I started with someone else's part (for example I started with a Jegster adjustable TA, but made new brackets/frame/mount for both ends/just about everything). I literally couldn't find anything that didn't have some deficiencies (at least from companies I was willing to deal with), even simple stuff.
Can anyone post a summary of ball joint OD in this thread by brand and also by smooth vs serrated? I'd like to see the range.
ramey
I brought my caliper and micrometer and was planning on stopping by an auto parts store on my way home tonight. I also ordered the proforged extended ball joints that one of your employees told me fits fine, no problems. I'll measure that as well. I'll also remove the powder coating in two places to get a measurement of the actual ball joint hole ID.
I know Mark SC&C went through the same measurement thing awhile back on Chevelle ball joints. The different manufacturers had their own ideas of "stock". All in a general range but not exactly the same. Not the same as say, bearing interchange...
Can anyone post a summary of ball joint OD in this thread by brand and also by smooth vs serrated? I'd like to see the range.
ramey
Ramey,
The numbers that I posted in this thread a few links up (the one that I linked to in the email/web form that you responded to) are yours. As shipped. Out of the box. They don't have any useful markings on them just the F13. Not worn, not installed. The BJ with the serrated edge that fell out when I messed with it was the one that you guys installed, you can see that most of the powder coat in the bore is not touched. Take a look at the pictures I posted here, cup or balljoint, you can see how little of the serrations were touching.
The second control arm is still in the box wrapped in bubble wrap.
To repeat what I said above (go back in case I miss something here), the ball joint that you shipped has an OD of 2.093", the cup measures 2.094" (where there was contact) one way and 2.105" the other way WITH the powder coating.
There is no way that your cup is "2.094+/-0.001" (quoting your email). I'm guessing that if I average my measurements and assume that your powder coat is .003-.005" thick it measured 2.105-2.110" before it was welded and coated.
Even if it was 2.094" that would still be wrong since the spec for the BJ is 2.093 with a .003" interference fit which means that your cups should be 2.090" making what you shipped to me roughly .020" oversized.
Last edited by 83 Crossfire TA; 07-25-2018 at 05:28 PM.
The numbers that I posted in this thread a few links up (the one that I linked to in the email/web form that you responded to) are yours. As shipped. Out of the box. They don't have any useful markings on them just the F13. Not worn, not installed. The BJ with the serrated edge that fell out when I messed with it was the one that you guys installed, you can see that most of the powder coat in the bore is not touched. The second control arm is still in the box wrapped in bubble wrap.
To repeat what I said above (go back in case I miss something here), the ball joint that you shipped has an OD of 2.093", the cup measures 2.094" one way and 2.105" the other way WITH the powder coating.
There is no way that your cup is "2.094+/-0.001" (quoting your email). I'm guessing that if I average my measurements and assume that your powder coat is .003-.005" thick it measured 2.105-2.110" before it was welded and coated.
Even if it was 2.094" that would still be wrong since the spec for the BJ is 2.093 with a .003" interference fit which means that your cups should be 2.090" making what you shipped to me roughly .020" oversized.
Agree actually. That F13 ball joint does not look familiar to me. It’s most likely before we started using Proforged. That’s why I posted the comment about various sizes and design history through the years.
Also during manufacturing we manufacture the cups (in-house as mentioned above) to a nominal size. Of course they may pull out of round during welding - not an excuse, just how metal behaves. We don’t post-bore the housings at all.
I know Mark SC&C went through the same measurement thing awhile back on Chevelle ball joints. The different manufacturers had their own ideas of "stock". All in a general range but not exactly the same. Not the same as say, bearing interchange...
This is not a problem with someone else's parts or manufacturing tolerances, even your parts don't fit. Let's be clear, all the parts I've posted pics and information for are from your company, sent directly from your location in a box with your label on it. This is not a situation of me trying to get other parts to work with yours (yet), this is what you originally shipped to me. The ball joint that you shipped in your control arm fell out as I went to try to press it out to figure out what the deal is with using extended ball joints.
