Ball joint retaining clip grove not showing

[Bronco67&69]

I keep seeing videos of people putting early bronco lower ball joints in. Some show them putting a clip on the retaining clip grove without issue. Others show people grinding down the steering knuckle so that the ball joint grove sticks out enough to put the clip on, and yet others say you don't need the clip on. My bronco did not have clips on the lower balljoints and was previously used as a championship hill-climber. I am replacing the balljoints and feel uneasy about having no clip on, especially the way the bronco ball joint system is designed. I also feel uneasy about grinding off part of the steering knuckles. Lastly, I wonder if someone knows of a balljoint that would work and be long/deep enough for the clip grove to show. Any assistance is greatly appreciated.

 

[Yeller]

If the ball joint pressed in firmly I wouldn’t worry about it. 1000’s of them running around with no clips and doing just fine. Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Jeep and International all have the same dilemma, most never left the factory with them and many did not even have the groove in the ball joint.

 

[DirtDonk]

Are you just gonna be driving it on the street like most? If it was a hill climber in its past life and it didn’t suffer any problems, it certainly won’t have any problems as a street bronco.
As said, most did not have the clips right from the factory. Neither of mine did, nor any of the others I’ve worked on. Original and replacement ball joints the same.

Does the upper joint have a clip? Every one I’ve seen had a clip on one joint but not the other.

What exactly is it about the design you’re not comfortable with? The weight of the vehicle keeps the force pushing it into the hole. Only getting air puts any force trying to pull it out.

 

[Yeller]

And it can’t pull out with the axle in, there isn’t enough room. It’s not made like a later model Jeep axle where it can separate when everything is assembled

 

[Bronco67&69]

Are you just gonna be driving it on the street like most? If it was a hill climber in its past life and it didn’t suffer any problems, it certainly won’t have any problems as a street bronco.
As said, most did not have the clips right from the factory. Neither of mine did, nor any of the others I’ve worked on. Original and replacement ball joints the same.

Does the upper joint have a clip? Every one I’ve seen had a clip on one joint but not the other.

What exactly is it about the design you’re not comfortable with? The weight of the vehicle keeps the force pushing it into the hole. Only getting air puts any force trying to pull it out.

Thanks much! This one will not be used as hill-climber anymore, except for all the hills in Pennsylvania, along with the assorted pot-holes. Not comfortable with no clips, when there are groves for clips and a clip would certainly be a better design. There were no clips in my lower or upper. The new balljoints I installed have splines, so that alone made me feel a little better, as the old ones did not. To be honest, if I didn't see videos of people being able to put clips on or grinding to put clips on, I would not have been concerned.

 

[Bronco67&69]

And it can’t pull out with the axle in, there isn’t enough room. It’s not made like a later model Jeep axle where it can separate when everything is assembled

Thanks much for your help!

 

[cannunz546]

Are you just gonna be driving it on the street like most? If it was a hill climber in its past life and it didn’t suffer any problems, it certainly won’t have any problems as a street bronco.
As said, most did not have the clips right from the factory. Neither of mine did, nor any of the others I’ve worked on. Original and replacement ball joints the same.

Does the upper joint have a clip? Every one I’ve seen had a clip on one joint but not the other.

What exactly is it about the design you’re not comfortable with? The weight of the vehicle keeps the force pushing it into the hole. Only getting air puts any force trying to pull it out.

Dirt Donk, I sit and read your posts and am in awe. You are a real treasure to this site. I really appreciate all of your knowledge and also the way you present it. Thank you very much

 

[DirtDonk]

Thanks! Happy to spit it out while I can still remember it. And hopefully accurately!

 

[DirtDonk]

…along with the assorted pot-holes.

Well, potholes are pretty hard on equipment.
Like their own little hill climb in the flatlands!

Not comfortable with no clips, when there are groves for clips and a clip would certainly be a better design.

A feeling not out of line. And there were probably applications where both clips were used at one time.
As mentioned these ball joints were used in multiple applications even with Dana/Spicer axles. Probably in other applications prior to that and Dana just picked those off the shelf to use in their Dana 44.
We should look up “K8794” and “K8795” ball joints and see what else, if anything, they fit.
If there are no other applications for them, then Dana probably just specified a groove just in case.

There were no clips in my lower or upper.

Now that would be unusual in my experience. And even with all that we’ve said about their tight fit and not coming out under load, I’d feel better with one clip in there as well.
Do the clips fit in the other one in your case? Or are both grooves blocked?

The new balljoints I installed have splines, so that alone made me feel a little better, as the old ones did not. To be honest,

Sounds like the Moog brand “problem solver“ models? If so the splines are a two edged sword.
On the one hand they give extra surface area to grip, and fill in space if the old tapered hole is worn out. On the other hand they often make the use of a standard round ball joint untenable in the future.

if I didn't see videos of people being able to put clips on or grinding to put clips on, I would not have been concerned.

