Hi all,

I just received my new front upper and lower ball joints to replace the stock ones (1981 model C3) only to find out that i ordered the non-greasable ones. Is there any benefit of one vs the other? Here's a picture of both!

 

Return them and get the greasable ball joints. Why go to the trouble of replacing a part with one that cannot be maintained?

 

I would much rather be able to service parts on my car.

 

Depends more to me on who manufactured them. All new cars for the last 20 plus years have gone with non greasable ball joints. Moog is a brand I would go with, but regardless you probably won't need to change them again for probably at least another 25 years.

 

Non-greasable are maintenance free. I would use them.

 

Bullshit! there only maintenance free because you can't maintain them. yes new cars don't have zirks. not because it's better. because it's cheaper. return them.

 

Greaseable!!!!!!! Sealed suspension parts are controlled guaranteed obsolescence, early.

I have had both type of suspension replacement parts over the years and moog replacement suspension greasable parts, on the same car, the same parts, will generally last 2-3 times as long (mileage) as the sealed units..............

I NEVER use a sealed part if I can use a greasable one EXCEPT for greasable half shafts for a C3......That part only sealed since the drilling for the grease fitting weakens the structural integrity of the metal for that drivetrain part...........

 

Thanks for all the opinions guys, much appreciated. I checked return policy with Rockauto and it seems my return costs from Europe are higher than the value of the units unfortunately. I will just keep those and put them on knowing that the hard part is done getting the riveted stock ones off. I can always swap them out later! Hope these will give me enough mileage for the next few years!

 

Dumb question.

Since its expensive to return them how hard would it be to drill a hole and add a zerk? Just be really careful to make sure you don't get metal shavings in the housing.

 

Let us know when they fail. I don't expect to hear from you anytime soon. Don't mind other comments on advising you to stick with technology 100 years old. If non-greasable ball joints are a known problem, car makers would have stopped using them. But they aren't. Ask the guys what they think about non-greasable u-joints.

 

The non-lube ball joints are made much differently, with different materials. They are NOT just the same design of joint without a zerk fitting. Those joints, if they are made by a reputable manufacturer, will last 100K miles or longer without significant issue. Now, if you wanted to road race the car, grease-type joints would be the way to go.

 

FWIW-Car manufacturers went to sealed suspension components to eliminate any serviceable items that needed periodic maintenance. Sealed suspension parts will NOT last as long as greaseable ones. The maintenance free parts is the same logic/philosophy used on new cars for "lifetime" sealed automatic transmissions. THERE IS NO SUCH THING!

Real life, no theory here:

I have 2 cars currently that have sealed front suspension parts with greaseable replacements in place: Both bought new/ 2001 Pontiac Grand Prix/2008 Chrysler 300

Neither cars' front sealed components lasted anywhere close to 100,000 miles in normal daily driving. Both cars' suspensions showed component wear and fatigue at around 50,000/60,000 miles from the sealed units with noticeable wear at 80,000 miles, requiring replacement....complete suspension replacement in the 300 case for every front suspension component at 80,000 miles. Police Fleet Chargers require complete front suspension component rebuilds with greaseable units at 60,000 miles

If I can and do use an available greaseable part as a replacement, that component always never has to be replaced again..ever..as long as I grease it at every oil change.

The 01 grand prix currently has 225,000 miles on it and the chrysler is at 170,000 miles with the same greaseable parts in place with zero slop..NONE!

Real life here, folks^^^^^^No theory!!!!

 

In reality, how many miles are going to be done yearly by the OP? I doubt that in Europe given typical fuel costs there that the car will be a daily driver so I would expect the joints will likely last for many years.

 

I thought the same and you are right but I could not let the comments go that greaseable parts are the same concerning longevity versus non greaseable components...Totally untrue....!

 

Anyone remember the 1988-1990 GM 4WD pickups? All of them built with non-greasable ball joints. I was an ASE certified mechanic in 1992 at 21 years old and remember having to listen to the goddamn air chisel in the shop all day everyday for a year......every one off them failed.

Jebby

 

My GM truck has >125,000 miles on it and 1 of the front lower ball joints has failed but the rest are still OK. Just checked it over a few months ago. My C5 Vette has 175,000 miles on the original ball joints and they are still OK.

Sealed ball joints on a C3 that sees limited mileage and is driven in nice weather is simply something not worth getting ulcers over.

 

True that i will only use it for some Sunday afternoon cruising so i guess the argument is settled on keeping the non-greasable ones! Didn't expect this religious discussion but fun to read and thanks for all the feedback!