Tie rod ends....something a bit different

[bbcc]

Hey boys. Doing a build on a first gen 2dr 2wd blazer. I'm using beltech spindles, and as anybody with an S or G series will know the pains of the steering arm hitting the inside of wide wheels. Well with some bench mock up's i've found that my tie rods will too be eating wheel.

So I've been thinking of ways to solve this dilema. I believe a spherical rod end in place of the tie rod end will give me a lower profile and a bit more room before contacting the wheel. What I'd like to know is what are some commonly seen forces when it comes to tie rod ends? Just by using corning forces as a reference I don't think I'd see much more than a 5000 lb load generated. Even considering rough roads whilest turing it should be under 5000 lbs peak load.

I do know that the pivot center will have to be matched to that of the stock bj, or the steering linkage will have to drop to aleviate any bump steer issues.

What do you guys think of this? My only other option really is to grind down the edge of the stock tie rod. But this concerns me especialy on a steering component. Wheel spacers will help out to, but I can only get away with about a quarter inch, half inch at maximum before shoving the wheel grossly outside the fender.

I appreciate any input you guys may have.

Cheers, Ryer.

[Randy67]

It's been done before, see Baer's site here:
http://www.baer.com/products/tie-rods/index.php

If Baer makes a kit for your truck, it would be a good way to go. I believe your tie rods are similar to the G-body (78-88) and the 82-92 Camaro/Firebird so they may work if not one directly for your truck. Someone else here may know more.

[JRouche]

I appreciate any input you guys may have.

Cheers, Ryer.

Yeah now!!!! I LIKE it.... Im all for other means to the ends, solly :) I would make a tapered shaft with a straight end and a threaded end. Straight side for the spherical bearing. Yer gonna have to make sure of the taper on the spindle. But you could just as easily drill and ream the hole at the large end size and use a bolt, good bolt..

NOW!!!!! After all that.. There are two very critical areas on a car. Steering and braking. You CANNOT have any of these two systems failing mechanically.

Soooo much engineering went into the stock setups. For a good reason... Death..

I dont think spherical bearing rod ends are a good idea for a street car's steering bearings. Remember, ball joints have a very large bearing surface area compared to the SBs. And they are pretty much sealed from the road debris, and greasable. For a track car that will be serviced after every race the SB will be ok. I wouldnt recommend them for a street car though.. Great idea though!! JR

[bbcc]

Thanks for the input guys!

I totaly forgot about those baer pieces Randy thanks for posting that up.

J, I totaly understand where you are coming from on the sb's. Safety is the main concern with any of my projects. Not so much my own, but for the innocent people who I'm sharing the raod with. Having said that, QA1 offers some dead reliable self lubricating units that have tight enough clearences as to almost wipe the load bearing surface of large contaminants. The part number I was interested in has a rated 7000 lb load capacity, and I'm assuming QA1 is using an N value of 4 for thier ratings. A quick call will confirm that. This will give me a large margin of safety. I was looking to ream the hole like you had mentioned so I can use grade 8 hardware and not have to worry about turning a tapered stud. Seeing how the stud is in single shear and the forces at play, the sb will definitly be the fuse link, which is good (better than the stud breaking).

Thanks again for the input fella's. More is welcome, and criticism works to.

Cheers, Ryer

[JRouche]

Having said that, QA1 offers some dead reliable self lubricating units

Yup, QA1 does have some of the best rod ends at an affordable price. I used some XML 10-12 ends on my watts link. Static load rating of 31,680 Lbs JR

http://qa1.thomasnet.com/printitem/loaded-slot-injection-mold-7/xm-rod-ends-2/item-9181?&plpver=1001&assetid=&origin=viewitems&by=prod&filter=0

[Randy67]

If you don't want to buy premade parts like the Baer stuff, you can start with something like this:
http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Adjustable-Tie-Rod-Adapter-Stud-to-Heim,3333.html
to make it easier to fabricate.

[bbcc]

Ya I was scoping those out at work. The tough part is going to be making a sleeve to go to the factory inner tie rod. The baer kit is surprisingly cheap and I'm not sure I can piece it together for less. I'll price it out tomoro at work though. Gotta love staff discount :yum:

Thanks for the input again guys. Really do appreciate it.

[chevy42083]

Out of curiousity, what size wheel are you running that you are having problems with?

[parsonsj]

Baker Precision is another place to have a look.

