Wandering steering, older Ford and Dodge balljoints
...
I just went through a long process regarding a surprising lack of truck chassis knowledge in many shops. My wife and I currently own two 4x4 Ford trucks, both year 2000.
The first is a 3/4 ton 2000 Ford Excursion SUV with a V-10. The problem didn't directly start with ball joints. Let me explain.
I recently felt I had to replace the engine in it, that failed at 118k miles. (A ford dealership offered the best deal that I trusted, mainly because of the 3 year unrestricted national Ford warranty.) In addition, the Ford shop foreman seemed to know a lot about Ford Triton engines and where their weak spots are. So much for the engine.
The reason that ball joints came up is that I had new tires on the truck and the technician thought I should replace ball joints since we already blew money on a new longblock and tires. I have no idea just how loose the passenger side (his concern) is, but the truck still steers like a dream. It still has the factory joints in it after about 120k. I do plan to research this come spring just to make sure I don't eventually lose a wheel. But when I pressed the shop foreman about ball joints he finally confessed they have a tire shop across the street do that "low tech" work. Raised an eyebrow.
The second truck is a 2000 Ford F-250 with the 7.3L diesel. I can't imagine that the Cummins is a whole lot heavier and I know these early brands both were considered "joint eaters" when I was shopping. When I bought the 3/4 ton F-250 at 130k miles, I had noted that the joints had already been replaced (a plus) since they had zerks, and Ford factory joints don't. However, the truck steered terrible, wandering all over the road and the new front tires were already visibly wearing on the outer edge (later found 1/32nd gone).
I should interject here, I've had some experience in the distant past where the GM factory, two alignment shops (one was a frame shop!) and a dealer couldn't align my 1976 K10 chevy so as to not wear out the tires in less than 10k. It turned out to not be rocket science. The tires wore on the inside and, in desperation, I merely hand aligned the toe-in, in, by a very careful but crude driveway method. Geez, the truck steered better immediately and tire wear was gone. That nifty '76 had about 40k on the last tire set when I sold it (at 70k), and it had a truck camper on it on occasion. The tread looked half there yet. I have no idea why the shops didn't catch this. I guess they all trusted their machines without question. One shop even offered to bend the live axle because he thought the side wear must be coming from improper camber. Glad I knew better.
So anyway, buying an F-250 with new parts that only seemed to need minor adjustment was not out of the question at all. I figured I would fix it in my driveway in about 1/2 hour. That didn't work so well in practice. Oh I adjusted the toe-in out and corrected further wear, but the truck still steered poorly. The best laid plans of mice and men... It didn't seem loose, but it steered and wandered like it. I spent several months thinking about this. I hated driving it, especially with a camper attached. What a disappointment.
A year later I decided that the reason for "loose" ill handling was that the steering was actually too tight. Although I found a Moog factory reference (mine are similar Delco) to this problem (here and here), which is related to improper ball joint installation, I still couldn't convince the shop that did the original joint replacement (nor any other) that "memory-steer" was a problem. One of the reasons is that also I found a test driver can't really feel this small drag since the power steering largely masks this, but it still has a terrible effect. The truck doesn't automatically self-track straight.
From here I will have to mention that the only reason that front wheels have a built-in adjustment called caster is because that is exactly what they are supposed to do with the little play they have left when major steering slack is taken up. In other words when the truck is floating down the road in a supposed one-finger-steered straight line, the steering actually wobbles just a tish from minor bumps and grooves, but it auto self-corrects because of caster. Caster only works if the wheels automatically can return to dead center though. If the joints are too stiff, with the least bit interuption in smooth road, the steering assumes (locks to) a myriad of tiny, semi-permanent different directions, and the operator has to watch the road like a hawk and constantly correct. And too stiff for one finger driving. Very tiring. If anyone does not realise how important caster is, try backing up quick and straight when the castering is exactly backwards. Caster is only set for ahead.
The wandering problem was finally resolved when I took the truck to an actual truck alignment shop. The shop foreman knew exactly the problem I described and how to fix it by loosening the joints up without wrecking them. Other shops offered to start from scratch with new joints and big bucks. It still cost around $300 with a new damper and pro gearbox reset (too tight, somebody had messed with it).
