No problem Y2KW57 that is what FTE and neighbors are all about.

Tim M

 

I just tried to sort my way through this and here's what I ordered from Summit Racing:

Front: Energy Suspension Sway Bar Bushings 4-5180R - Sway Bar Bushing; Front Sway Bar Bushing Set; Bar Dia. 36mm; Red

I measured my front bar with calipers and it is 36mm. These are only the bar-to-frame bushings in red, no downlink bushings. If you want black, just replace the "R" with a "G" at the end of the part number.

Rear: Energy Suspension Sway Bar Bushings 4-5187R - Bushings, Rear Sway Bar, Polyurethane, Red, 30mm Diameter, Ford, F-250 Super Duty, Kit

I picked up the 30mm kit because I will be replacing the stock rear bar with the F250 30mm bar. Again, if you want black instead of red just replace the "R" with a "G" at the end of the part number.

Hopefully I ordered the correct kits

 

A bit different from the article WE3ZS posted the link to! When in doubt, go with factory, I suppose.

 

Maybe not necessarily.

Go with the factory when using factory parts... but a lot of guys are not using factory parts for the sway bar end links. The factory upper end link bushing comes with a brand new metric class 10.9 "stretch bolt" fastener.

A "stretch bolt" is of a type that is necked down to a smaller root diameter for the unthreaded portion of it's shank length. This enables the bolt to stretch when torqued, and it is the stretching of the bolt that creates the tension that applies friction to the nut threads to keep the fastener tight.

By contrast, some of the aftermarket end link kits, particularly those offered by Raybestos, and remarketed by ACDelco, use "shoulder bolts" which have the diametric opposite construction. Shoulder bolts are thicker, in fact much thicker, for the unthreaded portion of their shank length, and as such, are very difficult to "stretch".

They can be torqued, but the distribution of tension would be concentrated within the very short root diameter occupied by the nut threads, rather then that tension being smoothly distributed over a much longer section of bolt by virtue of a thinned down shank like a stretch bolt.

The shoulder bolt is obviously that way to fully support the inside diameter of the urethane bushings used in those types of end links, which do not use a separate rolled sleeve cylinder like the Energy design does. I'm not suggesting that one design is better than the other by this comment.

I'm only pointing out that a Torque Spec is how many pounds of turning force is applied to a fastner couplet (bolt and nut in this case)... the resistance to this force is the tension of the bolt. The ability of that bolt to be stretched effects the enduring friction on the threads of the fastener.

The factory stretch bolt has a full diameter shank for only about the first 12 mm behind the flange head. This centers the bolt in the bore of the bushing. Then the bolt necks down to a smaller root diameter for about 60mm, before it grows back to it's full diameter for the thread cut.

The factory bushing interior metal sleeve is several times thicker walled than the rolled sleeve insert of the Energy suspension kit. A thicker walled metal sleeve is less likely to deform under 185 ft lbs of torque. By contrast, a thinner walled rolled sleeve with an open seam may be more likely to deform under high torque. I do not know at what torque.

Again, this is not a comment about what end link bushings are better... it's just an observation concerning the different construction of various options for end links. The differences give rise to the possiblity that the factory torque spec may or may not be applicable to non-factory end link installations.

YMMV.

For brand new (just posted) detailed pictures of a Ford factory sway bar end link installation, click on this current (in progress) full write up here: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...l#post12684481

 

Actually all that info about torquing and stretch bolts means nothing. It was a bad design by Ford and the bolts that go through the frame mount are "waisted" or cut down in the middle so they will slide through the upper mount and the upper bushing sleeve easily. The bolt steps up near the head so it will fit well in the link bushing but leaves the "waisted" part too small for the frame mount hole (not a pillow block as mentioned above). It's not a special torque type bolt, in fact all you can do is tighten the nut tightly but that won't help since the problem lies in the design and the inherent looseness caused by the slop in the upper mount. You can torque all you want and even get grade 8 bolts but it won't help. It is a design flaw by Ford. I did mention a fix for it elseware, in fact mine are still very quiet. Just get the whole link from Ebay and fill the waisted section with JB weld the day before installation.

 

For those planning on buying "Energy" bushings for the end links, you may find the following information interesting, if not useful:

The 881166 part number for sway bar end links from Energy Suspension Products (.com) is not really an Energy product. Here is the story:

First, the cast of characters:

1. Energy Suspension ... the Manufacturer.

2. Energy Suspension Parts . com .... an independent reseller of urethane suspension parts that are not only products made by Energy Suspension, but are also products made by Prothane.

3. Prothane Suspension ... the Manufacturer.

4. Prothane Suspension Parts . com ... an independent reseller of urethane suspension parts that are not only products made by Prothane Suspension, but are also products made by Energy.


1. Some general notes about Energy Suspension the manufacture:

Energy is not affiliated with Prothane. Their parts do not all come off the same boat from China. They are separate manufacturers.

Energy makes kits for 1999, 2000-2004, and 2000-2005 Excursions. Energy does not offer end link bushings in isolation outside of a kit. The black only 881166 kit is not an Energy part number, nor is it an Energy product. All true Energy products are available in black or red.

Energy does not offer a standard kit for these applications that includes a "greaseable" sway bar bushing. Energy does make greaseable uBrackets, but they are not included in any application kit. The tech sales rep at Energy (manufacturer) suggested drilling and tapping the stock U bracket for the axle mounted sway bar mounting, and drilling a 1/8" diameter hole through the Energy bar bushing in line with the drilled and tapped u bracket hole just drilled, and threading in one's own zerk fitting as an alternative to special ordering a greaseable u bracket from Energy. (This paragraph has nothing to do with end links, it's just an FYI).

Energy makes 3 kits for the front sway bar for the listed applications this research applys to. These kits include both the sway bar end link bushings as well as the axle mounted sway bar support bushings, and are as follows:

2000-2005 4WD Excursion, 36mm bar, Part # 4.5180
2000-2004 4WD F250-550, 32mm bar, Part # 4.5186
1999-99.5 4WD F250-550, 32mm bar, Part # 4.5192

Append any Energy part number with "G" for Graphite (black) or "R" for Red.

Energy does not sell end link bushings a la carte. The 881166 part number is not even in Energy's part numerology system.

Energy typically offers three different durometers (hardness of the urethane) in their products, but for the kits Energy has for the applications listed here, Energy only offers one durometer, their most durable/hardest, with a durometer of 88 "tough".



2. Some general notes about Prothane Suspension the manufacturer:

Prothane is not affiliated with Energy. Their parts do not all come off the same boat from China. They are separate manufacturers.

Prothane only makes one kit for all for 1999, 2000-2004, and 2000-2005 Excursions, called the 6-1166. Prothane does not offer an end link only kit that has been sold as part number 881166. That part number is not a valid Prothane part number. Prothane, however, does indeed make the actual bushings in that "invalid" part number. The part number is actually the result of a large reseller (below) breaking up that one and only one kit that Prothane makes for the 1999-2004 Super Duty, which is part number 6-1166.

Unlike Energy who offers three different kits, Prothane only makes one kit for all applications, and that kit includes the axle mounted sway bar bushings for a 32mm diameter bar. Prothane does not offer a 36mm diameter bar kit. For that, one must turn to Energy.

The durometer of the Prothane end link bushings is slightly less than Energy's, with a durometer of 85A for the Prothane, versus Energy's 88.


3 & 4. Some general notes about the resellers called Energy Suspension Parts dot com and Prothane Suspension Parts dot com:

Neither reseller is affiliated with either Energy Suspension or Prothane Suspension, but both resellers are affliated with each other. In fact, the parent company of both resellers is Diversified Suspension Technologies (DST) which itself has no direct affliation with either Energy or Prothane, but is a major distributor of both manufacturer's products.

