Suspension bolts

[SydneyM37]

I am trying to remove the suspension bolts ( currently working on the front) i have removed the nut, and tapping wth a hammer and drift, it moves a little then just won't budge any more, has anyone found a solution, i a really putting some effort behind the hammer.

Bruce

[SydneyM37]

I have removed the bolt at the frontof the truck, with no problem at all, but the set up that is behind the front wheel have got me cursing, i have whacked them with my hammer, and nothing, while i am at it, any good ideas for punching out the bushes ?

Bruce

[MSeriesRebuild]

We have never had an issue with bolt or bushing removal/installation. If only everything were as easy. Just position the suspension so as to balance and remove tension from the bolts, tap them out. Some resistance can result if there is a serious wear groove on the bolts, however a little playing with the balance and removal is not a problem.

Bushing removal/installation is easy with a simple bushing driver. You can do this with the help of a press, or by simply pounding the driver with a hammer. Any newly installed bushing is subject to the need of a slight ream or burnishing to bring in a precision pin or bolt fit.

This is one of the easiest jobs to complete with a few very simply tools. The proper tools can be had for a nominal cost, may also be available for rent or loan at a local auto parts outlet if you prefer not to purchase.

[SierraM37]

To build on Charles (Always thoughtful and excellent) advice, I use my floor jack to try to unload the shackles to make driving the pin in/out a little easier. You can position stands either on the axles or on the frame to help as well.

[Cal_Gary]

My front spring, rear shackle pins were a bear to remove, too, even with lots of penetrating oil, and removing the tension. I ended up using a Dremel to cut off the old pin head, then extending a socket with enough extensions to get at it from outside the fender, then swung hard with a BFH-that took 'em out. You may need to slice your old bushings lengthwise in order to remove the tension, then drive out each half. That worked for me as well.
Gary

[SydneyM37]

Well today i attacked the bolts, and removed all of the front ones, (I will do the ones near the back wheels probably next week), I replaced 4 of the larger bushe's.
The two smaller ones seemed to be in really good condition, i slid a bolt in and felt pretty tight, so i am just going to leave them alone, seeing as i had the bolts removed, i am putting in new ones.
All in all good day today (chucked a sickie from work).

Will the back ones be about the same to expect as the front ?

Thanks guys
Bruce

[MSeriesRebuild]

Well today i attacked the bolts, and removed all of the front ones, (I will do the ones near the back wheels probably next week), I replaced 4 of the larger bushe's.
The two smaller ones seemed to be in really good condition, i slid a bolt in and felt pretty tight, so i am just going to leave them alone, seeing as i had the bolts removed, i am putting in new ones.
All in all good day today (chucked a sickie from work).

Will the back ones be about the same to expect as the front ?

Thanks guys
Bruce

Rear ones screw in, easy to remove. Of course it's your call, but at the nominal cost of bushings from McMaster-Carr, ($2-$3each), really makes no sense at all not to install new while you have it down. Replacing with SAE660 bronze bushings will last way longer than original bushings. If kept greased properly, it should be the last time you ever need to do it.

[nhjohnny1]

Bringing this back up, is there a part number for the 660 bushings?
thanks

[Elwood]

Bringing this back up, is there a part number for the 660 bushings?
thanks

Try this: http://www.mcmaster.com/#6381k195/=117eluu for the spring bushings, p/n 7351270.

If you're comparing this McMaster-Carr bushing to the specs in the ORD 9 SNL G-741 or in TM 9-8031-2, note that the original ID spec of 0.735" was corrected to a tolerance for new parts of between 0.748" to 0.753" (and a maximum wear limit of 0.763") per TM 9-8031-2 C3.

[MSeriesRebuild]

Bringing this back up, is there a part number for the 660 bushings?
thanks

Try this: http://www.mcmaster.com/#6381k195/=117eluu for the spring bushings, p/n 7351270.

If you're comparing this McMaster-Carr bushing to the specs in the ORD 9 SNL G-741 or in TM 9-8031-2, note that the original ID spec of 0.735" was corrected to a tolerance for new parts of between 0.748" to 0.753" (and a maximum wear limit of 0.763") per TM 9-8031-2 C3.

Many opinions on such issues, based on building many trucks, this is mine. I'm a sticker for perfection, or as close as we can come to that. What I prefer to do is this, pin diameter tolerance will vary a few thousandths, even on new parts, this is a given. My preference is to take the pin that is going into a particular spot, press the bushing into the eye which will shrink the bushing ID slightly; Hone the bushing until proper pin fit is achieved. Bear in mind keeping the tolerance as snug as possible WITHOUT leaving it too tight for the suspension to work freely. Bushings like offered by McMaster will work, however these are PLAIN bushings. Bushings with grease tracks machined on the inner bore surface are the better choice because of equal lubrication reaching the entire distance. Notice when greasing these points on your truck, if you notice that you always see excess grease escaping on the same end of the pin every time a particular point is greased; it is highly likely that the other end of that pin/bushing assembly, (the side new grease never escapes from during application) is not getting free lubrication all the way through the pin / bushing length. The end that is starved of lube will naturally wear faster than the end that always gets grease. A bushing with grease tracks machined on the ID will eliminate this from being an issue. Just my opinion based on the way we like to do things "the best they can be."

