↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home > Puma (Tdci) > Swivel Housing Ball for a 2010 Defender 110 & Castor cor
Post Reply  Down to end
Page 1 of 1
Print this entire topic · 
RobM



Member Since: 06 Jul 2015
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 55

Australia 2010 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Chawton White
Swivel Housing Ball for a 2010 Defender 110 & Castor cor
RE: Swivel Housing Ball Par Number for a 2010 Defender 110 & Castor correction options?

Guys...
I'm looking to improve my castor angles and as it appears that I need to replace my old Swivel Housing Balls due to wear, I was wondering what options there are for buying castor corrected Swivel housing Balls?

Researching the Part Numbers for the standard Swivel Housing Ball for a 2010 Defender (with ABS) I found a part number of FRC7065 which has been superseded by FTC5366. Various websites states that these are for NON-ABS version while other websites say they will suit All Defenders from 1994 onwards. The only differences I can find is obviously the Top Pin and Bearing where the Wheel Speed Sensor goes. Other than that, they appear to be all the same Swivel housing ball (FTC5366). The plan was to buy 2x of the FTC5366 and have them slotted to correct my castor issues... but then I came across some castor corrected Kits on paddocks...

Looking on the Paddockspares website, they offer to Castor corrected Swivel Housing KITS:

> Castor Corrected Swivel Housing DA2992
> Castor Corrected Swivel Housing DA3203

Both the above kits mentioned that they use the FRC7065 Swivel Housing Ball which from my researching has now been superseded by FTC5366. I understand that these are for NON-ABS versions BUT IS IT just a matter of buying the correct top bearing and pin and these castor corrected Swivel housing kits could be able to be used on my MY10 (ABS version) Defender ?? or have I misunderstood something?

Also, can someone verify what the swivel housing Ball Part number is? (FTC5366 ??)

thanks in advance... Cheers.....
Rob

1995 Defender Tdi 110Wgn
2010 Defender PUMA 110Wgn
TRIPS: Meanderingdownunder WikiLoc Trips
Post #1053408 30th Nov 2024 4:20am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Esben Kold



Member Since: 14 Oct 2023
Location: Horsens
Posts: 23

Denmark 2008 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Galway Green
Hi, I am just wondering if this is an ideal way of adjusting the castor. I apologize for my English not being the best, so I cannot express myself perfectly. But if you look at the load going through the suspension when absorbing forces, I think adjusting the castor by changing the radius arms and trailing arms is the correct way. Perhaps somebody with real insight and experience can clarify this. Other than that it makes changing the castor later on very complicated. What if you don’t like the way it drives after the replacement? I would prefer the other option. That is of course your decision and you might already know what you are doing. This was just my initial thoughts
Post #1053444 30th Nov 2024 11:14am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
DSC-off



Member Since: 16 Oct 2014
Location: North East
Posts: 1428

United Kingdom 2015 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS CSW Aintree Green
I can't help with the original question sorry.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both types of castor correction.
Both methods rotate the king pin and swivel bearings, supposedly back to factory specification or near to it, to restore the original steering geometry and handling of a vehicle with lifted suspension. The angles and loads going into the king pins and bearings SHOULD be the same with both methods.

Using castor corrected suspension arms will rotate the whole axle backwards, changing the angle of the differential in relation to the propshaft. The universal joints in the prop will be working at a greater angle all of the time and will wear out quicker. Driveline vibration is another possible effect, worse than only lifting the vehicle.
It will however improve the alignment of the chassis bushes and panhard rod bushes, as they are normally twisted and preloaded on a lifted vehicle.

Castor corrected swivels leave the Driveline angles as standard, the relationship between the differential and the propshaft. (Except it is lifted, and therefore a little worse at the transferbox end) The rotation of the swivels, due the bolt hole position, changes only the king pin angle and leaves all the suspension mounts on the axle unchanged. Panhard rod bushes will wear more quickly.

Both methods are not adjustable if it doesn't work. Both methods involve fitting non standard parts to the vehicle and will require removal if the suspension height is later changed back to standard.
Post #1053466 30th Nov 2024 2:45pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Esben Kold



Member Since: 14 Oct 2023
Location: Horsens
Posts: 23

Denmark 2008 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Galway Green
Thanks for the insight. It makes a lot of sense. And sorry for hijacking the tread. I was assuming that the vehicle was lifted since castor correction is needed. Are there other reasons to change the castor? Other than simply thinking that the standard truck is not set up correctly of course.
Post #1053482 30th Nov 2024 5:26pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
DSC-off



Member Since: 16 Oct 2014
Location: North East
Posts: 1428

United Kingdom 2015 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS CSW Aintree Green
It's all to do with stability at high speeds and steering feel. Correcting a lifted vehicle, or building a highspeed race car with more stability are typical reasons for wanting to change it.

This explains it, Thumbs Up
https://suspensionsecrets.co.uk/caster/
Post #1053494 30th Nov 2024 7:22pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Esben Kold



Member Since: 14 Oct 2023
Location: Horsens
Posts: 23

Denmark 2008 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Galway Green
Okay thanks. I guess I was not thinking in high speed scenarios. Probably because I always take my time in the Defender. It feels more harmonic that way.
Back to the swivel ball question then. I don’t have the answer by the way.
Post #1053495 30th Nov 2024 7:33pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
RobM



Member Since: 06 Jul 2015
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 55

Australia 2010 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Chawton White
Hey guys...
I'm also going to replace the front prop-shaft with a Gwyn Lewis DC prop-shaft as the vehicle is lifted but NOT too extreme (only 50mm, 75mm maybe, hard to say not knowing what factory height is / Front Bump stop clearance is 130mm - I think factory is around 90-100mm maybe?)

