Bowie69 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Id give that a miss for anything really....I used twelve to do a front an rear 3 link on a g wagen....they lasted a few hours. It was more an example of the construction of bush needed, but take your point on a bad experience with some bushes, a lot of this will be suck it and see, as you have found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discomark10 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 here is one at the rear lower link at the axle end, this is it flexed out on 14" shocks with the springs re moved....the bush, actually a ball joint isnt maxed out here....they will mis aline more than a jonny joint....cost 6 pounds gbp from island 4x4!! Have you got a part number for the ball joint? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discomark10 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Id give that a miss for anything really....I used twelve to do a front an rear 3 link on a g wagen....they lasted a few hours.what killed them so fast was as the suspension flexed the bush needs to rotate far more than it would on a standard car, and as the center sleeve is bonded, and then in turn clamped to the bracket its bolted to it gets ripped free very quick with 14" shocks front and rear....once the center sleeve is no longer bonded the bushes are toast! MKII was to use poloy bushes....the center sleeve is free to rotate...but even with nearly 9" of separtion between top and bottom links there just too soft as theres to much 'meat' in them alowing the axles tramp. Mk III is these that sort of movement do you get with the mkIII ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash.Witty Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I have just looked them up as this has been quite an interesting thread, as I also have plans on doing a 3 link setup on my Landy. The bush P/N is: RBK500220 or RBK000042 Both look pretty similar though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I think the differences are that one has a lager through bolt than the other, I cannot remember whether the bush od's are the same though. I used one of these on the chassis end of my lower link on my gwagon, it was a genuine one, and seemd to cope fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I have just looked them up as this has been quite an interesting thread, as I also have plans on doing a 3 link setup on my Landy.The bush P/N is: RBK500220 or RBK000042 Both look pretty similar though. As far as i know RBK500220 and RBK000042 are the same thing. BUT the part number on the bags mine came in is RBK500220 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 that sort of movement do you get with the mkIII ? As much as a johnny joint...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I think the differences are that one has a lager through bolt than the other, I cannot remember whether the bush od's are the same though. I used one of these on the chassis end of my lower link on my gwagon, it was a genuine one, and seemd to cope fine. This is the upper ball joint....as there not actually bushes part no RHF000260 this takes a m14 bolt, its 52.5 wide and the OD is 45.4.....perfect for panhard rods and one links this is the lower part no RBK500220 takes a m16 bolt, is 54mm OD (not inculding the lip) and 65mm wide....perfect for suspension links Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discomark10 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 As much as a johnny joint...... looks like a bit more! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash.Witty Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 After seeing the pics of those I've been out and bought some, I got some RBK500130 or RBK000130 they measure 54mm O/D, 16mm I/D 75mm total width and 31.5 mm centre width. 3 link in progress Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted March 12, 2013 Author Share Posted March 12, 2013 what killed them so fast was as the suspension flexed the bush needs to rotate far more than it would on a standard car, and as the center sleeve is bonded, and then in turn clamped to the bracket its bolted to it gets ripped free very quickMKII was to use poloy bushes....the center sleeve is free to rotate...but even with nearly 9" of separtion between top and bottom links there just too soft as theres to much 'meat' in them alowing the axles tramp. Will MkIII have same problem as MkI?(centre tube not rotating) Will MkII Polybush be OK fot one link? MkIII uses a clip or similar at oposite side of lip? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 After seeing the pics of those I've been out and bought some, I got some RBK500130 or RBK000130 they measure 54mm O/D, 16mm I/D 75mm total width and 31.5 mm centre width. 3 link in progress Ash a rbk500130 is a freelander front bottom Ball joint, different thing alltoghether. 75 mm wide isn't a rbk500220 but the rest of your measurements are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 [img=http://www.famousfour.co.uk/images/parts/ff005666.jpg] Will MkIII have same problem as MkI?(centre tube not rotating) Will MkII Polybush be OK fot one link? MkIII uses a clip or similar at oposite side of lip? No as there a balljoint the centre is free to rotate. Yes a polybush would be fine for a one link....but in my view a ball joint is better. Yes on the back of a l322 or 5 series there is a cir clip on the other side as it will see side loads in this configuration. I machined the lip of mine and just pressed them in to a sleeve ther will only really ever see compression or tension in a link never really side loads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Offsetting the top arm will alter the torque reaction of the link setup. While that's true, and you might think it would present a problem, I'm damned if I can tell mine is offset! My link is about a foot off centre on the rear which was to avoid the fuel tank. It seems to work pretty well. Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 While that's true, and you might think it would present a problem, I'm damned if I can tell mine is offset! My link is about a foot off centre on the rear which was to avoid the fuel tank. It seems to work pretty well. Si I had paraphased my self Si, having your upper link dead central will not equally torque load each of the rear wheels equally, On the back of your jimny (or anything with a conventional rotating prop) the further the top link is offset to the N/S of the axle the more equally you will be able to apply the torque if you have make that top braket adjusable you should be able to tune the torque dead evenly. A symetrical link system will never give this level of adjustability, as you have to control the torque differently on each side of the axle due to the prop trying to unload one wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash.Witty Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Sorry, wrote the part number down wrong, the bushes/knuckles part number of the ones I got were RHF500130. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Sorry, wrote the part number down wrong, the bushes/knuckles part number of the ones I got were RHF500130. Is that a RR sport balljoint? Can you post a picture of them? Who did you get them from and what cost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash.Witty Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Yes I think they are sport upper knuckle bushes, they are at my workshop so will be unable to get pics till tomorrow but look exactly the same as your RBK500220 knuckle but has 5mm extra spacing on each side. Will check as well that they have a 16mm through hole not 14mm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick the digger! Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 From what I can see from google images they don't have the lip like on the 500220, looking forward to pictures to clarify. Also the 500220 has a 16mm bolt hole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted March 13, 2013 Author Share Posted March 13, 2013 This is the upper ball joint....as there not actually bushespart no RHF000260 this takes a m14 bolt, its 52.5 wide and the OD is 45.4.....perfect for panhard rods and one links this is the lower part no RBK500220 takes a m16 bolt, is 54mm OD (not inculding the lip) and 65mm wide....perfect for suspension links Why not use RBK500220 for one links and panhards? It can be considered as a HD version of RHF000260... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash.Witty Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I have just had a look at the knuckle bush, it's a 16mm through hole, doesn't have the lip on so won't need machining. I currently can't upload pics as I'm on my phone but they are exactly the same as the pictures on Google. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discomark10 Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I wonder how hard it would be to push in the ball joint bush, and will the receiving arm need slimming to allow movement of the joint? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonr Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 this is the lowerpart no RBK500220 takes a m16 bolt, is 54mm OD (not inculding the lip) and 65mm wide....perfect for suspension links I've just bought a pair of these to 'play with'. I bought Genuine, which were about £25 each - but have measured the max offset at +/- 18.94 degrees compared to a Jonny Joint at +/-15 deg. Granted, you could probably get a bit more out of a Jonny joint as the PU Bush starts to compress, but I doubt it would give an extra 4 degrees! The joint and seals are beautifully made and even the genuine ones look good value. I cannot confirm if it's true, but someone I know reckons that the patterned ones max out at +/- 16 deg - so probably worth the extra for the movement if true - and you'll likely get better seals to boot. They are just made for something a lot cooler than an L322! Si Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtydiesel Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I used one of those Si on the chassis end of the front lower link of my gwagon. In 18 months hard use it developed no wear unlike the chassis ends of the upper link which were ballistic Fab 3" joints. I just made a 16mm thick steel bush to house it so I could still use the snap ring There is another smaller joint used in the back suspension of a lot of BMW models it is 52mm diameter and 60mm thick in the center. Again though these only have the very narrow mounting surface. I have over come this by making these to house them. They are for the panhard rod for the jeep. They allow full movement of the joint and give me 40mm to weld to These are the bushes, http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-REAR-ROSE-JOINT-BUSH-E38-E39-E60-E61-E64-E65-E66-/190808439546?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item2c6d11bafa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landroversforever Posted March 22, 2013 Share Posted March 22, 2013 I've just bought a pair of these to 'play with'. I bought Genuine, which were about £25 each - but have measured the max offset at +/- 18.94 degrees compared to a Jonny Joint at +/-15 deg. Granted, you could probably get a bit more out of a Jonny joint as the PU Bush starts to compress, but I doubt it would give an extra 4 degrees!The joint and seals are beautifully made and even the genuine ones look good value. I cannot confirm if it's true, but someone I know reckons that the patterned ones max out at +/- 16 deg - so probably worth the extra for the movement if true - and you'll likely get better seals to boot. They are just made for something a lot cooler than an L322! Si Sorry if I missed it in the thread, are these some kind of spherical bearing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.