U-Joints

[Reveeen]

If you could operate a car, or a vehicle, in a clean, dry, environment, then I would say that greasing (lubricating) the moving parts would serve no purpose (beyond the lubricant the parts were installed with), but we all know this is not so.

*Think* just for a moment the purpose never-seize performs on fasteners, lubrication, and water displacement. I have yet to see a U joint fail from over greasing, I've seen plenty fail from water, and dirt, contamination.

[Frank B]

Thus over-greasing is a problem and one that manufacturers have solved by removing the zerks. You won't find them on u-joints in any new vehicles (or ball-joints, tie-rod ends, ect). Forceing grease out through the edges of the seals breaks them away from their sealing surface and when the grease heats up and cools down it will suck contaminates (water and particulate) back into the joint. You are seeing water and dirty grease come out because you have broken the seals by continually pumping grease into them.

 

New cars don't have the zerks because they are not intended to last. They are expected to be traded up for a new model every two or three years not kept as the family car for ten to fifteen like people used to do. New models are released every year, all new models that share very little if any parts with the previous models. That means in five to ten years finding parts will be difficult if not impossible. Aftermarket parts anyway. You would be able to get some from the dealership, at a high price, but wait a minute, that would be a good deal for them! Just like making parts on the car non-serviceable, so they can sell new parts instead of grease.

When I managed a NAPA store a few years ago, I had ASE certified mechanics working at Ford, GM, Toyota dealerships, and the mechanics at the local shops that have been on a creeper longer than most of us have been alive, ask for ball joints, u-joints, king pins, tie rods, etc, etc, that had zerks. Why, because the one they are replacing didn't and they failed.

It's real, it's the truth, I've seen it in my hands. Not in a manual.

[jacobs]

 

I was just talking about a similar thing with one of the older techs at work. 35 years ago he worked for a Ford dealership and had a customer that insisted on having his oil, oil filter, and air filter changed every 3,000 miles and did NOTHING else to the car. He specifically made it clear that he wanted nothing on the chassis greased or lubricated. In the time my friend worked there he went through 3 cars - sold each of them at 200,000 miles (all without a single failure). The 4th one he brought in at 100,000 and my friend thought he would do the man an extra special service and greased the chassis (for free) - adding zerks to the joints (Ford did not put them in stock) and the man was so irate that he sold it immediately and bought a new car. GD

This customer having his air cleaner element changed every 3000 miles was showing his ignorance. Once a "cake" of fine dust accumulates on the filter element, the air cleaner filters MUCH more efficiently as verified by document #680536 published by the Society of Automotive Engineers in 1968. In this publication, the radiotracer technique was used to measure piston ring wear caused by dust metered to the intake air, fuel supply, and crankcase lubricant of an industrial diesel engine. Several basic air cleaner configurations were evaluated for their effectiveness in reducing ring wear due to ingested dust. This document titled "Ingested Dust, Filters, and Diesel Engine Ring Wear" is still available from SAE at http://www.sae.org/servlets/productDetail?PROD_TYP=PAPER&PROD_CD=680536.

 

This customer was defiantly ignorant about air cleaners and his knowledge was also severely lacking on lubrication.

[GeneralDisorder]

The only u-joints, tie rod ends, shackles, drag links, & etc I've had fail in the 45 years I've been driving were the newer cheep zerkless garbage that was factory installed and I'm still driving vehicles I purchased in the 1960's.

 

Aftermarket components are known for being poot quality. Has nothing to do with the maintenance when the components are built in pakistan and handled accordingly. One good drop from a few feet and a bearing's life will be cut by 2/3rds easily. Everything from quality control to handling in these cut-rate manufacturing facilities is extremely poor - many of the workers aren't old enough to be attending high school in the US. It's got nothing to do with maintenance my friend.

 

I wrenched professionally for 15 years as a heavy equipment mechanic and the main reason for failures then was when the crews did NOT grease the equipment as required. If greasing was bad, heavy equipment manufactures wouldn't put grease zerks on $500,000+ equipment. The more expensive the equipment, the MORE grease zerks there are.

