Ball Joint Longevity

SydneyRoverP6B

SydneyRoverP6B

Well-Known Member
Staff member
What has been your experience in terms of the above? How many miles have your genuine ball joints seen prior to replacement?

If you have fitted replacements such as those by QH, how have they fared to date? Have any of these had to be replaced and if so, how many miles of service did they see?

Ron.
 
I have no receipts for ball joints from receipt happy PO, and have replaced some of mine after a possible 120K ?

Gosh that's vague :roll: . Maybe they're original, maybe they've done 120K. The new ones have been on for 1500 miles and they're fine!
 
Hi Rob,

Appreciate your observations. I asked as the answers are of benefit to everyone with a P6/P6B.

Ron.
 
Back in the day I always fitted the genuine items, the only exception being if pattern parts were customer supplied, but in those cases I was never very happy about it. Pattern ones never seemed to feel as quality made. I don't ever remember fitting a ball joint for a second time, but maybe that's because I always used genuine.
Other than the few NOS ones that pop up now and again there really isn't any option now but to use pattern.
 
Hi Harvey,

Appreciate your feedback equally.

My Rover's genuine original top ball joints were replaced at just over 62,000 Miles (100,000km) for the N/S in 1987 and at 83,000 Miles (133,000km) for the O/S in 1990. Both had just the manufacturer's initial touch of grease.

I fitted genuine replacements, filling their boots to capacity with grease.
The N/S was replaced at just over 214,000 Miles (345,000km) in 2008 having seen 152,000 miles (243,000km) of service. The O/S a day later with just over 131,000 Miles (210,000km) under its belt. A significant improvement over the factory fitted originals, no doubt a result of all the grease that I added helping to keep dirt and moisture away from the ball and socket.

I fitted genuine items again at this time, so I am hoping on at least a similar service distance prior to their replacement in the future.

The original bottom ball joints lasted much longer compared to the original tops, with the N/S being replaced at just on 164,000 Miles (262,000km) during 1997 and the O/S at just over 198,000 Miles (317,000km) in 2007.
Both had only the manufacturer's initial wipe of grease whilst the genuine replacements that I fitted were again filled to capacity. I am hoping that again this will make a substantial improvement in their longevity.

Harvey, was it your experience also that the bottom ball joints way outlast the top ball joints? Given that they reside at opposite ends of the same swivel pillar, I would have imagined that the forces on each would have been similar, but I wonder if that is indeed the case?

Ron.
 
SydneyRoverP6B said:
Harvey, was it your experience also that the bottom ball joints way outlast the top ball joints?
Click to expand...

It's difficult for me to say, because unlike you, most of the time I wasn't in possession of the full history of the car. What I could say it I fitted more top than bottom.
 
Hi Ron.
I have no experience with balljoints in terms of your question, however, I did notice when researching them that a certain seller warned against using "inferior quality QH" units.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROVER-P6-P6B- ... 3a7c0529bd

I have read elsewhere that QH are quality units.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROVER-3500-22 ... 3a7c9b7472

In practice I do not know which view is accurate.
When it comes time to purchase them, i think I will tend toward the OEM NOS stuff.
OR
These...as prior posted...

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rover-2000-3 ... 692wt_1008

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rover-2000-3 ... 787wt_1008

the price on these last two is certainly attractive...jsy havent found anyone who has actually fitted them yet.
 
Hi Brenten,

I have not used a QH ball joint either, so I am not in a position to comment, although I have seen Rovers on here that wear non original ball fitted with nyloc nuts, so hearing from their owners on their experience thus far would be most beneficial.

The ball joints from the Mini business do look quite ok, but we really need to get your hands on one and give them a whirl so we can make an informed choice.

Going back to QH for a tic, I am using a QH waterpump which so far has seen over 62,000 Miles (100,000km) of service (typing very quietly....) and this makes it the second longest serving pump so far that my Rover has used. The original factory fitted pump so far has lasted the longest at 74,001 Miles (114,000km), but the QH has outlasted by quite a margin 2 genuine OEM waterpumps that I fitted in years past.

Ron.
 
SydneyRoverP6B said:
The original factory fitted pump so far has lasted the longest at 74,001 Miles
Click to expand...