[Elwood]

Bringing this back up, is there a part number for the 660 bushings?
thanks

Try this: http://www.mcmaster.com/#6381k195/=117eluu for the spring bushings, p/n 7351270.

If you're comparing this McMaster-Carr bushing to the specs in the ORD 9 SNL G-741 or in TM 9-8031-2, note that the original ID spec of 0.735" was corrected to a tolerance for new parts of between 0.748" to 0.753" (and a maximum wear limit of 0.763") per TM 9-8031-2 C3.

Many opinions on such issues, based on building many trucks, this is mine. I'm a sticker for perfection, or as close as we can come to that. What I prefer to do is this, pin diameter tolerance will vary a few thousandths, even on new parts, this is a given. My preference is to take the pin that is going into a particular spot, press the bushing into the eye which will shrink the bushing ID slightly; Hone the bushing until proper pin fit is achieved. Bear in mind keeping the tolerance as snug as possible WITHOUT leaving it too tight for the suspension to work freely. Bushings like offered by McMaster will work, however these are PLAIN bushings. Bushings with grease tracks machined on the inner bore surface are the better choice because of equal lubrication reaching the entire distance. Notice when greasing these points on your truck, if you notice that you always see excess grease escaping on the same end of the pin every time a particular point is greased; it is highly likely that the other end of that pin/bushing assembly, (the side new grease never escapes from during application) is not getting free lubrication all the way through the pin / bushing length. The end that is starved of lube will naturally wear faster than the end that always gets grease. A bushing with grease tracks machined on the ID will eliminate this from being an issue. Just my opinion based on the way we like to do things "the best they can be."

Good points.

McMaster-Carr also has a 660 alloy plain bearing with grease grooves in the ID: http://www.mcmaster.com/#7965k26/=117j9ai. Just have to be careful to index the hole in the bushing so that it is against the ID of the spring eye, and not open, otherwise grease will leak out, and dirt will possibly get in.

I figured that a 0.750" straight flute reamer would be the tool of choice to size the ID after pressing them in to the spring eye. Since the grease grooves are not parallel to the long axis of the bushing, a straight flute instead of a spiral flute should work just as well.

[MSeriesRebuild]

I hear you, I'd have to check the catalog to become aware of what they currently offer.

I like using a honing machine to finish the bushing bore, more precise and best finish by far if set up correctly to handle and hold the spring rigid in the proper position during the honing operation. Again you get into a machinist process instead of getting by with a lesser quality job using hand tools. If using a hand reamer, spiral flute compared to straight flute; 99 times out of 100 my preference is spiral; typically they just do a better, smoother job; however here where tracks are most always cut in a figure 8 or spiral pattern, straight could be very likely the better choice I think as you run the risk of the spiral cutter flutes dropping into the grease track, causing the same issue as straight with a keyway in the bore. Won't work because the straight cutters will drop into the keyway. Here you see the possibility of the exact opposite effect. That is why reamers are offered with a choice of straight or spiral flute design; best choice of tooling for any application depends on the specific job at hand. Exact reamer size can be an issue as well. If you have chosen a .750" reamer, and your pin diameter is .750"; you have an issue as the bushing bore must be larger than the pin bore to achieve a proper fit. The fact that no 2 pins ever end up as exact duplicates; it's hard to have the exact reamer you need on hand to get the perfect bore tolerance. You would need a .002" - .004" over bore in the bushing for pin rotation freedom, and to allow clearance for lubrication. A honing machine eliminates all these variables as it is infinitely adjustable for precise sizing tolerance. TomAAtoes and tomOOtoes, depends on the degree of precision that an individual is going after.

[Elwood]

If a consistent tolerance across all of the pin/bushing points is desired, then sizing the bushings to fit each pin is probably best done by honing. An adjustable reamer might work, but I've never been a big fan of those, and they'd require a lot of adjustment to do all eight bushings.

I wonder how a flex-hone (a.k.a. ball hone) would do on these bronze/tin/lead bushings?

[nhjohnny1]

Thanks for the info

[MSeriesRebuild]

If a consistent tolerance across all of the pin/bushing points is desired, then sizing the bushings to fit each pin is probably best done by honing. An adjustable reamer might work, but I've never been a big fan of those, and they'd require a lot of adjustment to do all eight bushings.

I wonder how a flex-hone (a.k.a. ball hone) would do on these bronze/tin/lead bushings?

My thought is it would be extremely hard to hold any valid degree of precision using a ball hone; I expect one would be as well off using a reamer