 

Heavy equipment is a different application. It moves slowely - often heat is less of a concern (ie: 5 to 10 MPH *maybe*) thus over-greasing isn't a problem. It also suffers from the same ailment that I discussed in relation to manufacturers of electric motors - the buyers/owners/operators *feel* better about having something to zerk - regardless of weather it does anything or not. I have taken apart MANY motors that had zerks on the bearing covers and inside were SEALED bearings. Silly, but it's common.

 

GD

[Frank B]

You fail to realize, although you basically just covered it yourself, U-joints, ball joints, drag links, even wheel bearings are NOT high speed bearings. All of the high speed bearings in a car, like the ones in the tranny are lubricated with gear oil. I bet the "grease" in your high tech, high speed electric motor bearings mounted on a stationary piece of production equipment in a climate controlled building is more like oil than grease. Since it is a true high speed bearing that requires a thin, oil like grease, or oil. Again, you can't compare the machinery you are referring to with a car, they are two different machines operating in totally different environments, made to different standards. I bet the bearings on your equipment are made one at a time by a highly trained machinist, not thousands a day by employees making dollars a day. Made from pure steel or better, not reclaimed and recycled steel that is full of impurities.

[GeneralDisorder]

New cars don't have the zerks because they are not intended to last. They are expected to be traded up for a new model every two or three years not kept as the family car for ten to fifteen like people used to do. New models are released every year, all new models that share very little if any parts with the previous models. That means in five to ten years finding parts will be difficult if not impossible. Aftermarket parts anyway. You would be able to get some from the dealership, at a high price, but wait a minute, that would be a good deal for them! Just like making parts on the car non-serviceable, so they can sell new parts instead of grease.

 

All that really just isn't true in the grand scheme of things. Cars last LONGER by far (with less maintenance) than they ever have before. A car in the 1960's was basically shot at 100,000 miles. Now people complain if they can't get to 200,000 or more. And that's with NO greasing of chassis components as there are no zerks and it isn't called out in the schedule. Sure a component fails from time to time but by and large suspension components last the usuable life of the car without even a glance from a mechanic. You have to see the forest for the trees here. Parts are expensive because fewer are needed in the replacement supply chain

(less repairs means fewer parts are produced). It's also much faster and easier to redesign components now that all the engineering and proto-typing is done on computer.

 

Lets not forget that grease has come a long way in that time as well. The grease of 30 or 40 years ago often may not have outlasted the life of the component as some of todays finer lubricants will.

 

When I managed a NAPA store a few years ago, I had ASE certified mechanics working at Ford, GM, Toyota dealerships, and the mechanics at the local shops that have been on a creeper longer than most of us have been alive, ask for ball joints, u-joints, king pins, tie rods, etc, etc, that had zerks. Why, because the one they are replacing didn't and they failed.

It's real, it's the truth, I've seen it in my hands. Not in a manual.

 

People that turn wrenches on cars are very rarely in the posistion to do proper failure analysis. They fix it and move on. Their business is volume. They are of a breed that often has very rigid rituals with regards to lubrication - ones that they can't always quite explain.

 

You have given me no reasons other than anecdotal evidence to support your claims. I would now like you to offer some concrete reasoning behind your posistion. Just because a bunch of wrench monkey's wanted the zerks, and because you have seen some failed joints that you suppose failed due to contamination does not indicate that greasing zerks every 3,000 miles would have led to this not occuring. Indeed is it not possible that regular greaseing could have contributed to the contamination and actually sped up the failure process? There are good, concrete reasons to beleive that it might have, and there have been studies indicating that's exactly what happens in the vast preponderance of cases. Is in not possible that what you suppose was "contamination" was actually failed lubricant that had changed from a semi-liquid to a solid and contaminated itself? Were they any chemical analysis done on the supposed "contaminates"?

