WH adjustible track bar

[savage]

Hey Paul (dirtdonk)I sucky at computers so here are the pictures of the track bar.THANKS DAVE

 

[DirtDonk]

Yep, that's farther than I thought from your earlier description. I still think it'll fit in there fine though, since you said your original was in the same position. And so was mine for that matter.

I figured that with mine it was because one of my rear radius arm mounts had been pulled forward (passenger side) by either an impact at some point in it's life, or by someone trying to align it, or it was simply welded on incorrectly from the factory.
All of the above are plausible.

Even though you're putting pressure on it, I would still do it. There's even another thread about that just in the past couple of days you can check out. In the OP's case in that one, it was farther back than yours and did not match the factory bar.

The only things to correct it are to either bend the lower mount towards the passenger side (not sure how best to do it, but it would be possible), relocate one rear radius arm mount (possible to do as well, but not really very a sensible solution I don't think), or to move your trackbar mount to the rear (also not necessarily the best way to do it).
Or you could tweak the bar itself.

Of course, you could also take measurements along the frame rails to make sure your truck is square still, but if it's off, getting it back to stock would involve some work. Been some guys here who've done their own frame straightening, but it's usually better done at a shop.

If the bar was different from your original, I'd take it back certainly. But since that wouldn't fix your issue, and should not cause any more trouble than your original has done over the years, I would say to leave that until the last choice.

Oh, and wait until you've got your engine and stuff back in too, before making any determination on it.
If you can leave it off until then, that would be the way to go. If you need to put it on ahead of time for whatever reason, I would not hesitate to pull it into place.

Paul

 

[tacobronco]

Sorry to butt in, but are you guys talking about the angular misalignment between the WH track bar and the mount? I noticed the same thing with mine, but it may not have been as bad as these pics. Anyway, I solved it by just installing the upper mount first, then the lower. Basically the upper bushing deformed slightly to make up for the misalignment. I've only put a few hundred miles on it, but no issues so far. I'm just keeping an eye on it to see of the bushing dies a premature death. (They don't seem to last that long anyway.)

 

[DirtDonk]

No problem taco. Glad to have more feedback anytime.
And yeah, that's what he was referring to.
Agree about the short life expectancy. Especially of the upper bushing.

Funny thing about that though. I used to go through them pretty often when mine was a DD and a WW, but ever since I changed to the adjustable bar, the bushings have lasted much longer.
The last set even more, after I used anti-seize on all surfaces. And no, anti-seize is not good for polyurethane by all reports. I just didn't think about that at the time, and so far so good.

Paul

 

[bronc50]

Mine was simalar but if you do not have the correct castor it can also affect where the upper trackbar locates to

 

[DirtDonk]

I totally forgot the most often changed relationship here! Thanks bronc50, for bringing that up.

When you lift the front suspension, you're tilting the lower mount down. When you install the offset c-bushings you're tilting the axle and mount back. They probably rarely cancel each other out, even if they're close.
That alone can make quite a noticeable change when you get a couple of feet along the bar.

The adjustable bars are great for getting the angle of the upper eye correct for the tilt after the lift and bushings, but can't do anything about any overall change in the tilt of the lower mount.
This highlights another reason that, when all is said and done, the best way to correct for caster loss at the wheels is to cut and rotate the steering yokes instead of trying to compensate with the bushings.
For most of us, that decision only comes when you can't get enough positive caster with bushings alone. But in reality, we should be using the bushings to correct the trackbar location, and the yokes to get proper caster.

Good call.

Paul

 

[savage]

THANKS PAUL,I was wounding does the track bar have a torque for both ends or just axle end?

 

[Fireball05]

Subscribed, I have one of these waiting to go in. Might need to come back here and refresh my memory once I get around to actually installing it!

