When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Well..it didn’t make sense to me to have thread on a bolt where it passes thru the mount and frame…so…checked my “new” ford type bolts and found the original bolt and nut…as well as one that is solid at the point where the bolt passes thru the mount and frame. Solid meaning no threads on the portion that passes thru the mount and frame. No threads means more metal..,less prone to stretching…not impossible..but less.
top bolt is an exact replacement bolt.
middle bolt the damaged bolt
bottom bolt a bit longer but no threads at the point where the bolt passes thru the mount and frame. Exact thread pattern and engagement to properly install the bolt. So the bottom bolt is what I used.
I dragged checked the bolt with a large breaker bar and it did not move. The original damaged bolt turned while drag checking it even though the original bolt was secured by a nut.
this is the subject bolt installed. There is a lot of drag link stress at this bolt.
probally my fault in general due to the 37” on 22.5’s and 3.5” front lift.
just posting in case others have this mysterious case of wiggly woes.
That appears to be the track bar. That upper end has a torque spec around 400 ftlb, I wonder if it was under torqued and allowed some.movement which wore at the bolt....that and corrosion may have ate at it.
That appears to be the track bar. That upper end has a torque spec around 400 ftlb, I wonder if it was under torqued and allowed some.movement which wore at the bolt....that and corrosion may have ate at it.
the forward bolt on the track bar bracket…not the track bar bolt.
1) Was the original bolt head flanged gapped away from the bracket when you first saw it?
1a) In other words, could you see daylight between the flange head of the bolt, and the underside of the bracket?
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
this bolt was loose as an assembly ….meaning I could spin the bolt with a breaker bar while the actual nut was very tight.
2) Was the bracket itself loose?
3) If the bracket was tight to the frame, and the nut was tight to the frame, and there was no air gap between the bolt flange and the bracket, but the bolt by itself could spin when tightened with a breaker bar, what then did you mean by the bolt was "loose as an assembly"?
3a) In other words, if an "assembly" can be thought of as an assemblage of multiple parts, but only one part (the bolt) was loose, what did you mean by "assembly"? Is there another part involved that was also loose, that you did not describe?
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
this bolt probally stretched becuase of my 37” on 22.5’s and 3.5 front lift.
There is no "probably" about the bolt stretching. That bolt IS INDEED stretched.
The most important question in this entire matter is HOW that bolt came to be stretched.
While you do have some big tires and a lift, you also applied a breaker bar to a bolt that was already tight.
There is a much greater probability that the bolt stretched from your over torqueing an already tightened bolt.
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
Well..it didn’t make sense to me to have thread on a bolt where it passes thru the mount and frame…so…checked my “new” ford type bolts and found the original bolt and nut…as well as one that is solid at the point where the bolt passes thru the mount and frame. Solid meaning no threads on the portion that passes thru the mount and frame. No threads means more metal..,less prone to stretching…not impossible..but less.
top bolt is an exact replacement bolt.
middle bolt the damaged bolt
bottom bolt a bit longer but no threads at the point where the bolt passes thru the mount and frame. Exact thread pattern and engagement to properly install the bolt. So the bottom bolt is what I used.
The bottom bolt that you selected is not able to be tensioned like the original bolt that Ford specified.
A key component of bolt's ability to secure two parts together is axial tension within the bolt.
The original bolt, having threads "where the bolt passes through the mount(bracket) and frame", has a root diameter that is skinnier than the shank diameter of the bottom bolt that you picked.
For the same torque specification called out in the service manual for that fastener location, the originally specified all threaded bolt can be tensioned more, within the distance between friction faces of the parts being clamped.
In my opinion, the bolt you selected as a replacement bolt will be more likely to loosen in the field than the bolt that you removed, which was tensioned.
When you applied the force of your "large breaker bar" to an already tensioned bolt, the bolt yielded.
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
I dragged checked the bolt with a large breaker bar and it did not move. The original damaged bolt turned while drag checking it even though the original bolt was secured by a nut.
4) What do you mean by "drag checking"?
4a) Does your use of the term "drag checking" mean taking a large breaker bar to an already tightened fastener, and applying torque with the breaker bar until the fastener moves, with the head "dragging" against the part clamped?
5) Do you have a torque wrench?
6) Have you looked up the torque specification for the fasteners you are "drag checking"?
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
this is the subject bolt installed.
probally my fault in general due to the 37” on 22.5’s and 3.5” front lift.
The probability of fault in the bolt stretching more likely rests with the unmeasured application of bolt head turning force with a large breaker bar than with the big tires.
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
There is a lot of drag link stress at this bolt.
It isn't a drag link, it is a panhard rod or torque arm that locates the axle laterally, and arguably endures greater stress than a moveable drag link for steering linkage, as the panhard rod anchor bracket is the fixed point that establishes the axle's location, and takes all the hits, heaves, and hos from all ground and suspension reaction inputs that attempt to bounce the axle away from that location.
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
just posting in case others have this mysterious case of wiggly woes.
The concern here is that your fix may not have diagnosed or addressed your wiggly woes.
It sounds like you over torqued an already tight and tensioned fastener.
Then you replaced that fastener with longer bolt having a greater full diameter shank that could be tightened, but not tensioned within the axial distance between clamped parts.