 

This is the stuff I do on a daily basis. Failure analysis is a big part of some of the work I perform as my employer is the factory service center and we process warantee claims for equipment and components that can be in the 10's of thousands of $$. We have chemical analysis done at times by independant labs, ect. This stuff is rarely done in the autmotive world (or if it is it's done at the corporate/factory level as we do) because it's easier to just throw on a new part (possibly updated ), pat the customer on the butt and send them on their way.

 

GD

[jacobs]

Heavy equipment is a different application. It moves slowely - often heat is less of a concern (ie: 5 to 10 MPH *maybe*) thus over-greasing isn't a problem. It also suffers from the same ailment that I discussed in relation to manufacturers of electric motors - the buyers/owners/operators *feel* better about having something to zerk - regardless of weather it does anything or not. I have taken apart MANY motors that had zerks on the bearing covers and inside were SEALED bearings. Silly, but it's common.

 

GD

 

GD, crawl under an 18 wheeler and then report back to us what you saw. Those aren't slow speed vehicles.

[GeneralDisorder]

You fail to realize, although you basically just covered it yourself, U-joints, ball joints, drag links, even wheel bearings are NOT high speed bearings. All of the high speed bearings in a car, like the ones in the tranny are lubricated with gear oil. I bet the "grease" in your high tech, high speed electric motor bearings mounted on a stationary piece of production equipment in a climate controlled building is more like oil than grease. Since it is a true high speed bearing that requires a thin, oil like grease, or oil. Again, you can't compare the machinery you are referring to with a car, they are two different machines operating in totally different environments, made to different standards. I bet the bearings on your equipment are made one at a time by a highly trained machinist, not thousands a day by employees making dollars a day. Made from pure steel or better, not reclaimed and recycled steel that is full of impurities.

 

Ball joints and tie-rod ends.... drag links and the like are not high-speed, but they are load bearing. Friction creates heat, and you can get your friction different ways - light loads at high speed, or heavy loads at low speed. It all makes heat regardless. And u-joints actually do rotate quite fast - they also change direction rapidly and tend to wear uneavenly because of it.

 

I agree with what you are saying to a point - there are definite difference between a C3 (motor rated) bearing, and a u-joint's pin bearings. But over the time they are required to operate (in hours) they are not all that different.

 

And either one will fail if there is nowhere for the grease to expand to, it overheats, and loses it's lubrication abilities. Grease must expand and contract - if it's contained then it will exert pressure on the bearings and drive out the lubricating film. Adding good, new grease to grease contaminated with particulates of burned grease creates a "compound" and grinds away the metal in the assembly. It may quiet it down, and it may help for a short time, but overall it was the over-greasing that killed it in the first place. To some extent, once you have over-greased them the damage is done unless you dissasemble them to remove some so you might as well keep adding grease - at that point it can't really hurt you anymore anyway.

 

GD

[GeneralDisorder]

GD, crawl under an 18 wheeler and then report back to us what you saw. Those aren't slow speed vehicles.

 

That falls more into the "feeling good about greasing things" catagory. Also a lot of heavy equipment joints are built in such a way that they will "belch" out the added grease - they have replaceable boots that can be squeezed to remove some of the grease when you force more in. But that is a totally different world from consumer automotive. The small Subaru u-joints use lip-seals, not boots.....Once upon a time I was a heavy wheeled vehicle mechanic in the Army so I understand what you are saying. But this topic was on regular 4-wheeler "automotive" components - not heavy over-the-road gear like tractor-trailer systems.

 

GD

[Frank B]

Careful with the wrench monkeys and such, your s**t**g were you live man. Your fellow board members here are wrench monkeys.

And your still talking about differnet machinery in a different industry, they do not compare! My concrete evidence was in my hand when I replaced my u-joints. Ones with and without zerks. Tell me how the dirt and water got in the factory u-joints that did not have zerks and how that did not contribute to thier failure? Tell me why I have to grease all the bearings in my lawn mower a few times a summer or they'll sieze up and need replacing? Your trying to tell me that the parts that have been in my hand never existed. The parts I am talking about ARE NOT the parts you deal with, they ARE NOT precision pieces that are properly sealed from the elements. Water and dirt get in, pumping new grease pushes it out, not all of it, but enough to prolong the life of the part. Were not working on the space shuttle man, were working on $400 Subarus!!! You need to think about the machine your working on, they are not all the same, why can't you get that?