Since I'm having to replace the Swivel housing balls and basically having little to no castor & speaking to other LR mechanics/suppliers, I thought this option would be the best solution as I use my Defender mainly for Remote Touring, etc

As mentioned - replacing the radius arms will make the prop-shaft angles worst, and that's not what I want




DSC-off wrote:
I can't help with the original question sorry.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both types of castor correction.
Both methods rotate the king pin and swivel bearings, supposedly back to factory specification or near to it, to restore the original steering geometry and handling of a vehicle with lifted suspension. The angles and loads going into the king pins and bearings SHOULD be the same with both methods.

Using castor corrected suspension arms will rotate the whole axle backwards, changing the angle of the differential in relation to the propshaft. The universal joints in the prop will be working at a greater angle all of the time and will wear out quicker. Driveline vibration is another possible effect, worse than only lifting the vehicle.
It will however improve the alignment of the chassis bushes and panhard rod bushes, as they are normally twisted and preloaded on a lifted vehicle.

Castor corrected swivels leave the Driveline angles as standard, the relationship between the differential and the propshaft. (Except it is lifted, and therefore a little worse at the transferbox end) The rotation of the swivels, due the bolt hole position, changes only the king pin angle and leaves all the suspension mounts on the axle unchanged. Panhard rod bushes will wear more quickly.

Both methods are not adjustable if it doesn't work. Both methods involve fitting non standard parts to the vehicle and will require removal if the suspension height is later changed back to standard.
 Cheers.....
Rob

1995 Defender Tdi 110Wgn
2010 Defender PUMA 110Wgn
TRIPS: Meanderingdownunder WikiLoc Trips


Last edited by RobM on 4th Dec 2024 9:39pm. Edited 2 times in total
Post #1053782 4th Dec 2024 8:48am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
TexasRover



Member Since: 24 Nov 2022
Location: Paris
Posts: 1084

France 2002 Defender 110 Td5 DCPU Chawton White
In terms of the different part numbers, LR changed from a chrome coating to some special black coating for the seal on the swivel to ride on. Possibly this explains the p/n change?
Post #1053790 4th Dec 2024 10:43am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17443

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
Re: Swivel Housing Ball for a 2010 Defender 110 & Castor
RobM wrote:
... The plan was to buy 2x of the FTC5366 and have them slotted to correct my castor issues...


I think I would be uneasy about slotting the swivel ball, I'd be concerned that the brake reaction troque under extreme braking could rotate the ball on the axle. The bolts connecting the ball to the axle (at least, one bolt on each side) is a fitted bolt which acts as a locating dowel i order to locate the ball accurately. Slot the holes and you will lose that.

Extreme braking would tend to try to rotate the ball forwards on the axle end and although I suspect that the friction in the mating face, if the bolts are properly tightened, may stop this I really don't know (and can't at present be sufficiently interested to calculate) either the maximum torque which can be produced under braking not the frictional force produced by the bolted joint. It may be absolutely fine, but there will be a reason for the fitted bolt.

The castor-corrected balls in your link won't have this (possible) problem since they have simply been drilled differently and are therefore a much better-engineered solution to slotting.
Post #1053798 4th Dec 2024 2:24pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
DSC-off



Member Since: 16 Oct 2014
Location: North East
Posts: 1428

United Kingdom 2015 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS CSW Aintree Green
RobM wrote:
Hey guys...
I'm also going to replace the front prop-shaft with a Gwyn Lewis DC prop-shaft as the vehicle is lifted but too extreme (50mm > 75mm maybe, hard to say not knowing what factory height is)

Since I'm having to replace the Swivel housing balls and basically having little to no castor & speaking to other LR mechanics/suppliers, I thought this option would be the best solution as I use my Defender mainly for Remote Touring, etc

As mentioned - replacing the radius arms will make the prop-shaft angles worse


If it was my vehicle that had a 3" lift the additional mods would be,
Caster corrected swivels. (not slotted)
Double cardan front prop.
Adjustable panhard rod.
Plus, if you can find or make them, radius arms to correct the suspension bush angle at the chassis end. WITHOUT any caster correction. I've never seen any of these for sale or know of any company that makes them.
Thumbs Up
Post #1053817 4th Dec 2024 5:07pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
RobM



Member Since: 06 Jul 2015
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 55

Australia 2010 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Chawton White
Can anyone tell me what the factory FRONT Bump stop clearance is on the Defenders?
I believe it could around 90>100mm maybe??

My Front Bump stop clearance is 130mm Cheers.....
Rob

1995 Defender Tdi 110Wgn
2010 Defender PUMA 110Wgn
TRIPS: Meanderingdownunder WikiLoc Trips
Post #1053845 4th Dec 2024 9:41pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Post Reply
Post Reply  Back to top
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT

Jump to  
Previous Topic | Next Topic >
Posting Rules
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
DEFENDER2.NET RSS Feed - All Forums