I will say I also had two identical front suspensions to compare and many unlucky owners do not. This worked for feel as well as measurement. So, I used a fish scale to weigh the relative steering torque values. The first measurement was a quick check on the easy Excursion which measured about a 3 pound pull directly tangent to the rim with the front wheels freely off the ground and engine off. The yet unresolved F-250 measured 15 pounds of bind under the same conditions.
After correction, the F-250 later measured about 4.5 pounds in cooler weather (45F), with a new damper. The damper should not make a lot of difference since I barely moved the steering, looking for break-loose torque more than anything. The cool weather joint drag could have still affected other drag though. One other item, the top ball joints never had a zerk (just a tiny threaded plug) in 20k miles and probably were therefore not properly lubed even during installation. The shop dealer said he had never seen any truck drag that bad before, but I suppose his shop doesn't screw up installs or lubes either. Because of possible top zerk clearance issues (half-shaft u-joints), he installed small, straight zerks and recommended I get this 90 degree Lincoln 5883 adapter tool to access lubing them:
Not one other shop offered this $10 adapter tool solution when I inquired, so I plan to take it with for service. Otherwise one shop wanted $50 to grease the truck. No thanks. I wasn't sure I could do it with my own needle adapter either, so I just kept looking.
There is one other thing that may affect differences in steering effort. Ford uses non-greasable sealed joints from the factory. I don't think it is all about being cheap. I found net references to the effect that Ford does this because they use a solid hard nylon(?) bearing cup under the ball and they do it because it reduces steering effort, a major plus. Remember, power steering can make up to reduce human effort, but automatic castering is still paramount. I did find a Ford TSB on the "sticky-steering" subject on http://www.ford-trucks.com. I think it is TSB 01-3-2 for those that can still find it after log-in, or have other TSB access. If I remember correctly, Ford did not give a torque value on their TSB, and neither local Ford dealer had a clue, thus my custom measurement experiment.
To be honest, if I do get new joints for the Excursion, they will be OEM non-greasable Ford joints. The first lasted over 100k, what the heck. The Excursion still steers slightly easier than the F-250 with the steel-on-steel ballcups and I like comfort. The Ex steers as good as my older cars did and I think the only improvement might be rack-and-pinion, definately better than the old recirculating worm gear.
I hope someone will find this info useful.
Wes
...
I just went through a long process regarding a surprising lack of truck chassis knowledge in many shops. My wife and I currently own two 4x4 Ford trucks, both year 2000.
The first is a 3/4 ton 2000 Ford Excursion SUV with a V-10. The problem didn't directly start with ball joints. Let me explain.
I recently felt I had to replace the engine in it, that failed at 118k miles. (A ford dealership offered the best deal that I trusted, mainly because of the 3 year unrestricted national Ford warranty.) In addition, the Ford shop foreman seemed to know a lot about Ford Triton engines and where their weak spots are. So much for the engine.
The reason that ball joints came up is that I had new tires on the truck and the technician thought I should replace ball joints since we already blew money on a new longblock and tires. I have no idea just how loose the passenger side (his concern) is, but the truck still steers like a dream. It still has the factory joints in it after about 120k. I do plan to research this come spring just to make sure I don't eventually lose a wheel. But when I pressed the shop foreman about ball joints he finally confessed they have a tire shop across the street do that "low tech" work. Raised an eyebrow.
The second truck is a 2000 Ford F-250 with the 7.3L diesel. I can't imagine that the Cummins is a whole lot heavier and I know these early brands both were considered "joint eaters" when I was shopping. When I bought the 3/4 ton F-250 at 130k miles, I had noted that the joints had already been replaced (a plus) since they had zerks, and Ford factory joints don't. However, the truck steered terrible, wandering all over the road and the new front tires were already visibly wearing on the outer edge (later found 1/32nd gone).
I should interject here, I've had some experience in the distant past where the GM factory, two alignment shops (one was a frame shop!) and a dealer couldn't align my 1976 K10 chevy so as to not wear out the tires in less than 10k. It turned out to not be rocket science. The tires wore on the inside and, in desperation, I merely hand aligned the toe-in, in, by a very careful but crude driveway method. Geez, the truck steered better immediately and tire wear was gone. That nifty '76 had about 40k on the last tire set when I sold it (at 70k), and it had a truck camper on it on occasion. The tread looked half there yet. I have no idea why the shops didn't catch this. I guess they all trusted their machines without question. One shop even offered to bend the live axle because he thought the side wear must be coming from improper camber. Glad I knew better.