You will have a u-joint fail on your car, if not allready, are you going to invest the time and money to analyze the grease and steel? NO , your going to replace it with a new one, and grease it up after or before you install it. When you take the old one apart you will find old, hard grease, dirt, and possibly water. Would new grease have prevented the failure? YES. Who cares if all of the old crap was removed before the new grease was pumped in, it doesn't matter. All that matters is that it lasts longer. It's not a precision piece, it's a maintenance item that's not designed to last forever, but helps out our wallets a bit to grease it instead of replacing it. I don't have thousands or millions of corporate dollars to maintain my car, nor do I rely on it to make thousands or millions of dollars to run a business so I don't care if it's perfect, just as long as it woks.

Save your way of thinking for the equipment your payed to work on, that jod requires it, a tired old car does not. It was designed differently, to different standards, with different materials, that require different maintenance procedures. Your not going to convince me that what I'm doing is wrong, I know first hand that greasing a u joint or other automotive bearing will prolong it's life compared to one that does not have a zerk. I've wasted money on non-greasable u-joints, and ball joints just to replace them within a year with greasable ones, ones that I have pumped new grease into every time I change the oil to compensate for the poor quality of the part or seal. They still don't squeel, pop, snap, or vibrate.

[GeneralDisorder]

I just replaced one of the original, factory u-joints on my 83 Hatch. It did not have a zerk but managed to last 223,000 miles. Granted one pin bearing was dust, but it got there without any zerking.

 

I agree with you that a lot of the aftermarket stuff is junk - zerk or not. The seals are crap to begin with so any grease you add will probably just leach out. Lawnmowers are so poorly built that it doesn't surprise me there either.

 

I'm merely saying that most of the *factory*, or OEM quality stuff is better left alone, and adding aftermarket parts with zerks will likely not last any longer than a quality OEM part with quality grease, quality seals, and no zerks at all. Yet another reason to shop at the dealer. Again and again I find that it's cheaper in the long run to just buy the right part to begin with. There are notable exceptions, but the rule is reinforced more times than it is proven wrong.

 

Given the choice of cheap part without a zerk, and cheap part with a zerk I would go with the zerk style if for no other reason than when it does seize up I have a way to force something in there to keep it moving till I can replace it, ect.

 

I just want the readers here to understand what they are doing, and think twice before wantonly adding grease to everything they see. Most of the time a good cleaning, check for play, and inspection of the seals is sufficient. Corrosion, dirt, expansion and contraction of filled grease cavities, ect are what cause the contamination in the first place. Make sure to wipe away any grease leaking from a seal as it can contract back into the assembly and carry with it contaminates that will severely shorten it's life.

 

GD

[michael appel]

All that really just isn't true in the grand scheme of things. Cars last LONGER by far (with less maintenance) than they ever have before. A car in the 1960's was basically shot at 100,000 miles. Now people complain if they can't get to 200,000 or more. And that's with NO greasing of chassis components as there are no zerks and it isn't called out in the schedule. Sure a component fails from time to time but by and large suspension components last the usuable life of the car without even a glance from a mechanic. You have to see the forest for the trees here. Parts are expensive because fewer are needed in the replacement supply chain

(less repairs means fewer parts are produced). It's also much faster and easier to redesign components now that all the engineering and proto-typing is done on computer.

 

Lets not forget that grease has come a long way in that time as well. The grease of 30 or 40 years ago often may not have outlasted the life of the component as some of todays finer lubricants will.

 

 

 

People that turn wrenches on cars are very rarely in the posistion to do proper failure analysis. They fix it and move on. Their business is volume. They are of a breed that often has very rigid rituals with regards to lubrication - ones that they can't always quite explain.