Anyhow, it is the two DST resellers that breaks up Prothane's 6-1166 kit, removes the sway bar bushings, and resells just the end link bushings as Part number 881166. They further market this part number under both the Energy Suspension Parts .com and the Prothane Suspension Parts .com websites.

The point of this clarification is, if you truly want "Energy" suspension end link bushings with a hardness durometer of 88, then don't order 881166. Instead, look for and order the applicable and true Energy Suspension part numbers I have enumerated above, in black or in red, and know that you can order any part number from either reseller.

If you have an Excursion, and want true "Energy" you will have to live with receiving a couple of axle mounted sway bar support bushings that are two small at 32mm for your 36mm sway bar.

On the other hand, if you don't mind the Prothane brand name, and don't mind or would actually prefer 3 less points in hardness with a durometer of 88, then either order the full Prothane kit listed below that will include 32mm sway bar support bushings, or for end link bushings only, order the break out kit that DST markets as 881166. Just be aware that these are not Energy bushings, they are Prothane's.

Personally, I doubt that I would be able to feel a difference between the two brands, despite durometer differences, at least when new. Only time can tell if there is a long term durability difference. And one would need to have both kits in hand to determine any metal hardware differences like the sleeve wall thickness, or washer plating and thickness.

Clear as mud? Hope so. I was really confused about this, so I tore into it, calling both manufacturers, to get answers straight from the horses's mouthgs. Once I got it all straight, it seemed like a useful bit of info to share here on FTE.

 

Wow. That makes my head hurt.
Thanks for that info...

 

Tell me about it Misky6.0!

My head hurt writing it.

And to make it worse, when verifying the data, I did an image and word search for each part number, and big companies like Amazon would have the wrong picture for the part they were selling, making it even more confusing.

Case in point: Google image search Energy Suspension 4.5186, and the first hit is Amazon, and their picture shows only the sway bar axle mounted bushings, not the end link bushings. Furthermore, their image shows Greaseable axle mounted bushings complete with brackets and zerk fittings, when in fact the 4.5186 does not include any greaseable bushings, and does not include brackets either, all according to the Tech Service Rep at Energy Suspension headquarters in San Clemente, CA.

So buying these parts from some retailers is an excercise in faith at best. Definitely not what you see is what you get, and there is no disclaimer that says objects may not be what they appear as either.

This mystification is the motivation for this post. I hope it helps fellow members here who visit this topic in the future. Typically, the same questions crop up in cyclical fashion, and it is hard to find all the information without investing a lot of time... and head hurting.

 

Excellent write-up! At least now I feel confident I ordered the correct parts as listed above.

I guess if one wants to be sure they are getting real Energy products, always get the red ones.

I ordered them just because I thought it would be a better wear indicator, as it will likely be easier to spot cracks and deterioration in a red bushing than in a black (graphite) bushing.

Awesome job!

 

Don't send anymore PMs telling me to remove my pictures on my sway link thread to make yours look better..........that's just wierd.

 

Nicmike...

At first I took it on faith that you were correct, and went out and checked the torque on my upper bolts that I had just installed, and of course they were less than 185 ft lbs. Much less.

Thought about it for a minute. Then I took a drastic step... blowing the dust out of an old Win98 computer and fired it up to look at the Ford Service CD. Note to anyone who is considering buying a factory service manual... a paper book can be so much easier and faster. Ford's service software at that time only seems to work on Win2K and earlier machines. A pain to keep running, and hence taking the time to verifiy the spec posted above for me was "drastic" step.

I took a look at the Ford Service Manual for model year 2000, with a Revision date of March 2001, and the bolt torque spec for the upper eyelet to frame bolt is stated to be only 85 ft lbs, just like the lower bolt.

The way Ford prints the spec is as thus: 115nm (85ftlbs).