Whether cast or forged, these old steering knuckles can be pretty rough and I’m sure the company wanted to keep machining costs to a minimum after casting.
The difference between an exposed groove and a covered groove might have been just a slight change in the forging equipment, or the mold and the pouring process.
A lot more physical variations in parts back then than there are now.

 

[jamesroney]

This snap ring? (The one that has no useful purpose except to ensure that the ball joint taper can be separated when you are beating the piss out of it during disassembly?) I’ve changed my fair share of ball joints, and I have never seen this missing. Can someone post the casting number of the knuckle that doesn’t use it?

 

[DirtDonk]

I’ll check mine when I get a chance James. But if you already know the number for the knuckles on a 71 that’s all I’ve got.
Original ones had no snap ring and the replacement Moog brand came with a snap ring but I could not install it because half the groove was covered by casting.

Haven’t really looked closely at the ones on the 68, but they were some early drum brake models swapped on to a later 44 from a ’77.

 

[67sport]

This snap ring? (The one that has no useful purpose except to ensure that the ball joint taper can be separated when you are beating the piss out of it during disassembly?) I’ve changed my fair share of ball joints, and I have never seen this missing. Can someone post the casting number of the knuckle that doesn’t use it?

I’m into this as we speak. Axles are from a 74, installed in my ‘67
James-I don’t know casting numbers well, is this what you need? No snap rings upper or lower. I’ll get them out over the next few nights, but this is what I have.

 

[jamesroney]

I’m into this as we speak. Axles are from a 74, installed in my ‘67
James-I don’t know casting numbers well, is this what you need? No snap rings upper or lower. I’ll get them out over the next few nights, but this is what I have.

Yep, that's the number. C35823. That's a RH Dana 44 knuckle from a drum brake Bronco. All of those I've seen have the snap ring on the lower ball joint. It looks like yours has room for one.

I'm hoping to get a casting number for a D44 knuckle where the snap ring won't physically fit.

Thanks!

 

[67sport]

Yep, that's the number. C35823. That's a RH Dana 44 knuckle from a drum brake Bronco. All of those I've seen have the snap ring on the lower ball joint. It looks like yours has room for one.

I'm hoping to get a casting number for a D44 knuckle where the snap ring won't physically fit.

Thanks!

Thanks for the info. I'll get it apart and cleaned up and have a closer look, but maybe you can educate me some. I don't see any evidence of room for a snap ring on the lower, possibly the upper, but I'm not here to argue, only to learn.
Is your preferred replacement ball joint a Spicer? I bought AC Delco upper/lower joints. The lower measures about 2mm too thick between the shoulder and the snap ring groove compared to the casting, though it's not apart yet so measurements are not as accurate as I would like yet. Will I expect a different measurement from a moog or spicer P/N?
I may be victim to educating myself from the internet, but are d44 ball joints from the mid 70's not the same between the big three?
Thanks for the help.

 

[DirtDonk]

Yes, K8794 and K8795 were the numbers if I remember. In the old days a Moog or Spicer or TRW or whatever brand you chose should in theory have been exactly the same in all dimensions. Nowadays I still tend to trust-but-verify, but don't know whether or not the parts like ball joints are trustworthy. Maybe James has some experience with that.
But I do know that in the last ten years or so EVERY SINGLE SET of ball-joints I've installed, and many reports from members here, I've run into the problem of the ball-joints not responding to the normal factory adjustment procedure.
Is that due to the new ball-joints not having the same tolerances as the old USA made stuff? Or is it due to wear and tear on 50 year old knuckles? I don't know...

But one thing I've personally never run into is a difference in the location of the ring groove. At least in the ones I know of, if the joint had a ring from the factory, the new joint accepted the ring. If it did not have a ring from the factory, the new joint was the same and the included ring could not be installed.

A no-brainer for old-timers, but perhaps not for everyone anymore, is to make absolutely certain that there is no damage, debris, or gunk on top where the joint's collars press down on to the casting of the knuckle. The surfaces must be clean and the joints pressed fully into their holes and fully seated on the machined surface of the knuckle. Even just a couple of thousandths is usually enough to block the ring from being able to seat into the groove.
If that is done and there is no room for a ring, there probably was not from the factory originally.

I've personally only seen one knuckle where both joints had the ring-clips installed. All the rest were either just a single ring, or none at all.

Paul

 

[67sport]

A no-brainer for old-timers, but perhaps not for everyone anymore, is to make absolutely certain that there is no damage, debris, or gunk on top where the joint's collars press down on to the casting of the knuckle. The surfaces must be clean and the joints pressed fully into their holes and fully seated on the machined surface of the knuckle. Even just a couple of thousandths is usually enough to block the ring from being able to seat into the groove.
If that is done and there is no room for a ring, there probably was not from the factory originally.

Thanks for the info Paul. I've got just enough knowledge of machined tolerances to be dangerous!
I know the measurements taken while things aren't cleaned up aren't worth much, so once I have it apart and dressed I'll measure/compare and go from there,