[BlueBabySound]

I looked into these last year when I started building my Jeep, now I see bleepin Jeep and others installing them.
Anyone have personal experience or thoughts on the matter?

Ford Super Duty Dana 60

Jeep

 

[Gobi_Rubi]

Im currently building a 70" 44 for my JK and have been considering my options for balljoints. I was interested in the ball joint eliminators but after looking into the Dynatrac Prosteers, I realized they are basically the same concept with some improvements. The prosteers look like they use the same type of replaceable spherical bearing, but also have seals, are greaseable and have adjustable preload. I think for the cost of the BJE that its worth it to spend the extra cash to get the prosteers.

 

[Rob50lx]

Do either the Dynatrac or American Iron kits allow the upper "c" to support some of the load or is that still a feature only on the Rare Parts balljoints?

 

[Gobi_Rubi]

Do either the Dynatrac or American Iron kits allow the upper "c" to support some of the load or is that still a feature only on the Rare Parts balljoints?

I believe only the Rare Parts and its clones has that feature. I don't see the necessary adjustments on the upper on either of the others

 

[christensent]

Im currently building a 70" 44 for my JK and have been considering my options for balljoints. I was interested in the ball joint eliminators but after looking into the Dynatrac Prosteers, I realized they are basically the same concept with some improvements. The prosteers look like they use the same type of replaceable spherical bearing, but also have seals, are greaseable and have adjustable preload. I think for the cost of the BJE that its worth it to spend the extra cash to get the prosteers.

For a JK (and I assume JL), I can personally confirm that the Dynatrac uses the same joint and is the same design, just done better (sealed, greaseable, higher quality parts). I'd always go Dynatrack over Ball Joint "Delete" (I put delete in quotes because I can't do it, it's NOT A BALL JOINT DELETE! It's just a ball joint. It's the most BS marketing name ever).

On the Superduty line, they do have a cool feature on the upper where it's dramatically stronger than an OEM stud and essentially impossible to break. That upper is the weak link on the 05+ superduty ball joints.

 

[Pinepig]

Take a look at the new ones from Metal Cloak. I'm local and drove down and got a set, very nice. It looks like the have the good parts from the dynatrac and rare parts. Grease-able, sealed, rebuildable and split the weight on upper/lower.

Jeep JK Wrangler Baller Joints™, HD Ball Joints, Full Set

I'm just waiting for the Tq specs to be published and I'll put them in with the RCVs I have leaned up against the wall.

 

[BlueBabySound]

Take a look at the new ones from Metal Cloak. I'm local and drove down and got a set, very nice. It looks like the have the good parts from the dynatrac and rare parts. Grease-able, sealed, rebuildable and split the weight on upper/lower.

Jeep JK Wrangler Baller Joints™, HD Ball Joints, Full Set

I'm just waiting for the Tq specs to be published and I'll put them in with the RCVs I have leaned up against the wall.

Those look nice, didn't even know they made ball joints

 

[Pinepig]

Those look nice, didn't even know they made ball joints

They were released on Friday. I think I might have the first set that aren't on a development Metalcloak vehicle.

 

[BlueBabySound]

Do either the Dynatrac or American Iron kits allow the upper "c" to support some of the load or is that still a feature only on the Rare Parts balljoints?

@Rob50lx take a look at those new Metalcloak mentioned above

 

[Rob50lx]

Take a look at the new ones from Metal Cloak. I'm local and drove down and got a set, very nice. It looks like the have the good parts from the dynatrac and rare parts. Grease-able, sealed, rebuildable and split the weight on upper/lower.

Jeep JK Wrangler Baller Joints™, HD Ball Joints, Full Set

I'm just waiting for the Tq specs to be published and I'll put them in with the RCVs I have leaned up against the wall.

View attachment 368240

Can you take a better picture of one of the upper joints unwrapped and also measure the lip on the upper BJ that will sit at the bottom of the upper "c"

This was part of the problem with the original Rare Parts ball joints when trying to use a Tera44 housing.

@Rob50lx take a look at those new Metalcloak mentioned above

Yes, I'm keeping an eye on them. At that price I'm not going to be the first Tera44 Ginny pig like I was for the 1st production run of the RP joints. I'll wait until someone actually installs them on Tera44 housing. Somewhere in this forum I discussed my issue with the RP joints and they were of no help at the time. They did make the threaded body longer later down the road after I already ditched the RP BJs.

Here is my older post: Can we discuss Rare Parts Ball Joints... again

 

[Pinepig]

Can you take a better picture of one of the upper joints unwrapped and also measure the lip on the upper BJ that will sit at the bottom of the upper "c"

This was part of the problem with the original Rare Parts ball joints when trying to use a Tera44 housing.
View attachment 368243




Yes, I'm keeping an eye on them. At that price I'm not going to be the first Tera44 Ginny pig like I was for the 1st production run of the RP joints. I'll wait until someone actually installs them on Tera44 housing. Somewhere in this forum I discussed my issue with the RP joints and they were of no help at the time. They did make the threaded body longer later down the road after I already ditched the RP BJs.

Here is my older post: Can we discuss Rare Parts Ball Joints... again

I took this one for ya on the other site, so you need the thickness of the lip that overhangs to locate the depth of the balljoint, looks to be about an 1/8th.

ETA this was also a problem with the RP bjs according to your other earlier topic.

 

[Sinpperx]

How about 44 33 dana