So anyway, buying an F-250 with new parts that only seemed to need minor adjustment was not out of the question at all. I figured I would fix it in my driveway in about 1/2 hour. That didn't work so well in practice. Oh I adjusted the toe-in out and corrected further wear, but the truck still steered poorly. The best laid plans of mice and men... It didn't seem loose, but it steered and wandered like it. I spent several months thinking about this. I hated driving it, especially with a camper attached. What a disappointment.
A year later I decided that the reason for "loose" ill handling was that the steering was actually too tight. Although I found a Moog factory reference (mine are similar Delco) to this problem (here and here), which is related to improper ball joint installation, I still couldn't convince the shop that did the original joint replacement (nor any other) that "memory-steer" was a problem. One of the reasons is that also I found a test driver can't really feel this small drag since the power steering largely masks this, but it still has a terrible effect. The truck doesn't automatically self-track straight.
From here I will have to mention that the only reason that front wheels have a built-in adjustment called caster is because that is exactly what they are supposed to do with the little play they have left when major steering slack is taken up. In other words when the truck is floating down the road in a supposed one-finger-steered straight line, the steering actually wobbles just a tish from minor bumps and grooves, but it auto self-corrects because of caster. Caster only works if the wheels automatically can return to dead center though. If the joints are too stiff, with the least bit interuption in smooth road, the steering assumes (locks to) a myriad of tiny, semi-permanent different directions, and the operator has to watch the road like a hawk and constantly correct. And too stiff for one finger driving. Very tiring. If anyone does not realise how important caster is, try backing up quick and straight when the castering is exactly backwards. Caster is only set for ahead.
The wandering problem was finally resolved when I took the truck to an actual truck alignment shop. The shop foreman knew exactly the problem I described and how to fix it by loosening the joints up without wrecking them. Other shops offered to start from scratch with new joints and big bucks. It still cost around $300 with a new damper and pro gearbox reset (too tight, somebody had messed with it).
I will say I also had two identical front suspensions to compare and many unlucky owners do not. This worked for feel as well as measurement. So, I used a fish scale to weigh the relative steering torque values. The first measurement was a quick check on the easy Excursion which measured about a 3 pound pull directly tangent to the rim with the front wheels freely off the ground and engine off. The yet unresolved F-250 measured 15 pounds of bind under the same conditions.
After correction, the F-250 later measured about 4.5 pounds in cooler weather (45F), with a new damper. The damper should not make a lot of difference since I barely moved the steering, looking for break-loose torque more than anything. The cool weather joint drag could have still affected other drag though. One other item, the top ball joints never had a zerk (just a tiny threaded plug) in 20k miles and probably were therefore not properly lubed even during installation. The shop dealer said he had never seen any truck drag that bad before, but I suppose his shop doesn't screw up installs or lubes either. Because of possible top zerk clearance issues (half-shaft u-joints), he installed small, straight zerks and recommended I get this 90 degree Lincoln 5883 adapter tool to access lubing them:
Not one other shop offered this $10 adapter tool solution when I inquired, so I plan to take it with for service. Otherwise one shop wanted $50 to grease the truck. No thanks. I wasn't sure I could do it with my own needle adapter either, so I just kept looking.
There is one other thing that may affect differences in steering effort. Ford uses non-greasable sealed joints from the factory. I don't think it is all about being cheap. I found net references to the effect that Ford does this because they use a solid hard nylon(?) bearing cup under the ball and they do it because it reduces steering effort, a major plus. Remember, power steering can make up to reduce human effort, but automatic castering is still paramount. I did find a Ford TSB on the "sticky-steering" subject on http://www.ford-trucks.com. I think it is TSB 01-3-2 for those that can still find it after log-in, or have other TSB access. If I remember correctly, Ford did not give a torque value on their TSB, and neither local Ford dealer had a clue, thus my custom measurement experiment.
To be honest, if I do get new joints for the Excursion, they will be OEM non-greasable Ford joints. The first lasted over 100k, what the heck. The Excursion still steers slightly easier than the F-250 with the steel-on-steel ballcups and I like comfort. The Ex steers as good as my older cars did and I think the only improvement might be rack-and-pinion, definately better than the old recirculating worm gear.
I hope someone will find this info useful.
Wes
...
