Here I am

Front axle control arm replacement

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Annoying Pac Brake Issue

2004 Dodge 2500 5.9 - P2502

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, I decided to do a 2" to level the truck, and since I was adding air to the rear, could control the truck's level with loads.. and as I typically do, it led to all sorts of other things, including the control arm replacement with slightly longer ones to keep the proper axle geometry.

First part of what has become a saga, was the bolts/hardware. Of course it appears obvious that most likely re-use the existing, but that is not a good idea, and the service manual has bold warnings all over to not do so.

I would think easy to find, but I was wrong. First find was actually on EBay, and when those arrived they were grade 8.8 bolts, not the 10.9/12.9 per the item description.. so no, I won't be using a much lower strength bolt to hold my front axle to the vehicle! Then I found the OEM parts, except one bolt was inexplicably not listed on the Mopar site, so I ordered what I could and with the size, type, grade, went to bolt depot, and McMaster Carr to get the other one, and even found one on Amazon.. then another kit billed as grade 12.9, so decided to order that too.. at this point I just want to get this thing back on the road and not sure when I'll get all the proper parts I went parts shotgun mode!

Well turns out the OEM bolts arrived, and the one especially critical cam bolt was not in the box, but some odd other thing was, and the supplier was slow to respond, and finally after a week seems to have sent the proper bolts, and in the meantime another supplier has a pair I'm suppose to get tomorrow.. so at the end of all of this I will have a bunch of extra bolts.... but I digress.

The main point of this is to point out an issue I found doing this job. I'm using aftermarket longer control arms, these are Freedom Offroad brand I found on Amazon, they appear to be good quality.

Well when I went to torque these, the service manual has some contradictory specifications. In the Torque specification table it has these torqued to 200 ft-lbs. On the page to re-install it has the rear/frame side at 170 ft-lbs, and the cam bolt at 140 ft-lbs. The uppers are all 120 ft-lbs. Uppers have 14mm bolts, the lowers are 16mm.

Anyhow, I was trying to split the difference so to speak an go with about 170 ft-lbs, but on the cam bolts (for now using original, while waiting for new to arrive). I could not get to 170 ft-lbs, I think I got to about 130 or so.. and it kept turning... finally I stopped thinking something is not right.. and instinct was correct.

The new control arms have much smaller bushing in the rubber mount, and as a result, less metal contact area to the frame elongated hole where these mount. The torque was sufficient to deform the busing and thus unable to attain the proper torque specification (well assuming it's 200, but if it's 140, it will be close).

I'm attaching some pictures, for some laughs the wrong part recieved compared to the old cam bolt, then 3 of the control arms, one showing the original compared to the new, and the last 2 the deformation of the bushing from torque attempt.

IMG_20210406_220522017_MP.jpg
IMG_20210406_220458471_MP.jpg
IMG_20210406_220447888.jpg
Wrong bolt.jpg
 
Answer you won't like. I spent $790 in arms from Thuren. They are badass and fit perfect.
https://www.thurenfabrication.com/2003-2009-dodge-ram-hd-high-clearance-control-arms.html

Certainly those appear to be quality, but with all the options I've added I'm already in hot water on the budget with my wife, who fails to understand the reason for these projects. The arms I got on Amazon were $248, total. That said, now I have to find a solution to the situation, if I had to go back knowing what I know now.. I would quite likely buy these $790 control arms. Thanks for posting.
 
Man thats some soft stuff. I think I'd be sending the seller that picture. Hopefully they are a brick and mortar store....its a crap shoot with ebay....
 
Man thats some soft stuff. I think I'd be sending the seller that picture. Hopefully they are a brick and mortar store....its a crap shoot with ebay....

The control arms were sold via Amazon... the wrong grade bolts Ebay. The seller of the bolts was responsive, an offered a return/refund.. but I'll find another use, and they were only about $50, but they did a no return $15 refund. I still posted an appropriate review of the product, and reported the listing, because the item description was not what was received, and it has safety implications.

