69 camaro lower control arm ball joint problem

[northwests]

Hey guys got a little problem maybe some of you may have had. I have a 69 camaro trying to get new lower balljoints for. None made for that car fit. Tried moog,spicer various other ones too all are too small by approximately 1/8 inch. Any input would be helpful. Thanks

[MarkM66]

Are they to small on both L and R control arms? Maybe someone modified them for a different style ball joint in the past. I've used parts store joints before, and they fit.

[northwests]

Figured it out today. Finally talked to the right guy. Turns out the camaro being produced possibly in late 69-70 was changed to 70-81 ball joints and control arms and now sport a upgraded and much beefier ball joint. Evidently they had problems with the smaller ones used from 67-69. Thanks for the input tho. You never know what has transpired over the years.

[Proforged]

Figured it out today. Finally talked to the right guy. Turns out the camaro being produced possibly in late 69-70 was changed to 70-81 ball joints and control arms and now sport a upgraded and much beefier ball joint. Evidently they had problems with the smaller ones used from 67-69. Thanks for the input tho. You never know what has transpired over the years.

For what it's worth, we've never heard of this. The 1970-81 control arms are totally different and won't bolt onto the 1967-69 subframe. I don't see how this would be possible.

[David Pozzi]

Second gen Camaro ball joints use a 10 degree taper into the spindle, 67-69 use a 7 degree taper. I've never heard of this.
David

[northwests]

I have had this camaro for about 12 years and these are the arms that was on it. By all looks they are 69 camaro arms, they have been on a driveable car. They(new ball joint) appear to fit in the spindle as they should and in the control arm hole. I don't have the old ones they got thrown away by mistake so no comparisons. Makes me wonder now whats up since you guys are not ever hearing of this. What could be the deal. I will try to get some pics of the arms on here for you guys to look at. Thanks for all the input.
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n14/Northwest--S/NorthwestClackamas-20110913-00094.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n14/Northwest--S/NorthwestClackamas-20110913-00095.jpg

[northwests]

The new ball joint for a 70-81camaro fits this arm and the spindle I have -I don't know whats up. Hopefully someone here can see something I do not. Thanks

[northwests]

Nobody got any more clues to what i am experiencing. Would love to put this sucker together someday. Thanks

[MarkM66]

Nobody got any more clues to what i am experiencing. Would love to put this sucker together someday. Thanks

I thought you said in the post above this that you got ball joints that worked. If that's the case, go with it..

[northwests]

I thought you said in the post above this that you got ball joints that worked. If that's the case, go with it..

No i did some figuring and measuring and the 70-81 ball joint has a different length shaft by about a 1/4" and has a different taper (not by much)as described earlier by Mr. Pozzi. I have been to every parts store in my area and noone has the answer. Hopefully someone out there will read this and the mystery will be solved.

[MarkM66]

If factory control arms are ok, just look for some different used ones. With everyone ditching them for tubular, they should come pretty cheap.

[Vince@Meanstreets]

I have had this camaro for about 12 years and these are the arms that was on it. By all looks they are 69 camaro arms, they have been on a driveable car. They(new ball joint) appear to fit in the spindle as they should and in the control arm hole. I don't have the old ones they got thrown away by mistake so no comparisons. Makes me wonder now whats up since you guys are not ever hearing of this. What could be the deal. I will try to get some pics of the arms on here for you guys to look at. Thanks for all the input.


How did you remove the old ball joint?
After time and several ball joint removals the ball joint hole in the arm can get deformed. MOOG makes a larger size problem solver joint to help this. Lower section is knurled to make up the slack.

[lomchivok]

I have the same problem.

I just slid a 69 camaro sub frame from a second owner wreck under my 67 firebird. When I went to rebuild the front end...the ball joints didn't fit. Pitman arm, Idler arm inner and outer tie rods all worked with 67-69 parts but the ball joints were 70.weird indeed.
I picked up some upper and lower A arms today at the Monroe swap meet and will rebuild and install them to keep things kosher.
I did install the 70 ball joints upper and lower. The only thing I had to do was use a thicker washer under the castle nut as the nut when tightened bottomed out on the threads. No driving issues and my shimmies are gone but I want the right parts under my Firebird.

[David Pozzi]

A 70 ball joint has a different taper into the spindle, no safe way to interchange them unless the spindle is reamed to match. It's hard to believe GM did this.

[northwests]

I have the same problem.

I just slid a 69 camaro sub frame from a second owner wreck under my 67 firebird. When I went to rebuild the front end...the ball joints didn't fit. Pitman arm, Idler arm inner and outer tie rods all worked with 67-69 parts but the ball joints were 70.weird indeed.
I picked up some upper and lower A arms today at the Monroe swap meet and will rebuild and install them to keep things kosher.
I did install the 70 ball joints upper and lower. The only thing I had to do was use a thicker washer under the castle nut as the nut when tightened bottomed out on the threads. No driving issues and my shimmies are gone but I want the right parts under my Firebird.

Question: were your calipers on the front side of the wheel as opposed to normal behind the wheel. Yes someone finally with the same prob. Thanks for that post. My problem is now solved as I now have C5 brake setup and correct 69 spindles, control arms, and steering arms going in now. Thanks to all for the posts. Don't know if GM did it my guess is someone else with some ingenuity wanting disc's made it happen although probably not the correct way. Interesting nonetheless!

[lomchivok]

No calipers its drum brakes and rear steering linkage. I ended up yanking the existing upper and lower A arms off and putting back the "correct" ones that take a standard ball joint. I also notice the upper A arm rods on the bastard set have nuts to retain the bushings and the "correct ones have bolts...very strange!:willy: