Hi all,

I wanted to report an issue with some ball joints I had ordered that were made by Mevotech. These are the TXK5335 TTX line of lower ball joints.

According to Rock Auto, they are used on the following vehicles:
1997-2005 CHEVROLET BLAZER
1997-2004 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP
1997-2005 GMC JIMMY
1997-2004 GMC SONOMA
1998-2000 ISUZU HOMBRE
1997-2001 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA

The problem is that the hole for the cotter pin is too high on the stud and the stud is longer than needed. You can see the issue in the first picture where I have installed the ball joint and had done the initial tightening of the nut so that it was snug but not torqued to is final specified value. By my best guess is out of position by about 2mm to 4mm. The comparison was made to the old Moog ball joint I was replacing as measured from the top of the taper on the stud. The OD of the top of the taper on both ball joint studs was 16.6 mm.

Sadly for me, these ball joints were ordered over 30 days ago, actually about 6 months ago, from Rock Auto so that I cannot return them for a refund. I have also since contacted Mevotech technical support to inform them of this problem.

And one last thing, the mounting bolts for these come with lock washers and prevailing-torque nuts. This will make working out the proper torque to use when tightening them hard to work out.


The installed new Mevotech ball joint with the cotter pin hole too high to engage the nut castellations.



The Mevotech and Moog ball joints side-by-side.



The height above the top of the taper to the hole on the old Moog ball joint.



The height above the top of the taper to the hole on the Mevotech ball joint.

 

That's wild that it's off by that much.

 

Right?

I can't believe they let their product out with such a flaw.

And then there was my frustration. I had not done lower ball joints in a long time and I had forgotten that it wasn't a small job requiring the removal of the hub and disconnecting the upper control arm from the steering knuckle. Argh.

 

That sucks! Looking at it though, that castle nut looks way shorter than what I would expect. Wonder if they were shorted on their normal nut and some bean counter said use this one instead. I'm not saying that it is right, but would a heavy washer space it enough to get the nut to engage with the cotter pin hole?

How much clearance is there to the rim? That thing sticks down there a ways further than the stock joint...

 

Good eyes! I too wondered about the nut and as it turned out it was the same height as the Moog one with the castellations of the same size.

And yes, the stud is longer too. It is as if the engineers added extra length to the base of the threaded part.

 

wondering what the final conclusion was ?

 

After talking to Mevotech on the phone and sending them pictures, I've heard nothing from them.

I'm pretty disappointed.

They don't know this but I have already passed them over for a purchase.

 

did you end up leaving them in and washering down the nut

 

Regarding the nut, I too wondered if it was shorter than normal. So I checked and and the Mevotech nut was the same height as the old Moog one.

As for using a washer as a spacer, that is what the guy on the phone at Mevotech tech support suggested. I have thick spacer washers on the upper ball joints, but those were supplied with the Rough Country upper control arms and have the exact thickness required. I thought about trying to find some washers but then realized finding the right thickness in one or a couple would have been too hard to get right.

I didn't even get to checking any clearance between the stud and the wheel rim. However, it does stick down enough that it could have been an issue too.

I can't believe they made such an obvious mistake. It sure makes a person wonder about their quality control process.