 

You have given me no reasons other than anecdotal evidence to support your claims. I would now like you to offer some concrete reasoning behind your posistion. Just because a bunch of wrench monkey's wanted the zerks, and because you have seen some failed joints that you suppose failed due to contamination does not indicate that greasing zerks every 3,000 miles would have led to this not occuring. Indeed is it not possible that regular greaseing could have contributed to the contamination and actually sped up the failure process? There are good, concrete reasons to beleive that it might have, and there have been studies indicating that's exactly what happens in the vast preponderance of cases. Is in not possible that what you suppose was "contamination" was actually failed lubricant that had changed from a semi-liquid to a solid and contaminated itself? Were they any chemical analysis done on the supposed "contaminates"?

 

This is the stuff I do on a daily basis. Failure analysis is a big part of some of the work I perform as my employer is the factory service center and we process warantee claims for equipment and components that can be in the 10's of thousands of $$. We have chemical analysis done at times by independant labs, ect. This stuff is rarely done in the autmotive world (or if it is it's done at the corporate/factory level as we do) because it's easier to just throw on a new part (possibly updated ), pat the customer on the butt and send them on their way.

 

GD

 

Hey general take back the 60s comment the cars they make now are throw aways 1950 and 60s cars out perform and out last these cars now I still drive a 1966 plymouth everyday and it still has original wiring and motor with way over 300,000 miles and still hasnt had to be honed or bored just regular maintenance I even have 1964 cutlass with only 50 miles on the 250,000 mile rebuild and it is all orginal to. both carbuerated and could out do horsepower and torque ratio then most stock cars that are out there besides that the body and frame of the older rigs werent made to collapse like these late 80s to now rigs which still goes to show over engineering and comfort are to stupid things that we live with give me a car that shakes when it rumbles and that I can feel whenever I touch the pedal.

 

New cars are just a conformity of our society which is brainwashed by media and corporate law.

 

I would piss on any car newer then 1970 anyday call me old fashion but we went backwards not forwards with engine technology for mechanics not saying that electronics arent better now or suspension upgrades arent better but the fact that weight distribution has went up 30 to 40 percent making cars heavier now then 50s and 60s cars for what comfort? People to lazy to roll down a window or unlock a door manually. Thats why they buy automatics because its easier.

 

Give me a 300 horse 4 speed manual with duals any day.

 

which takes me to the facts of subarus the four wheel drive should still be around but not in america be cause none of the other hippie subaru people want to shift a stick for freak sake awd is a joke thats like my father in laws landcruiser its a awd drive 4wd that makes alot of sense de de de.

 

sorry for my rant but dont down on older vehicles dude unless you can back up an accusation.

 

Oh yeah by the way look up your history in the oil lubrication department they have actually took out the main ingredient that allows the coat of oil to lubricate and cool longer.

 

Thanks to our goverment there has been lots of things taken from our past and made better so we think

[GeneralDisorder]

sorry for my rant but dont down on older vehicles dude unless you can back up an accusation.

 

You sir, are clearly ignorant of...... nearly everything. I'll not waste my time with you.

 

GD

[jacobs]

That falls more into the "feeling good about greasing things" catagory. Also a lot of heavy equipment joints are built in such a way that they will "belch" out the added grease - they have replaceable boots that can be squeezed to remove some of the grease when you force more in. But that is a totally different world from consumer automotive. The small Subaru u-joints use lip-seals, not boots.....Once upon a time I was a heavy wheeled vehicle mechanic in the Army so I understand what you are saying. But this topic was on regular 4-wheeler "automotive" components - not heavy over-the-road gear like tractor-trailer systems.

 

GD

Rick, you obviously have never replaced a u-joint on a 18 wheeler. I have (no, not bearing failures) and they are constructed basically the same as an automotive cross including the seals. The same applies to other steering and suspension components. Seals are the same configuration made with the same materials only much larger.

 

Although I don't always agree with you you are very knowledgeable of Subarus, BUT you do not know everything there is to know about all subjects and this is one you don't have a clue about......end of subject.