The original waterpump on mine lasted @ 90,000 miles before I had to replace it.
According to Gerry, it was fine when it was laid up (91k miles), so I assume it sh@* itself shortly after i got the motor running. (As in about 2 weeks!!)
Certainly when i removed it, it was in poor shape.
 
Hi, I find it curious that there is a perceived distinction between original parts and Quinten Hazell. I wouldn't have thought Rover would have made things like ball joints and water pumps, they would have bought them in from specialist suppliers. Just like they do with electrical items.

I can see that the bottom joint would last longer because it is 'only' holding the bottom of the pillar steady, (if it stays in there) whereas the top joint is doing the same plus bearing the weight of the car.

As an aside, I can remember reading a long while ago that because modern joints have nylon cups they don't need grease like older joints with bronze cups, in fact it was said that the grease wasn't good for the nylon.

Colin
 
colnerov wrote,...
Hi, I find it curious that there is a perceived distinction between original parts and Quinten Hazell. I wouldn't have thought Rover would have made things like ball joints and water pumps, they would have bought them in from specialist suppliers. Just like they do with electrical items.
Click to expand...

Hi Colin,

That is very true, Rover did not make the ball joints and water pumps. Original equipment manufacture (OEM) are parts made by companies that supply those to the car company for installation within their vehicles. Citing the water pump as an example, the OEM items certainly in my case had the Leyland symbol cast into them. That would suggest that the pumps at least were made by a company within the Leyland group of companies.

Colnerov also wrote,...
I can see that the bottom joint would last longer because it is 'only' holding the bottom of the pillar steady, (if it stays in there) whereas the top joint is doing the same plus bearing the weight of the car.
Click to expand...

I am not following your thoughts there I am afraid Colin. Newton's third law tells us that if the mass of the car is bearing down upon the top ball joint, then given the swivel pillar retains both ball joints within essentially the same plane, then the bottom ball joint must exert an equal and opposite force.

Ron.
 
Hi, Ron. The weight is not going out through the bottom joint, it is going out through the wheel part way up the pillar. The bottom joint is 'only' controlling lateral and fore-aft forces.

Colin
 
Data points:

My '69 TC has done about 160,000 miles. Close inspection of the ball joints suggests that if any of them have been replaced it was a very long time ago.

The car has passed every 6 monthly roadworthy inspection for the last 10 years with no comment about the ball joints.

The only work I have done in that time in this department was to fit new boots to the side rod.
 
Keith Coman said:
. The car has passed every 6 monthly roadworthy inspection for the last 10 years with no comment about the ball joints.
Click to expand...

That could well be just because they don't know how to check them. It's that way in the UK so I see no reason why the same shouldn't apply where you are. I've lost count of the worn out ones I've replaced straight after the test.
 
harveyp6 said:
Keith Coman said:
. The car has passed every 6 monthly roadworthy inspection for the last 10 years with no comment about the ball joints.
Click to expand...

That could well be just because they don't know how to check them. It's that way in the UK so I see no reason why the same shouldn't apply where you are. I've lost count of the worn out ones I've replaced straight after the test.
Click to expand...

Anything's possible. But not all things are probable.
 
With the top ball joint (part number 595724), I notice in the parts reference book that the rubber boot has NSS next to it, what's that mean?

Also, is it possible to but the rubber boot seperately? My ball joints appear to be fine, just the rubber has perished.
 
ewokracing said:
With the top ball joint (part number 595724), I notice in the parts reference book that the rubber boot has NSS next to it, what's that mean?

Also, is it possible to but the rubber boot seperately? My ball joints appear to be fine, just the rubber has perished.
Click to expand...

Geoff

The rubber boots are available separately from JRW's see here or from Scott's see here

Dave
 
harveyp6 said:
Keith Coman said:
. The car has passed every 6 monthly roadworthy inspection for the last 10 years with no comment about the ball joints.
Click to expand...

That could well be just because they don't know how to check them. It's that way in the UK so I see no reason why the same shouldn't apply where you are. I've lost count of the worn out ones I've replaced straight after the test.
Click to expand...


Is there any special procedure required for checking the P6 balljoints inview of its unusual suspension?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top