Home > Puma (Tdci) > Swivel Housing Ball for a 2010 Defender 110 & Castor cor |
|
|
RobM Member Since: 06 Jul 2015 Location: Brisbane Posts: 55 |
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for the standard Swivel Housing Ball for a 2010 Defender (with ABS) I found a part number of FRC7065 which has been superseded by FTC5366.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Both the above kits mentioned that they use the FRC7065 Swivel Housing Ball which from my researching has now been superseded by FTC5366.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 |
||
30th Nov 2024 4:20am |
|
DSC-off Member Since: 16 Oct 2014 Location: North East Posts: 1428 |
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. |
||
30th Nov 2024 2:45pm |
|
Esben Kold Member Since: 14 Oct 2023 Location: Horsens Posts: 23 |
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.
|
||
30th Nov 2024 5:26pm |
|
DSC-off Member Since: 16 Oct 2014 Location: North East Posts: 1428 |
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, https://suspensionsecrets.co.uk/caster/ |
||
30th Nov 2024 7:22pm |
|
Esben Kold Member Since: 14 Oct 2023 Location: Horsens Posts: 23 |
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. |
||
30th Nov 2024 7:33pm |
|
RobM Member Since: 06 Jul 2015 Location: Brisbane Posts: 55 |
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 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 |
||
4th Dec 2024 8:48am |
|
TexasRover Member Since: 24 Nov 2022 Location: Paris Posts: 1084 |
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?
|
||
4th Dec 2024 10:43am |
|
blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17443 |
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. |
||
4th Dec 2024 2:24pm |
|
DSC-off Member Since: 16 Oct 2014 Location: North East Posts: 1428 |
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. |
||
4th Dec 2024 5:07pm |
|
RobM Member Since: 06 Jul 2015 Location: Brisbane Posts: 55 |
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 |
||
4th Dec 2024 9:41pm |
|
|
All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis