| From | Message |
whiplash
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/06/2004
23:55:46
|
 Subject: RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
The reason WipLash doesn't have to research anything is because he's "the premere expert on Teflon and it's applications in mechanical, load bearing, equipment." He may not be able to spell the word "premiere" or apply commas correctly, but I'm sure he'll provide the names of the trade journals that acknowledge his expertise.
|
WipLash
R/T
4/07/2004
01:01:05
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
RAMDAKOTA,
It takes 2 to argue.....
I'm not arguing with you by any means, I'm calling the micro finish of the ball on the joint polished since it is very smooth and near mirror like. Technically it's not polished, YOU ARE CORRECT...YOU ARE CORRECT!....YOU ARE CORRECT!...
A slight texture is better at retaining grease than a high polish. A dimpled (golf ball) texture is one that we have had the most success with retaining grease on our vertical slides/bearings (gibbs) on our 300ton presses. I would think that the same would work on a ball joint.
I did give 2 reasons for the C/R discrepancies and here they are again for about the 3rd time.....
#1 reason the Neon rates lower than the PT is the average age difference between the drivers that own/drive the 2.
#2 reason the Neon rates lower (possibly the #1 reason) is that the Neon is at almost every rental car place in the country. Rental cars get ABUSED SEVERELY!! You rarely see a PT at any rental car places. They do have them, but they are far and few between.
I pointed out both of these facts more than once on different threads. So maybe you’re the one guilty of not reading the post people make all the way through before making comments.
I can point out discrepancies between cars like the Neon and the PT because I am an enthusiast that has done lots of RESEARCH on these 2 cars.
If you go all the way back to the beginning of this thread, all I did was ask "what are you doing to these trucks to make the ball joints fail so soon?" I've got nothing but flames from every "poor little me" cry baby that's had to replace a ball joint and they are all pushing bad publicity that is hurting DC's sales. Now, here you are...... Need I say more?
All I did was ask a simple question. If you have bothered to read all of them, you will notice that I've asked that exact same question about 5 times with slightly different wording.
I WILL ASK ONE MORE TIME THE SAME QUESTION.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO THESE TRUCKS TO MAKE THE BALL JOINTS FAIL SO SOON?
I would really like know so that maybe I can do something to my truck to help avoid this problem.
Maybe these people drive where it rains more? I don't drive in the rain. Maybe these people drive down gravel/dirt roads occasionaly. I never do that. There are several things that I don't do that they maybe doing that could cause their ball joints to fail before mine. I also waterproof my ball joint boots every time I do an oil change by spraying an excessive amount of Silicone lube around the boot. Silicone repels water better than just about anything else on the market.
Now, if people had chosen to answer my question instead of arguing, we might have gotten to talk about things like Silicone treatment to prevent water seapage between the boot and the stem. But, hell no, everyone would rather argue. I gave them what they wanted, AN ARGUMENT!!
If they didn't want to argue, they would have answered my question and we could have worked as a team towards a solution to the problem.
It takes 2 to argue.
|
Ian
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/07/2004
01:23:55
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
Wiplash...the reason people are arguing with you is because you insulted everyone by saying that it was driver error and not a defect that causes these ball joint failure, this is outright absurd and that is why people are so quick to get on your case. Trucks are meant to be driven, yes even some are intended for use in inclement weather and or dirt gravel roads, however many of us have had balljoint failure with very low mileage and only paved road use, i.e. in my case. Please tell my how driving on only paved roads and highways, with no racing, no offroad use, no towing, has cause both my front upper ball joints to go bad and be replaced under warranty at 15,000 miles? I really would like to know, actually I already do know, because of DEFECTIVE ball joints!
|
Kevin
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/07/2004
07:33:13
|  RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
What I did to cause my ball joints to fail so soon was simply fail to grease them. Let's see...I noticed that there was grease all over my upper control arms, so I thought I'd grease up the ball joints to insure that they were lubricated. But upon closer inspection I realized that there weren't any grease zerks on the ball joints. Hmmmm...I rapidly came to the conclusion that DC sold me a 2nd class product. So I am completely for the negative publicity that DC is getting for selling us vehicles that will self destruct far sooner than they should. As far as I'm concerned, $28,000 should buy a vehicle that has a decent chassis and suspension...DC obviously doesn't agree with me.
|
DSW
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/07/2004
22:20:21
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
Teflon might ge the slipperiest "solid" substance know to man and make a good material for ball joint socket bearings, but it's not slipperiest substance known to man. Greases or other lubricants are slipperier than Teflon and they provide a thin film barrier between the two mating surfaces of a ball joint.