 

[savage]

adjustible drop brackets

Hey Paul,I went back and change the caster by using my adjustable drop brackets.I can adjust them in three different degrees top hole +1,middle hole +2.5 and bottom hole+4.I had them set at +2.5 which rolled the axle back,so I put it at +1 which rolled it forward,and it relieved some of the bind so I agree caster plays a big roll in the track bar connections.THANKS AGAIN DAVE!!!!! AND THANKS TO BRONCO50

 

[DirtDonk]

I was wounding does the track bar have a torque for both ends or just axle end?

Yes, but I don't know what they are at the moment. Can't find it in my Chilton's and can't find my Haynes at the moment.
What we really need to do after all these years, is what we've done on other websites, and have a sticky thread (or at least one in the Tech Section) that lists all the known torque values.
Then another thread, or an additional post in the same thread maybe, listing all the other specifications we can find.
Be a very good quick-reference resource.

As soon as I find my books I'll start it up and we can add to it as things come up.

Good call on playing with the adjustments on the drop brackets.
Now when all is said and done, have your caster measured to get a point of reference and double-check your u-joint/pinion angle to make sure you're not going to experience binding in the front.

Paul

 

[savage]

track bar torque

DirtDonk,did you ever find out if their is a torque for the track bar?

 

[DirtDonk]

What? Who me?
Stand by. My book's got to be around here somewhere.

brb...

Paul

 

[DirtDonk]

Well, my memory was a bit off. I knew it was pretty stiff, but I was thinking the upper was in the sixty to seventy range, while the lower would be in the one-twenty-five to one-fifty range.
Turns out, the upper mount should be torqued to 110-130 ft lbs, and the lower nut to 155-205 lbs.

As I said, pretty stiff. But I'd be willing to be that, like me, most here torque them nearer to the levels I said originally. I've used a big wrench and my foot for all I was worth on the bottom, but have no idea what the actual torque on it would have been.

Here's my take on it though. These are not stock bushings with their highly extended center sleeves that are made to dig into the metal with serrated ends. The polyurethane bushings have large flanges on them, and the sleeves do not extend as far out the center. So if you see the bushings or the ears of the upper mount distorting too much, just stop there and call it a day. It's tight!

Up to you then. If you can get that much torque on the lower mount, go for it. For the kind of values they're listing for the upper mount though, I would check to make sure that the upper bolt is in good shape and has not been replaced with an inferior grade. I've seen lots of them with damaged threads over the years (probably from pushing too hard through the hole with a mis-aligned bar) so inspect yours too.
If I'm not mistaken, the original should be a black-oxide coated, fine-thread, pointy tipped grade-8 bolt with a cotter pin hole for use with a castellated nut.
If it's not, check the grade on the head, replace if necessary, and torque accordingly.

Paul

 

[AZ73]

I had similar problems. I'm used to setting up suspensions on Porsche's so I know how to take the measurements. When it wasn't even close on the first fit, I measured with strings and plumb bobs. I placed the new one(s) next to the stock ones and they're all bent incorrectly. I called and was told that that's what they have to offer and they've put them on hundreds of trucks with no problems. That certainly doesn't explain why the stock one with new bushings fits perfectly while the aftermarket one isn't even close (yes I returned each one and ordered from someone else). I took side by side pictures to show the 3 Bronco houses that all of them were off. I ended up just going with Heim joints on the ends, it was the only way I could get them to fit. I calculated and measured and the bend closest to the axle on the aftermarket ones were off by 7 degrees making the end on the frame off by 3/4-1 inch. Sure, you can MAKE it fit, but it pre-loads and torques the bushing. It shouldn't be that way. It should be bent correctly when you buy it, and when you lay it next to a factory bar, the ends shouldn't be an inch apart. That said, there's ALWAYS a chance that my frame,suspension and factory bar are tweeked, but with the string/plumb bob measurements, it measured square. Lay your new one next to your old one and look.

 

[DirtDonk]

I agree with everything you just said, except that in the picture it looks like your original bar is not straight on the bolt. Is that just the angle of the pic, or is the bushing so worn out that the sleeve is no longer square in the hole?