Notice the left hand side parenthesis {(}. To me eyes, at a distance at least, and without glasses, (85 can appear as 185... not so much in the font that this website uses, but more so in the font that Ford uses in the diagrams of the Service CD.

Is it possible that your eyes are as deceitful as mine are?

Or do you have another official Ford reference, perhaps that applies to much later model years, that confirms what you report as 185?

For the 2000 model year, according to the official Ford CD that I have (purchased directly from HELM at full price, not a bootleg), the torque spec is only 85, not 185.

Please report back if you have reason to maintain your earlier assertion, and if so, please cite your source. We don't want everyone being as foolish as me, cranking up the torque without verifiying first. It would certainly be helpful for the archives if we all knew which years specified which torque, if there is a difference.

Thanks!

 

Someone whose opinion I respect called my attention to this comment.

I looked for it, and found what at best could be described as a personal missive, posted in a public forum, shouted in a giant font, that is neither related to the topic of the post quoted nor the thread in which it is found.

While such a comment is otherwise best left ignored, because of the questions about it, and the inaccurate implication that I supposedly asked someone to remove their pictures to make mine look better, I will address this simply by sharing the full content and context of the private message I sent:

Originally Posted by Y2KW57
Thank you for your suggestion of Dorman end links on my write up.

Unfortunately, you quoted my post by duplicating all of the pictures I had just previously posted again in your post.

Do you mind editing your post to not include all of my pics, so that others reviewing the write up will not be derailed by seeing repetitve pics in the nearly next post after the pics were just displayed?

I certainly support your comment... but I think the thread would flow much better without us having to look at the repeat of my pics.

My intention of doing the thread was as a write up, but it was taking me longer than I anticipated to annotate and post the pics, I allowed some time to lapse between the limited opportunities I had to complete it.

Your comment has inspired me to add a comprehensive inventory of all the other options currently on the market for swaybar end links, including part numbers and prices, so that all of the information can be found in one thread.

Yet, I started off wanting to do a write up on the factory end links, since so FEW people chose the factory option, there is very little information about them on enthusiast forums... other than "they suck" etc.

Anyway, thank you for your contribution, and for your consideration in editing your repost of my pictures out of your post.

Happy New Year! (ok, it's been a week now, but why not?)

And the response I received in return was:


I said nothing further. I will now say however, that if you indeed had more to say than just "get a life", then that message would have been more appropriately sent via private message also, rather than shouting it in giant font here.

Since ALL of the pictures in question were my pictures, and no one else's, the request was not about "making mine look better". The goal was to help make the write up more readable and picture sequence easier to follow for future members interested in replacing their sway bar end links.

I solved the problem by taking down my pictures, which automatically removed them from the redundant repeated requote of them. I then immediately reposted them later in the thread, so the context of any post referring to the pressing out of bushings would not be unfounded.

To judge for yourself (and to see these controversial, racy, blood pumping, weirdly censorsed pictures) here is the actual thread:

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...with-pics.html

The linked write up is still a work in progress, and has a lot of recently researched data about sway bar links and bushings, and is probably more interesting in the larger context of the topic of this thread rather than the small time housecleaning of this post.

I don't like doing laundry outside, but since this connotation of that giant bold shouting comment could be misconstrued in a maligning way, and since it was brought to my attention by others, I've now addressed it, giving the matter more attention than it deserves.

Incidently, my Private Message inbox is not full, and still works. Use it.

 

You are right, bro. Got the book back out and checked the chart again. 85 lbs is for both bottom and top on the end links. Seems I looked at the block next to it for the spring bolt. My apologies!

 

Cool! Thanks for checking back in and clarifying. I was talking with a friend and he said that you are usually dead on with Ford torque specs, so I was a bit worried when I saw the discrepancy, wondering if there was an update (like Ford has issued with other fasteners like lug nuts).

Thanks again for confirming that it is indeed only 85.

PS. You owe me a new bolt on one side.

 

Oh, man....now I feel bad! If you did break a bolt, I will make it up to you!