Front top ball joint information

[greymrj]

A bit more info to add! The front top ball joint is a SAAB part, fitted to the SAAB 90 (84-87), SAAB 99 (69-86), and SAAB 900 (from 78 up to 93). The later SAAB 900 will not fit. The correct part number is Quentin Hazell QSJ1004S as added on the alternative parts list. Alternatives are Lockheed TC125 and First Line FBJ5138. I just purchased a pair at £10.79 each. Although these parts are still available at the moment they are an unusual part not used on any other vehicle and apparently they are unlikely to be remanufactured. We have been through the parts lists for the above suppliers, both for cars and light commercials, and we can find nothing remotely similar so there will be an engineering problem to faces when supplies are exhausted.
For information, the link below is to a photo of the assembly. The hub carrier appears to be standard Sierra. Instead of the Macpherson strut which normally fits into the top of the Sierra unit, there is a small special TVR part (the domed bit marked B on my photo) which has the tapered hole for the SAAB ball joint (marked A on my photo). (17.5mm core). The two bolts mount the ball joint into the top wishbone, which has slotted holes for these bolts to provide some camber adjustment.
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...

[greymrj]

A good bit more info to add if I may. I can now see where you were coming from Chris.
The new ball joint fits perfectly into the top wishbone BUT; the top wishbone is slotted to provide some camber adjustment. You can get the new joint in but it wont slide in anything like as far and the camber adjustment is very much restricted. I could only get about 1/5th of the adjustment range. The problem is that the fixing part of the joint is the same size but the part of the casting that holds the ball is wider and doesn't taper in as fast and has a bit of a 'shoulder' on the casting.
Pictures 1 and 2 hopefully show the difference in the two joints.
Pictures 3 and 4 show how far I was able to slide in the old joint and the new; quite a difference.
I decided to file a radius on the inside edge of the mounting on the wishbone, this doesn't effect the strength of the wishbone but does allow the joint to slide in considerably further.
Picture 5 shows the filed mounting and 6 how far I could now slide the joint in. Better but not as far as the original.
I then realised that the outside edge of the casting on the joint was quite rough and that I could smooth out the shoulder quite easily which would allow the joint to slide further in.
Picture 6 shows the filed joint and 7 shows that it will now go in about as far as the original.
Bit of a fuss but it now fits really well and I've got the adjustment back.

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/1...

Edited by greymrj on Saturday 8th March 21:57

Edited by greymrj on Saturday 8th March 21:59

Edited by greymrj on Saturday 8th March 22:02

[greymrj]

So thats how it is done! Wondered how some members did it. Thanks Chris.

[greymrj]

Tried it, didn't get it right, got a headache now! Talk me through it again some time Chris and I will try to do it next time I post a picture. Must be my age.

[greymrj]

Thanks for that. Credit where credit is due, I will leave it as it is and learn for next time. Shame about the big pics though, show all the blemishes in the paint!

[greymrj]

I had no idea that was possible, and it is very useful. Seriously Chris, why not do a posting specifically on how to use photobucket? I'm clearly not the only one who would benefit from it and if it means more photos get attached then everyone should benefit. I know photobucket isnt the only option but it does look like the most popular one amongst forum members. Perhaps such a posting should be stuck at the top of the S Series forum permanently?

[greymrj]

Hi Sean, as shown on your picture the camber is set for the maximum amount of positive camber, i.e. the bolts are at the outer end of the slot. How far will it slide in on those slots to enable you to adjust the camber towards negative camber? Does anybody out there know where on the slot is the best 'starting point' for camber setting? As the S has a race derived chassis with unequal wishbones then the camber angle should be of some importance. Mine were set at about 30% of the way from max positive to max negative. Anybody know what the optimum road set up is?

[greymrj]

Had a word with my friendly motor factor and he got me the same joint but from different manufacturers. All is now clear! Because, for the SAAB for which these were originally made, the ball joint doesn't slide in then it doesnt matter to SAAB what form the casting takes at the 'pin' end. But is DOES atter to us. 3 joints were all different. What was striking though was that the Quinton Hazell part had the least metal at the pin end and fits easily, whereas the others would need different amounts of filing.
So the moral of the story is; QSJ1004S is the correct part number BUT you need to specify that you want the one made by Quinton Hazell. These pictures compare the QH part, the larger casting on an alternative, and the original.

IMG]http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa102/greymrj/100_4258.jpg[/IMG]


I'll ask Steve to do a link to this thread from the alternative parts list.

[greymrj]

OK, I'm still learning, has the picture appeared correctly this time?

[greymrj]

Hi Paul, thanks for that. I did see something interesting in your picture, may mean there is a slight difference on the late cars; your pic of your original ball joint shows what appears to be steel strip spacers either side of the ball joint, and the pic of the new ball joint shows space either side. If that is correct then it is likely that most if not all the 'aftermarket' ball joints would work on a later car because there is greater clearance. On the earlier cars the ball joint is a tight fit and getting the correct casting shape on the new ball joint would be more critical.

[greymrj]

Hi Tony, so it does look as if the later cars do have a slightly wider housing for the top ball joint so they wont face quite the same fitting problem as the owners of older cars.
Ken, I can confirm what Tony says that the special TVR part (B on my pic) is removable once the big bolt is out but was very difficult on mine. There is no reason to remove it under a normal rebuild, unless it has become damaged somehow. I am not proposing to take the one adrift on the other side of mine. It is a special TVR part, no idea if it is obtainable.

[greymrj]

Hi Ken, I suspect they would be quite expensive to make as I think they will have been heat treated as well as requiring a precise taper. I tend to agree with Peter, unless the item gets damaged (which is pretty unlikely I would have thought) I would have expected to leave it in and replace the bearings (Sierra)in the existing hub, or transfer the item to your new hubs.

[greymrj]

Just to let you know that there is now a link to this thread from the Alternative Parts List. Thanks Steve.

[greymrj]

Just to add slightly to what greenV8S said about removing the joint; it isn't easy to get the joint out. You will need a 19mm deep socket to get at the nut.
Thanks guys, I think that about 'bottoms' this subject and it is all linked to the parts list now so anybody who hasn't tackled the job yet should get all the info they need.

[greymrj]

A little more info to add. We now know that the genuine QH part is the preferred option. Two members have now contacted me, having had difficulty sourcing the genuine part via their local parts suppliers. I fixed up with my factor to supply that member direct. I have today spoken again to my factor friend, Steve Driver (Car and Commercial Components Blackburn), about this issue in general, he then spoke to QH direct. The position is that there are 342 original QH QSJ1004S joints shown on stock, and they are listed as to be discontinued when stocks are exhausted. I understand that these joints are also used in Chimeras as well as the original SAABs so that really isnt very many.
QH have offered to supply Steve with as many of these as he needs should TVR owners want to buy direct. The current cost is £11.22 (9.55 plus vat) plus postage at cost and a minimal packing charge. Steve can be contacted on 01254 670121 (or email [e-mail] and mark for the attention of Steve Driver).
Finally, a personal note, Steve has been enormously helpful to me in trying to find solutions to TVR parts problems, and is likely to continue to be (I have servo and brake parts on loan from him at the moment!). I, in turn, would be grateful for any support he then got from TVR owners.

Edited by greymrj on Saturday 29th March 09:55

[greymrj]

Hi Chris, thanks for that, I must say that surprises me. The three QH joints I have seen, supplied in genuine modern (blue/white with red band) QH packaging were all identical and correct. Steve is aware of exactly what we need (and has seen an alternative that we do not want!) but I will make him aware of the problem you had. QH supply him daily so he will just get stock as and when any member asks for one.

[greymrj]

Hi Norman, not sure if I will be able to get him in the morning but I will try and will get back to you.

[greymrj]

Hi Norman, my mistake, should be btconnect.com not btinternet.com. I've edited my earlier posting. Many thanks for pointing that out.

[greymrj]

A little bit more info:
1. If you have a later car (certainly true for the S3 cars owned by jimed and darbyp) the top wishbone has a different housing for the ball joint. It is a different shape, wider, and has shims either side of the balljoint. I doubt if there is any problem fitting any of the options. I do not know when TVR changed to this housing, perhaps they were also finding problems with ball joint fit.
2. Amazingly, the balljoint housings on either side of my car are NOT dimensionally identical! The QH joint fitted easily in one side but in the other I still had to file out the end of the housing slightly. I also found that 2 ball joints were over 1mm different in casting width at the ball. Looks like the QH joint is the best alternative BUT you may still need to file a little if you are unlucky.