It also looks like there is a hard limit as to how much the new bolt can be tightened, as the bolt runs out of threads at or near the extent of the axial distance between friction faces of the clamped parts. If this is true, then the bolt and nut can be tightened to an unlimited measure of torque, while still not managing to squeeze together the parts that are to be clamped. In such a case, there could also be insufficient friction between the nut flange and the frame, and the bolt flange and the bracket.
In the scenario described in the paragraph immediately above, the fastener combination would be as tight as it could possibly be, due to the nut running out of threads, and the bracket could feel tight against the frame, due to the other fastener having not been changed. Yet when the truck is back on the road, the forces acting on the axle that are transmitted through the panhard rod to the clamped bracket, force the bracket to move within the range afforded between the nut and the bolt that is not tensioned.
1) Was the original bolt head flanged gapped away from the bracket when you first saw it?
1a) In other words, could you see daylight between the flange head of the bolt, and the underside of the bracket?
2) Was the bracket itself loose?
3) If the bracket was tight to the frame, and the nut was tight to the frame, and there was no air gap between the bolt flange and the bracket, but the bolt by itself could spin when tightened with a breaker bar, what then did you mean by the bolt was "loose as an assembly"?
3a) In other words, if an "assembly" can be thought of as an assemblage of multiple parts, but only one part (the bolt) was loose, what did you mean by "assembly"? Is there another part involved that was also loose, that you did not describe?
There is no "probably" about the bolt stretching. That bolt IS INDEED stretched.
The most important question in this entire matter is HOW that bolt came to be stretched.
While you do have some big tires and a lift, you also applied a breaker bar to a bolt that was already tight.
There is a much greater probability that the bolt stretched from your over torqueing an already tightened bolt.
The bottom bolt that you selected is not able to be tensioned like the original bolt that Ford specified.
A key component of bolt's ability to secure two parts together is axial tension within the bolt.
The original bolt, having threads "where the bolt passes through the mount(bracket) and frame", has a root diameter that is skinnier than the shank diameter of the bottom bolt that you picked.
For the same torque specification called out in the service manual for that fastener location, the originally specified all threaded bolt can be tensioned more, within the distance between friction faces of the parts being clamped.
In my opinion, the bolt you selected as a replacement bolt will be more likely to loosen in the field than the bolt that you removed, which was tensioned.
When you applied the force of your "large breaker bar" to an already tensioned bolt, the bolt yielded.
4) What do you mean by "drag checking"?
4a) Does your use of the term "drag checking" mean taking a large breaker bar to an already tightened fastener, and applying torque with the breaker bar until the fastener moves, with the head "dragging" against the part clamped?
5) Do you have a torque wrench?
6) Have you looked up the torque specification for the fasteners you are "drag checking"?
The probability of fault in the bolt stretching more likely rests with the unmeasured application of bolt head turning force with a large breaker bar than with the big tires.
It isn't a drag link, it is a panhard rod or torque arm that locates the axle laterally, and arguably endures greater stress than a moveable drag link for steering linkage, as the panhard rod anchor bracket is the fixed point that establishes the axle's location, and takes all the hits, heaves, and hos from all ground and suspension reaction inputs that attempt to bounce the axle away from that location.
The concern here is that your fix may not have diagnosed or addressed your wiggly woes.
It sounds like you over torqued an already tight and tensioned fastener.
Then you replaced that fastener with longer bolt having a greater full diameter shank that could be tightened, but not tensioned within the axial distance between clamped parts.
It also looks like there is a hard limit as to how much the new bolt can be tightened, as the bolt runs out of threads at or near the extent of the axial distance between friction faces of the clamped parts. If this is true, then the bolt and nut can be tightened to an unlimited measure of torque, while still not managing to squeeze together the parts that are to be clamped. In such a case, there could also be insufficient friction between the nut flange and the frame, and the bolt flange and the bracket.
In the scenario described in the paragraph immediately above, the fastener combination would be as tight as it could possibly be, due to the nut running out of threads, and the bracket could feel tight against the frame, due to the other fastener having not been changed. Yet when the truck is back on the road, the forces acting on the axle that are transmitted through the panhard rod to the clamped bracket, force the bracket to move within the range afforded between the nut and the bolt that is not tensioned.
And then you still have the wiggly woes.
the bolt and nut was able to move together using a 14” breaker bar…the nut was very tight into the bolt…there was no gap between the bolt head and the mount or the mount and the frame.
I could spin the bolt with a breaker bar while the actual nut was very tight.
I had interpreted the sentence above as the bolt was spinning while the nut was very tight... which made me think that the nut was not moving,
Originally Posted by speakerfritz
the bolt and nut was able to move together…the nut was very tight into the bolt….
This clarification makes it clearer. It now sounds like the nut was spinning just as much as the bolt. They were clocked together. As the bolt turned, so did the nut, since prevailing torque nuts have a running torque.
Now knowing that the nut was moving with the bolt also may explain what you meant by bolt "assembly" (nut and bolt together as an assembly), and makes it more plausible for some other cause to have stretched the bolt.
Why not just use a torque wrench to the required specs?
there are 5 bolts that hold the track bar mount in place. I checked the other 4 and they are still 125ft lbs . This one particular position is the only position that stretched. So new bolt installed and torqued to 125ft lbs.
Keep an eye on your track bar mount especially if it’s aftermarket junk, had loose steering on an 08 and everything looked fine till I pulled the mount off and found the massive crack, that’s against the crossmember and can’t be seen unless removed
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalytic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.
