Upper wishbone ball joint dust cover

31 posts / 0 new
Last post
paul richards
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

I found that narrow track suspension caused the rubbers to split quite regularly. So much so that I had to change every couple of years. I therefore bought a few spares. Fitting new rubbers was far more economical than buying new joints. 

Paul Richards

LADS Joint AR  Drink

I thought 2020 was the year that was going to give me all I wanted. It turned out to be the year to make me appreciate what I've got.

john milner
john milner's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 19 hours ago
Joined: 17/04/2014
Neil220
Neil220's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 59 sec ago
Joined: 26/05/2021

Are the bottom ones 1/2" as used on Triumph Dolomites and Midgets?

QR1572?

john milner
john milner's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 19 hours ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

An earlier post has them as the whole unit as QR1118S although the Caterham parts site has the gaitor referencing QR1798.

The Caterham photo and comments have a metal ring on the cover. The Fiat/FSO listings just show a cheapo plastic cover that looks easy to swap using fingers.

john milner
john milner's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 19 hours ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

An old post. Basically QR1798S is not identical to QR1118S:

https://www.caterhamlotus7.club/comment/1737676

I did some first hand reserch. I had a chat today with the Technical & Training manager of Quinton Hazell about track rod ends. He confirmed that both the QR1798S and the QR1118S rod ends have the same taper of 1:10. The difference is the minor cone diameter which is 15.0mm and a 14.8mm respectively. The effect of this is that the QR1118S ballcentre will be slightly lower, simple trig would estimate around 1mm lower (1:10 taper at 0.1mm). He told me that QH no longer produce the QR1798S joint, so CC must be having them made elsewhere. The other useful bit of info he gave me was that the taper in the original upright is 1:8. He confirmed that the taper of the Triumph (bolt in) balljoint QSJ103 is still 1:8. Previous info from Canley Classics, as an alternative source for uprights, was that the uprights for Triumph and Caterham are the same, at least as far as trunnion type uprights are concerned. So this would mean that cars with upper wishbone conversions (like mine) have a ball joint with the wrong taper angle. What leaves me still concerned is whether when CC specified the lower ball joint to replace the trunnion, did they have the taper for the top ball joint revised? Info from Canley makes me wonder, as they had told me that the uprights are actually produced near them and they now offer a lower ball joint conversion for Triumphs using the CC upright.

Neil220
Neil220's picture
Online
Last seen: 5 min 59 sec ago
Joined: 26/05/2021

My question was referring to what the bottom parts were.

john milner
john milner's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 19 hours ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

I don't know but it's most likely whatever was fitted as standard to a SV in 2003.

 

I am getting the feeling that new exact upper rod ends may be out of production but nearly correct ones are easily available.

SM25T
SM25T's picture
Online
Last seen: 2 min 57 sec ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

#14 .....

 

john milner
john milner's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 days 19 hours ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

Is there an equivalents list for QR1798?

SamC
SamC's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 36 min ago
Joined: 05/01/2022

Another relevant thread recently.

https://www.caterhamlotus7.club/forum/top-wishbone-end-ball-joint
 

The QH ones weren't appropriate for my CSR. Thread into wishbone was too long meaning you couldn't get the correct camber without cutting down and the thread through the upright resulted in no thread protrusion from the nut.

Bit the bullet and put original ones on which Redline now have in stock (but didn't until last week)