Upper contol arm

[racephotoman]

I'm finally started my MkIV, and began assembling the front suspension. First, it's normal to have to slightly pound in the lower control arms, especially the two spacer washers added to pick up the slack? Second, torquing the bolts is all that is needed (no lock washers, lock tie)?

Addressing the upper control arms, and looking at the pix...I tried to flip the suspension pieces, but the ball joint A, only feed from one side, and B, if I was able to force them in, looking at the picture, the ball joint angle from the left and right unit would be different (one facing in, one facing out). Looking at the control arms with both having the same ball joint angle, it actually looks like I have 2 driver right units. I hope the above makes sense....can anybody help from the photo.

Are the two bolts mounting the upper arms also different? In my case one is case-hardered??? black color, and the other a brassy color (2 of each are included). As the instructions say, use the one without the flange nut at the rear hole of the upper control arm---despite the different colors, one has and one doesn't have the flared locking nut....thinking these are the bolts/nuts to use? I also see the brass colored bolt/nut is a 1/2"-20, while the black is a 1/2"-13. I'm also assuming the four other normal bolts/nuts go to the spindle/steering arm pieces. Using this logic I have exactly what bolts/nuts I need (no extra parts), but just a little confused if correct, why the upper control arm bolts are of different color/material and thread size.
Again, I hope this all make sense.

Walter

[QSL]

you need to flip one over and unthread the balljoint and thread it into the other side.

You are correct about the bolts. They are different and as you described.

[racephotoman]

I attached a few images of what I've asked above---I loosely put the driver's right side suspension together---if correct, the problem is if I flip the UCR to keep the solid bolt connection to the front, and mount the ball joint from the other side, the fix ball joint angle would be different. Basically, the UCA you see, I have two-thinking I should have a mirror image of the outer place, not the an identical. Even if this setup is upsidedown--please advise--I would encounter the same problem. The ball joint as shown can be hand tighten through the full thread, while trying to install the ball joint from the opposite side, it seemingly goes only a few turns and can't be turned by hand (almost feels like I'm cross-threading it-but maybe it needs to be that tight???). If via the photo the setup is correct, I also plan to reverse the pivot bolts/nuts.

I also added an image of the different bolts I've been talking about.
Thanks
Walter1191011911

[QSL]

1191211913

that side looks right. The other side should be a mirror for sure. Like i said, you need to thread the ball joint into the other side.

[CDXXVII]

Just a thought, on my LCA ( non donor like yours ) you only need one washer to take up the slack. I placed mine on the front side of the LCA rear leg. No pounding needed. My understanding is that the space is there on the front of the rear LCA leg to make room for a donor LCA. Spacer is only needed on the complete kit.

[rich grsc]

Your upper in the picture is upside down. When did FFr go back to the angled balljoint?

[CDXXVII]

I noticed the angled ball joint as well. I also just saw a post about these same control arms and frame clearance. I have Mk4 7421 and my control arms do not have the angles balljoints. FFR must have changed for some reason or another.


Your upper in the picture is upside down. When did FFr go back to the angled balljoint?

[Jeff Kleiner]

...Like i said, you need to thread the ball joint into the other side.

No can do Mike; that will angle the ball joints in opposite directions with one pointing inward and the other outward.


When did FFr go back to the angled balljoint?

I asked that same question recently when hrosenthal was having the frame interferance problems Luis mentioned. After using the angled mount on Mk2s and early Mk3s they went to the straight through ball joint plate and continued through to recent Mk4s. Even the earliest versions of that configuration were unidirectional but later were revised so that they could be flipped either way when installing the ball joint. Obviously they have changed vendorsand/or design again (in addition to the return of the angled ball joint the cross shaft is different and this is what posed issues for the other new builder) but I'm afraid that they have not realized that due to the angle the arms are not interchangable side to side. If the instruction to mount them with the fixed end forward is to remain there will have to be a left arm and a right arm. Walter, give FFR a call and speak with Jesper, Jason or Brian.

As for your other question; for clearance reasons when installing the UCA in the vertical mounts you'll use the flanged bolts and nuts for the front mounting hole but must use the plated, non flanged hardware at the rear. When using the horizontal mounts the flanged hardware is used for both the front and rear.

Good luck,
Jeff

[QSL]

Hmmm, i see what you guys are saying. that is a little different setup then what they shipped me. Sorry.

[racephotoman]

I did speak to Dan at FFR, and agree, the stationary versus pivot bolt parts can be facing the front. Looking my images though, I was feeling my setup was OK, but remember Dan saying the angle of the upper ball joint needs to face the other way, hence flipping the UCA (or end) over. Does my setup (image) look OK? I also mentioned that in my existing setup, the ball joints were hand screw in, while trying to feed them from the other side (the one Dan was saying is the proper angle), I get about a 1/4 turn and can't even move it---didn't try a vice yet, but thinking this is way too tight and didn't want to cross thread anything. Basically if my existing setup is OK, then no problem. I'm looking at QSL's and I think he matches mind???

Walter

[rich grsc]

No that is not correct. The top picture, in the group of three, the ball joint is angled in the wrong dirrection. You can see that it is almost in a bind, the stud should be centered, almost a straight line through the joint.

[racephotoman]

Thanks everyone....Since it was told to me that keeping the non-pivot section of the UCA toward the front is not necessary, and therefore OK to flip over, the images now show what I think is the correct UCA/ball joint angle on both sides...BUT, doing that, created a new problem as marked "B" in both the left and right sides, and showing a slightly different position (one higher and one lower) from each other (plus the grease fitting is on the top on one side and on the bottom on the other). Again either side could be flip to match each other, but not sure which one is the correct position---and the should the grease fitting face up or down?...basically which side seems correct, and I can change the other to match.

I haven't notice it in the manual, but is there a torque setting for the four "A" nuts? And any secret to get the rear "A" driver's left torque---it's basically nearly touching the chassis and a socket will not fit. I'm looking into the "open end" attachment for my torque wrench---any other ideas?
11923
Walter

[CraigS]

Walter, it doesn't really matter which way the grease fitting is oriented from a design point of view. The only thing that matters is where the pivot is and that is the same either way. I would set them up for whichever way it will be easiest to get a grease gun in there when the car is jacked up and the tire is off. And don't forget that you will have a brake rotor and caliper in there as well.