Even though Teflon has a low coefficient it still has some degree of resistance to slide or create friction. Put 2 peices of teflon together and try to slide them against each other while pushing down on them, there is going to be "some" resistance to slide. Now coat one of these peices with a thin layer of grease or oil and repeat the procedure and they will slide easier.
I am just saying that Teflon without a lubricant in a ball joint might lead to premature failure since the teflon is acting as the lubricant and load bearing surface instead of just the load bearing surface. We all know that lubricants start to break down at some point and if the load bearing surface is also the lubricant in the ball joint then the load bearing surface will begin to break down at some point.
This might be what is happening to the Dak ball joints since the failed units I have seen and heard of have a significant amount of grey powdery dust in them which is the remains of the once healthy joint. Once the teflon fails the metal ball is going to start eating away at the casing leaving behind a lot of powdered teflon and metal.
It just seems pretty odd that DC would have ball joints failing at 10K miles when most vehicles can go 100K+ without balljoint problems. Must be something in their design, materials or a lack or proper lubrication. Either way if DC had put zerks on these things, or loaded the boot with grease there would be a way for the joint to get fresh grease.
|
WipLash
R/T
4/08/2004
00:52:33
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
That gray dust you refer to maybe graphite? They do impregnate graphite in with the teflon in some applications? Real small metal fines will also appear to be a gray powder.
My curriosity is killing me right now. I have to take one of these apart just so I can make my own decision as to why everyone is having problems with these joints.
DSW,
You said you have taken these apart. What condition was the Teflon in? Did it appear to have failed from compression (squishing out from around the ball)?
Here's another thing that makes no sense.....
Most of the ball joint failures are on the upper ball joints. The lower ball joint carries most of the load. The lower control arm is the one with the spring on it that supports the weight of the truck. In all of my past experiences, the lower ball joint failed before the upper every time. I have never replaced an upper ball joint in anything except a VW. All the upper ball joint does is keep the camber/caster set in place and acts as a pivot point for the steering knuckle. It basically keeps the wheel straight much like the strut in a FWD car does. Most of the load is being supported on the lower ball joint? Both joints appear to be near identicle in size. So why would the upper fail before the lower?
That's the one thing that makes the least amount of sense about all this. The upper joint should never fail before the lower.
|
GOD
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2004
01:41:26
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT ! KICK HIM !
|
game guy
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2004
01:42:10
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
all your ball joints are belong to us
|
DSW
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/08/2004
03:38:29
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
I haven't taken the ball joints apart, but you can see the grooves and Teflon socket bearing without disassembly. The Teflon was white, at least the top section was, I realy don't know if the bottom socket bearing was teflon or not, but if the top bearing was teflon the bottom one is probably Teflon also.
The only thing that makes sense of the uppers failing is that they are a smaller joint than the lowers, but then again they don't support as much weight. Plus the uppers and lowers are oriented in the same direction, so if gravity and time were pulling the grease out of the joint, it should be degrading both balljoints. It might be poor engineering, a lack of lubrication or a combination of both that's causing the failures.
The one joint that failed on my truck had very little grease in the boot. However, the others that were sloppy had more lubrication in the boot, they were about 1/4 or less full with areas that had never touched grease.
As far as the grey dust goes, it was metallic since it stuck to a magnet. The only thing that would cause these joints to produce a metallic powder is the ball wearing or breaking through the socket bearing and grinding on the casing, since the socket bearings are plastic/Teflon. The Teflon would wear out before the steel. Maybe DC specified a different grade or thickness for the upper ball joints lower (upper in orientation) socket bearing.
What ever the cause is, these ball joints are real poor quailty and they should have provided better lubrication. Better lubrication would have probably solved the problem as long as there wasn't something that was grossly under engineered.
|
bigl22
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/11/2004
06:56:57
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
on my 98 dakota -- i went thru 4 sets of LOWER ball joints in 78K miles-- and a 5th lower on the pasenger side only-- the UPPER ball joints failed once only- I drive very hard over rock/oil /chip roads at low speedsd for 5 hours/day-- lots of sharp turns to the left mostly -- very sharp-- the first lower set failed at less than 11K miles-- I now use a 2004 model dakota with supposedly larger., stonger ball joints--
|
aj
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/11/2004
10:24:55
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
I can say this, I traded in a 2003 sxt with 24,500 miles on it. I know the balljoin ts were gone at about 8000 miles they started popping when I made a sharp turn.