If I had time, I'd go for a refund on the control arms and seek a higher quality option.. but I'm out of time, so I did a fix that should make them OK to use. It's not something anyone should have to do.. Pictures in next post. Oh, and I did write an appropriate review on Amazon for the lower control arms, including pictures of the issue. I feel it's good to let people have such information when making a purchase decision, I know I often benefit from other people's reviews, so when I can I contribute to the pool of knowledge.
 
One side upgraded. I took a piece of tube and formed it in my press to the diameter of the bushing, then pressed a section of that tube on to the ends of the control arm bushing. Then did a slow weld build up (slow to not damage the rubber). Then a final grind to flush and now have a larger area to take the load when torqued, and it did take the 140 ft lbs without issue, but I don't think it will take 200 ft-lbs, I'm still not sure which part of the service manual is correct. Anyhow, pictures of my upgrade. I'll do the other side tonight, and I should have the proper OEM Cam bolts today.
IMG_20210407_212703556.jpg
IMG_20210407_212658050.jpg
IMG_20210407_202346264.jpg
IMG_20210407_202343441.jpg
IMG_20210407_193646536.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: JR
Sorry to say that but you just wasted a lot of money.
For a two inch lift the arms stay the same. Powerwagon doesn't have other arms then any other Ram.

And from my sight, the OEM are very good quality.

I always reused my bolts. Ram wants to have them changed for liability not for technical reasons.
 
Sorry to say that but you just wasted a lot of money.
For a two inch lift the arms stay the same. Powerwagon doesn't have other arms then any other Ram.

And from my sight, the OEM are very good quality.

I always reused my bolts. Ram wants to have them changed for liability not for technical reasons.

Interesting, well the rubber on the originals was looking pretty sad, and the cost of these was comparable to the OEMs.. the upper at least was plug n play.

As to bolts, well according to the torque specifications, they might have been torqued to 200 ft-lbs.. that seems pretty high for a grade 10.9 / 16mm bolt.. I'll have to do some calculating, but that might even stretch them a bit, so it seems prudent to use new hard ware when doing this, especially on a 12 year old vehicle, but I think the condition of my bolts was acceptable, only slight rust on the cam bolts. some of the others were rust free. That said, they are not very expensive, so swapping out is not a bad idea, but I have no doubt you are right about why the service manual says to not reuse, they don't want the liability of a tech re-using a damaged bolt, and they don't want them making the determination of what is acceptable to reuse.

I would appreciate any insight on the torque specifications, if anyone has it, which is correct? Cam Bolt 140 ft-lbs, frame 170 ft-lbs, or both 200 ft-lbs?
 
From the 2004 DR manual... I think all 3rd gens were the same in this area...

Thanks! Apparently it's all over the place. The 2009 manual in the install procedure says the 170/140 for the lower control arms, the table says 200.. and your manual has all new numbers! Also, mine says 120 for the uppers, yours says 110. It's interesting the variance on values on the same basically same hardware items.. makes me wonder what caused them to change these numbers around.
 
M16x2 10.9 bolt has a maximum torque rating of either 202 or 247 lb ft dry and oiled, respectively. This is based on 85% of proof load according to my Engineering toolbox fastener torque sheet. So I would say you are well within your limits as far as fastener strength.
 
M16x2 10.9 bolt has a maximum torque rating of either 202 or 247 lb ft dry and oiled, respectively. This is based on 85% of proof load according to my Engineering toolbox fastener torque sheet. So I would say you are well within your limits as far as fastener strength.

Thanks, but having it be 200, when the max for that bolt is 202, is definitely justification for bolt replacement, how accurate is the typical shop torque wrench? I know several of mine are not that consistent when checked against a digital, and I still have some deflection type because they are consistent, but none that go over 140 ft-lbs.

It's odd that there are so many different specifications out there, and the price arms linked above have in their instructions to torque the lowers, both sides, to 215 ft-lbs, which is more than the maximum..
 
Thanks, but having it be 200, when the max for that bolt is 202, is definitely justification for bolt replacement.