Be careful about the suspension travel... many ordinary heim joints don't have enough misalignment for use as a tie rod end and will bind. You will probably need to use high misalignment ends.

jp

[bbcc]

Out of curiousity, what size wheel are you running that you are having problems with?


17x9 with 25 mm offset (6" b.s.)


JP, I have considered the range of motion. QA1 does offer a nice sealed unit that will do some rediculous range of motion. Thanks for the heads up on baker precision. Checking them out as I type this.

[frojoe]

bbcc... what QA1 rod ends are you looking at? I'm also considering "building" my own adjustable tie rod ends.

[Eric Howell]

X2
Also thinking about pushing the limit with a 9" rim on the front of the S-10.

BTW, I have a site dedicated to PT s10's. It's a pain at times to load but maybe you would like to check it out. http://protourings10.makeforum.org/

[dipren443]

Howe also has a nice setup.

http://www.howeracing.com/p-7449-howe-quick-bump-tie-rod-ends.aspx

[JRouche]

bbcc... what QA1 rod ends are you looking at? I'm also considering "building" my own adjustable tie rod ends.

I have looked at a lot of QA1 RDs for my use. I ran across their pcym-t rod ends that they say has a misalignment of 65* Which is odd cause most of their REs have around 12-16*. So Im wondering if its due to the extended portion of the ball? Wouldnt high misalignment spacers do the same thing. But if the numbers are right this looks like a good RE for the job. I would have to do some measuring but all the rest of their ends with 12-16* seems like they would work too. Depends on the travel of your suspension. JR
http://qa1.thomasnet.com/viewitems/2-piece-economy-5/pcym-t-rod-ends-3?&plpver=1001&sortid=1049&measuresortid=1003

[frojoe]

I have looked at a lot of QA1 RDs for my use. I ran across their pcym-t rod ends that they say has a misalignment of 65* Which is odd cause most of their REs have around 12-16*. So Im wondering if its due to the extended portion of the ball? Wouldnt high misalignment spacers do the same thing. But if the numbers are right this looks like a good RE for the job. I would have to do some measuring but all the rest of their ends with 12-16* seems like they would work too. Depends on the travel of your suspension. JR
http://qa1.thomasnet.com/viewitems/2-piece-economy-5/pcym-t-rod-ends-3?&plpver=1001&sortid=1049&measuresortid=1003



From what I can tell, the really high mis-alignment rod ends have much larger balls (bad sentence? haha) than the average heim joint. The larger the diameter of the ball, for a same race thickness and bore size, the more the race can rotate around the ball until it hits something, say the bolt going through the ball or a spacer.

Thanks for the link. 65* is insane! I would hazard a guess that that amount of articulation would only really be necessary on a trophy truck's steering, but if you want it, go for it. As I mentioned above, from the looks of it that rod end has an overall race width of 2" for the 5/8"-bore version, where most other normal rod ends would have a total width hovering around 1.5" or less I believe. If you're really tight on room, that extra width might be a problem...

You can get high mis-alignment spacers for rod ends, say a 5/8"-bore ball. But in order for these to work, they have to reduce the ball bore to something smaller, like 1/2" or 5/16". These spacers have kinks in them which allow the edge of the race to rotate past where the 5/8" bolt would have been and "into" the spacer, allowing more articulation while still having a sufficiently thick spacer, by forcing use of a smaller bore.

The only thing that concerns me about mis-alignment spacers is that some of the bearing race is now no longer contacting the ball in the critical areas, on the top and bottom, where it'll experienced the highest compression/tension. However this would only be the case at extreme mis-alignment, which is not when it should be experiencing the highest steering loads (I'd hope!!).

I found a nice rod end on McMaster-Carr's website that has 9800lbs static load capacity, internally lubricated, teflon-lined, and allowed 26* of articulation, and it wasn't even part of their high mis-alignment line (AKA ridiculously expensive)... too bad they don't ship small orders to Canada :(

[bbcc]

Hey guys. Havn't been online in a while.


X2
Also thinking about pushing the limit with a 9" rim on the front of the S-10.

BTW, I have a site dedicated to PT s10's. It's a pain at times to load but maybe you would like to check it out. http://protourings10.makeforum.org/

I'm already a member:)



bbcc... what QA1 rod ends are you looking at? I'm also considering "building" my own adjustable tie rod ends.

I was originaly looking at the CM series from QA1. I was undecided on the size however. The 8's would be more than strong enough, but I am concerned about the size of the body, seeing how it is .625" thick. The 6's would work, but I would need a heck of a sleeve to mate it to the inner tie rod end.