I have an 04 right now and I have the same 265/70 tires. On the 02 when I hit the railroad tracks the front tires would pull and fight ya, almost like an old truck, very loose and weak. I have noticed on this 04 that it is tight. I have really been taking note on this new truck and can say they absolutely did something between 02 and 04. The 04 more a tight ride, the 02 drove like my old 66 polara.
|
Kowalski
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/11/2004
11:37:23
|  RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
Whiplash - you may make a wrong assumption thinking there must be something people are doing to make these ball joints fail. While there seems to be a high incidence of failure, it doesn't happen to all or necessarily correlate to how they were used. For example, while you might not drive in the rain or on gravel roads, I do; not only that but also on salted snow and ice and carrying a regular duty snow plow. Yet despite this abuse, my ball joints are fine while many others are experiencing failures. So rather than blaming the drivers, you might want to consider other alternatives like poor (inconsistant) metalurgy or insufficient grease to start with. The non greasable design could well be a contributing factor.
|
macman37
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/15/2004
13:56:13
|  RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
OK, I've read a bunch on these ball joints... I
have a squeaking sound from the front end of
my babied 4x4 03 QC and want to know how I
can lube it... (or is it too late?)
It started when it was real cold out, and now
that it's getting warmer it seems to not be *as*
bad as it was.
I simply don't know how to identify the ball
joints to see if I can grease/spray silicone
on/put belt dressing (from another thread)
on...
Thanks in advance.
jim
|
DSW
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/15/2004
14:13:53
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
Macman, You can get a needle fitting for your grease gun at an auto parts store and use this to poke a small hole through the boot and get grease in there. Small hole in the boot or no grease, both are bad, but which is the worst?
The problem with adding grease this way is that it gets grease in the boot and doesn't flush the joint like the ball joints with the zerk on the bottom, but it should help somewhat.
If the ball joints are already squeeking it might be too late, have them checked.
|
macman37
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/15/2004
14:16:28
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
DSW, thanks for the info...
How can I identify where the ball joints are?
/I'm a car enthusiast but haven't ever had ball
joint problems before so don't know where to
look!
thanks again
jim
|
jeremiah2360
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
4/15/2004
18:25:59
|  RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
macman37,I had the same problem. For me it was the front sway bar bushings. Dealer replaced under warranty. Lasted two months,started to come back,then it got warmer and it went away. I`ll probably just grease them at beginning of next winter.
03 qc 4.7 auto 4x4 30k
|
peedee
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/26/2004
07:52:22
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
whew all the bashing! I am trying to find out if anyone has had trouble with the lower ball-joints. My upper and lower are being replaced today. The uppers are bad and the lowers have a slight amount of play. the truck has 26,000 '02 quad 4wd, never!!! driven roughly. So how many have had trouble with the lowers, and how many miles compared to the uppers?
|
peedee
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/26/2004
07:54:30
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
Sorry. I posted this in the wrong place. Oops!
|
Figols
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/26/2004
10:23:37
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
Wow!! This is good reading, BUT there seems to be one important thing that is being overlooked. The Durangos with balljoint problems are 4X4 models NOT 2wd models(unless that was changed since I last looked). Most of the Dakota owners that have had balljoint problems(from what I've been reading)have 4X4 models. It makes sense since there is a lot more weight in the front of the 4X4 than the 2X4. From what I can tell within this thread, "Whiplash" and a few others that are speculating that us 4X4 owners with balljoint problems basically abuse our trucks are 2X4 owners and therfore statistically will not have the upper ball joint problem.
It's not an issue of how we 4x4 owners drive our trucks. It's an issue of DC using the same size ball joint for 2x4 and 4x4 models which doesn't make sense. Every truck I've had in the past has never shared ANY parts in the front end between 2x4 and 4x4 models except for maybe brake parts. The stock Dakota/Durango balljoint seems to be sufficient for 2x4 models but are not big enough to handle the extra weight and constant loads of the 4x4 models. Also you need to take in to account the weight of the different drive trains(6, 4.7, 5.9, auto, 5 spd). The spring rate(or torsion setting) changes, but the ball joint stays the same.
Bottom line is Dodge f'ed up on this one, but in typical DC fashion they won't recall until the NHTSA gets involved.
|
Darrell
Dodge Dakota
JOIN HERE
10/27/2004
18:50:46
| RE: Ball joints failed on an 04!
IP: Logged
Message:
I have a 01 R/T with 60,000 miles on it, no ball joint problem yet. Do R/T's have differnt ball joints than other daks?
Darrell
silver 01 R/T
|
| | <<Previous Page P 4 Next Page>> |