Sorry, your previous reply appeared while I was typing this
Last edited by 83 Crossfire TA; 10-27-2020 at 05:28 PM.
Agree actually. That F13 ball joint does not look familiar to me. It’s most likely before we started using Proforged. That’s why I posted the comment about various sizes and design history through the years.
Also during manufacturing we manufacture the cups (in-house as mentioned above) to a nominal size. Of course they may pull out of round during welding - not an excuse, just how metal behaves. We don’t post-bore the housings at all.
It's obviously distorted from welding, but welding would make it shrink if anything, and if the press fit was correct it would be pulled back round. I see no reason why you should have to post-bore anything if it was close to start with, but this appears to be a case where the bore was way off before you started.
The problem isn't that any of the ball joints have measured undersize, but that the cup is oversized.
Not sure what the issue is but when I took my umi a-arms to them to have my old ball joints pressed out they pressed in the new extended proforged ones without a issue. And im pretty sure I my old a-arms didn't have proforged ball joints there was no part # anyway on there bottom side.
Not sure what the issue is but when I took my umi a-arms to them to have my old ball joints pressed out they pressed in the new extended proforged ones without a issue. And im pretty sure I my old a-arms didn't have proforged ball joints there was no part # anyway on there bottom side.
To be specific, you had someone else press them in and they didn't say any problems occurred? If you looked at the picture I posted, one could press that in and say they had no problems pressing it in.
The ProForged extended ball joints came in today and they measure 2.103
With powder coat the ID of the hole is 2.105 so the ProForged joints you recommend would have no interference fit.
The parts store normal ball joints also measured the same, 2.103.
I'd like to know what UMI's solution to this is now that we know the ball joints do not or will not allow a proper interference fit. For me, spot welding a perishable suspension joint in place is not an option. The best option might be for UMI to offer a return shipping label so they then be sent back for the ball joint sleeve to be bored out and a new one of the appropriate size welded in and then the ID checked before mailing back.
The ProForged extended ball joints came in today and they measure 2.103
With powder coat the ID of the hole is 2.105 so the ProForged joints you recommend would have no interference fit.
The parts store normal ball joints also measured the same, 2.103.
I'd like to know what UMI's solution to this is now that we know the ball joints do not or will not allow a proper interference fit. For me, spot welding a perishable suspension joint in place is not an option. The best option might be for UMI to offer a return shipping label so they then be sent back for the ball joint sleeve to be bored out and a new one of the appropriate size welded in and then the ID checked before mailing back.
My Summit Racing, 1" extended BJ's just showed up:
These things are Made in the USA and BEAUTIFULLY machined. They are really doing these things a disservice by not having the correct picture up and not labeling them Made in the USA. I'm guessing a small shop somewhere also, they came in a proper box but wrapped in newspaper
the OD of the seat measures spot on spec- 2.093"- I can push them in with my hands upside down.
Why upside down? Well the shoulder that it's supposed to seat against is 2.366", the bottom wide side of the step in the cup measures 2.377" most of the way around, but there is one spot next to where the rear tube is welded onto it that is distorted down to 2.360, so I can't just push it in the pocket. Not really a big deal since that difference is less than the thickness of the powder coat, but I don't want to start removing powder coat till I know what is happening with the rest of this.
FWIW, if anyone cares the OD of the top of the housing is 1.874", so if you want to run a rubber boot with these you'll have to find one that will go over that. I measured the boot seat surface on the mystery ball joint that came in the UMI arms and that's 1.600" so I doubt any amount of grunting and swearing won't make that go.
So again, not a problem with aftermarket parts, these are spot on spec. The cups in the UMI A-Arms are just wrong.
That's what I've been saying. I'm not even sure that we have evidence of a ball joint that is out of spec, I haven't seen one. Heck, the one that came in my control arms is dead on and fell out of my A-arm.
07-21-2018, 11:17 AM