The PC series is a better option, since they are self lubricating and a smaller body size. The load handeling is much higher aswell. These would be what I would use if I were to build my own.



From what I can tell, the really high mis-alignment rod ends have much larger balls (bad sentence? haha) than the average heim joint. The larger the diameter of the ball, for a same race thickness and bore size, the more the race can rotate around the ball until it hits something, say the bolt going through the ball or a spacer.

Thanks for the link. 65* is insane! I would hazard a guess that that amount of articulation would only really be necessary on a trophy truck's steering, but if you want it, go for it. As I mentioned above, from the looks of it that rod end has an overall race width of 2" for the 5/8"-bore version, where most other normal rod ends would have a total width hovering around 1.5" or less I believe. If you're really tight on room, that extra width might be a problem...

You can get high mis-alignment spacers for rod ends, say a 5/8"-bore ball. But in order for these to work, they have to reduce the ball bore to something smaller, like 1/2" or 5/16". These spacers have kinks in them which allow the edge of the race to rotate past where the 5/8" bolt would have been and "into" the spacer, allowing more articulation while still having a sufficiently thick spacer, by forcing use of a smaller bore.

The only thing that concerns me about mis-alignment spacers is that some of the bearing race is now no longer contacting the ball in the critical areas, on the top and bottom, where it'll experienced the highest compression/tension. However this would only be the case at extreme mis-alignment, which is not when it should be experiencing the highest steering loads (I'd hope!!).

I found a nice rod end on McMaster-Carr's website that has 9800lbs static load capacity, internally lubricated, teflon-lined, and allowed 26* of articulation, and it wasn't even part of their high mis-alignment line (AKA ridiculously expensive)... too bad they don't ship small orders to Canada :(

You are totaly right. The ball is a heck of alot larger on the high misalignment RE's. Not in diameter, but in how complete the segment is (think more of the ball is there). The outer race is also narower when looking in plan view, this contributes to thier slightly lower static load rating.

Doing some really quick measurements and trig I found that 20* is plenty for my application. I'm not going to experience more than 3" jounce or droop, so 6" total travel is what I am expecting. Limit straps and bump stops will be used to ensure this. The total arm length from center link to spindle is 18". Using a 20* missalignment RE will give me enough room to have 6.5" of travel at the RE. This is more then enough. So in short, a high missalignment RE should not be needed.

I have decided to go with the Baer kit though. I figured that with the purchase of the rod ends, jam nuts, the tapered stud (either buy out or purchase), cup spacers, and the fabrication of a nice adjuster sleeve (the major cost here), I would be into the component for over $200 CAD (took an estimating class in my last year of engineering haha, finaly got to use it!). Since I work at a performance retail store part time, I have access to the Baer kit for just a bit over half of my estimated cost. So needles to say that is the direction I will go. If I had access to a machine shop, or could find a place in town that wouldn't charge two hours for the sleeves then it would be worth it. So for those of you who can get these sleeves made, the rest is cheap and easy.

I will throw some pictures up when they arrive if anybody is interested.

Thanks again for all the idea's and suggestions. Really appreciate it guys!

[frojoe]

bbcc... What engineering did you do? I'm just in the tail end of Mechanical! And yay for fellow Canadians!!!

The deciding factor for me was already having hexagonal-rod sleeves sitting in front of me, as well as good-condition inner tie rod ends, so why not right?

I'll also report back with some pics of the assembled setup when it gets there...

[bbcc]

Ya I noticed you were in Vancouver! I went the mechanical engineering technologist route. When I came out of high school I wasn't sure what I wanted to do, so I decided to try Mec Eng out. The part that loured me in was the course was only two years, so if I didn't like it I didn't waste four years and $XXXXX. I loved it! Now I'm undecided if I will go back for a full Mec degree or go for a Matty degree since that was my favorite part of the program. Which U are you attending? I was thinking of going to UBC since they have a campus in Kelowna :twothumbs

Definitly nice to have that sort of stuff layin around. Do you have a build thread going? I'd like to check out your ride! Which rod end did you end up going with? If you are having troubles tracking some down in your area let me know, I can probably help you locate some.

Cheers, Ryer

[frojoe]

I also did the Mech Technology @ BCIT, now I'm over at UVic, and I'm loving the island, just can't really work on my car duringthe school year :(

My build thread is in my sig...

-Joe