That looks like one of ours, so if it is, sorry we couldn't get you one that matched your original.
While I agree that the overall angles look different (is the adjustable top eye oriented correctly?), that bolt angle just looks out of skew.
Probably just the angle of the pic, since it sounds like you're familiar with suspension adjustments and angles, but had to check

Paul

 

[savage]

My bar from wild horse was pretty close to my stock bar,it would follow all the curves.If it was off it was at the most 16th of a inch.I did mention above when I played with the caster it got pretty close to lining up with the upper bracket.hey,Paul I do think the torque for both ends seems a lot,I ended up buying a factory oem shop manual on cd and the torque was the same as you gave me .I think Ill start low and work my way up. Thanks Dave

 

[AZ73]

I agree with everything you just said, except that in the picture it looks like your original bar is not straight on the bolt. Is that just the angle of the pic, or is the bushing so worn out that the sleeve is no longer square in the hole?

That looks like one of ours, so if it is, sorry we couldn't get you one that matched your original.
While I agree that the overall angles look different (is the adjustable top eye oriented correctly?), that bolt angle just looks out of skew.
Probably just the angle of the pic, since it sounds like you're familiar with suspension adjustments and angles, but had to check

Paul

I appreciate the customer service I received from WH and the other houses. They actually went and looked to see if the one that was sent to me was off but I was told all the ones in stock matched the one I had. Unfortunately no one could match the bar to a factory bar. I took that pix with the old bushings. You'll notice the gap on the end is much greater than 1 inch in the attached picture. The adjustable end is off by 180 degrees in the picture, but the gap remains the same (it's irrelevant for the measurements). Also, the bolt line on the ends are not parallel as they should be (after rotating it 180 degrees). I put new bushings in and did the same measurement with the bolt running through both. The gap on the end was an inch off. I pulled the bushings out and ran a straight edge on the eye holes with the bars laying on graph paper, still off by an inch. I ran a laser along the bends, using a matched angle for the axle mounting point. Off by 7 degrees, which matched my plump bob measurements exactly. I have complete photographs of all the plumb bob measurements, as well as all the geometry. I spend close to 10 hours checking and double checking. Again, perhaps my frame/axle are off, but plumb bobbing with the mounting points on a level surface produces a perfectly square measurement. I even ran the math for the 2.5 inch lift and it should have helped the new track bar by bringing the mounting point 1/16th inch back as the rotation from the radius arm bushings moves the mounting point rearwards, after accounting for the 7 degree C bushings (which rotate the axle forward). The 7 degrees on the C bushings is non-correlated to the 7 degrees bend in the track bar. Put new bushings in both an after market bar and a factory bar, and put them both in a vice on the first part of the bar by the mounting point to the Axle so they are completely parallel (make sure the bolts though the hole that mounts to the axle are parallel as some vendors weld the eye-hole at a angle) and you'll be able to see the bends are off. Again, I might be blowing smoke because if my track bar is bent and my frame is bent, then all my measurements will be off and they will only match each other. BUT the entire frame was plum-bobbed onto a level surface and it measured square. If it fits on other trucks, then great. For now, as I said, I swapped the ends for Heim joints which give me the rotation on the ends I needed.

I'm not dissing the Bronco houses, they've all been great in trying to solve my problem. But here's another owner with a similar issue. I'd like to see another factory bar matched to an after market bar to be sure. I've already fixed my issue, but if there is an issue, it would help future owners.

 

[Fireball05]

Here's my OEM bar next to a new WH one. Haven't installed it yet, but it looks pretty close?

 

[savage]

[AZ73],I agree your track bar looks way off by the picture,my bar was like the one [Firerball05] has pictured.Was your bar from wild horse or another place?I notice when I was researching before I bought mine,I notice the old track bars varied in size of the ends and bends from different years.I think what works for one person my not work for another.

 

[AZ73]

Thanks all. I don't know what the problem is with mine but subbing the ends with Heinz solved it for me.