Not arguing or disagreeing with you, just pointing out the fastener itself is rated for all the torque specs you posted.
Keep in mind proof load is not the same as yield strength, proof load refers to the tension of a bolt in terms of clamping force, yield strength is the point of no return of a bolt so to speak where it stretches or permanently deforms or breaks. Torquing to a fasteners proof load is not the same as torquing right up to a fasteners limits (yield strength). I gave the proof load of an M16.

I know none of this helps, and neither am I (helping) Just some more useless info o_O

I wonder if the different torque specs across the years have anything to do with different thread pitches. M16 x 2, M16 x 1.75 or 1.5.....etc. etc.

Just throwing more poo at the wall....don't mind me :)
 
Not arguing or disagreeing with you, just pointing out the fastener itself is rated for all the torque specs you posted.
Keep in mind proof load is not the same as yield strength, proof load refers to the tension of a bolt in terms of clamping force, yield strength is the point of no return of a bolt so to speak where it stretches or permanently deforms or breaks. Torquing to a fasteners proof load is not the same as torquing right up to a fasteners limits (yield strength). I gave the proof load of an M16.

I know none of this helps, and neither am I (helping) Just some more useless info o_O

I wonder if the different torque specs across the years have anything to do with different thread pitches. M16 x 2, M16 x 1.75 or 1.5.....etc. etc.

Just throwing more poo at the wall....don't mind me :)

It's all a good discussion... as to the specs, that was a standard M16-2.00 Grade 10.9 bolt, correct? Well as Ozy pointed out, that cam bolt has about 25% less thread contact in the nut, due to its design.. Seems like pushing the limits by stress on the threads might be a factor there at 200 ft-lbs, and I do wonder if that was driven by some other issue (or it's just an error in the manual).. seems something was driving the changes in the torque specs. I also noted the new OEM long/frame bolts for the upper control arms were not necked down like the 2009 original bolts were, I wonder what drove that update to that part. Generally there is an engineering reason for a change, though not always.
 
So I did 170 ft-lbs on the frame side, and it came up to spec and stayed. I did 140 ft-lbs on the cam bolts, initially and it was slow going to get there. A day later, when I got the new digital torque tool ( I don't trust click style torque wrenches). I verified, and the frame side was solid, did not move. The cam bolt.. yep it would not even take 140 ft-lbs before it started to rotate.. arrghh.. locked it down and re-torqued to 150 ft-lbs and got there.. and I don't want to check again, as I'm guessing it will go back down. It's quite bizzare actually. As a just in case I applied some green, penetrant type loctite to the cam bolt washers and enough is a enough.. it's out of the garage and seems to be doing fine. I guess my marks for the cam bolts was pretty good, steering is centered, and it's tracking perfectly, so looks like I won't need an alignment.
 
Then I realized I have a Chilton Manual. I thought.. hmmm wonder what it has for the lower control arm torque specifications.. and it has 200 ft-lbs for both sides. NO WAY can I get 200 on that cam bolt, 150 will have to do. It has been an interesting experience for sure. So far seems to be working fine, I've been sure to hit a few bumps in the road, just to make sure it wasn't going to shift.. so far, so good.
 
Well, turns out it appears 200 ft-lbs is really needed. After a 2400 mile trip, rough SoCal roads at highway speeds, some rough gravel roads and ditches.. the left side cam bolt appears to have shifted a bit, and the alignment is now a bit off. 150 ft-lbs could not hold it it seems, so these crap lower arms are going to be replaced soon. Also, something, I have not yet figured out what.. makes a clunking sound at end of travel. Not sure if it's the springs or something else.. (I'm guessing the bump stops will not "bump" with the spacer and stock length spring). I'm regretting not just getting the longer springs (also ride quality is worse, not better).. the $100 I saved is not worth the hassle of a do over. Of course I could not have known it would have these issues.
 
If you are getting a metal on metal clunk on compression check the upper control arm bolt on the driver side axle, if it was installed from the outside pointing toward the frame the end of the bolt can hit the frame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top